Dataset Information

Physician and patient predictors of evidence-based prescribing in heart failure: a multilevel study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The management of patients with heart failure (HF) needs to account for changeable and complex individual clinical characteristics. The use of renin angiotensin system inhibitors (RAAS-I) to target doses is recommended by guidelines. But physicians seemingly do not sufficiently follow this recommendation, while little is known about the physician and patient predictors of adherence.

Methods

To examine the coherence of primary care (PC) physicians' knowledge and self-perceived competencies regarding RAAS-I with their respective prescribing behavior being related to patient-associated barriers. Cross-sectional follow-up study after a randomized medical educational intervention trial with a seven month observation period. PC physicians (n?=?37) and patients with systolic HF (n?=?168) from practices in Baden-Wuerttemberg. Measurements were knowledge (blueprint-based multiple choice test), self-perceived competencies (questionnaire on global confidence in the therapy and on frequency of use of RAAS-I), and patient variables (age, gender, NYHA functional status, blood pressure, potassium level, renal function). Prescribing was collected from the trials' documentation. The target variable consisted of ?50% of recommended RAAS-I dosage being investigated by two-level logistic regression models.

Results

Patients (69% male, mean age 68.8 years) showed symptomatic and objectified left ventricular (NYHA II vs. III/IV: 51% vs. 49% and mean LVEF 33.3%) and renal (GFR<50%: 22%) impairment. Mean percentage of RAAS-I target dose was 47%, 59% of patients receiving ?50%. Determinants of improved prescribing of RAAS-I were patient age (OR 0.95, CI 0.92-0.99, p?=?0.01), physician's global self-confidence at follow-up (OR 1.09, CI 1.02-1.05, p?=?0.01) and NYHA class (II vs. III/IV) (OR 0.63, CI 0.38-1.05, p?=?0.08).

Conclusions

A change in physician's confidence as a predictor of RAAS-I dose increase is a new finding that might reflect an intervention effect of improved physicians' intention and that might foster novel strategies to improve safe evidence-based prescribing. These should include targeting knowledge, attitudes and skills.

SUBMITTER: Peters-Klimm F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3283612 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physician and patient predictors of evidence-based prescribing in heart failure: a multilevel study.

Peters-Klimm Frank F Laux Gunter G Campbell Stephen S Müller-Tasch Thomas T Lossnitzer Nicole N Schultz Jobst-Hendrik JH Remppis Andrew A Jünger Jana J Nikendei Christoph C

PloS one 20120221 2

<h4>Background</h4>The management of patients with heart failure (HF) needs to account for changeable and complex individual clinical characteristics. The use of renin angiotensin system inhibitors (RAAS-I) to target doses is recommended by guidelines. But physicians seemingly do not sufficiently follow this recommendation, while little is known about the physician and patient predictors of adherence.<h4>Methods</h4>To examine the coherence of primary care (PC) physicians' knowledge and self-per ...[more]

PMID: 22363553

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBeta-blockers reduce mortality among patients with systolic heart failure (HF), yet primary care provider prescription rates remain low.ObjectiveTo examine the association between primary care physician characteristics and both self-reported and actual prescription of beta-blockers among patients with systolic HF.DesignCross-sectional survey with supplementary retrospective chart review.ParticipantsPrimary care providers at three New York City Veterans Affairs medical centers.MeasurementsMAIN OUTCOMES WERE: 1) self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers, and 2) actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients. Physician HF practice patterns and confidence levels, as well as socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, were also assessed.ResultsSixty-nine of 101 physicians (68%) completed the survey examining self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers. Physicians who served as inpatient ward attendings self-reported significantly higher rates of beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients when compared with physicians who did not attend (78% vs. 58%; p = 0.002), as did physicians who were very confident in managing HF patients when compared with physicians who were not (82% vs. 68%; p = 0.009). Fifty-one of these 69 surveyed physicians (74%) were successfully matched to 287 HF patients for whom beta-blocker prescribing data was available. Physicians with greater self-reported rates of prescribing beta-blockers were significantly more likely to actually prescribe beta-blockers (p = 0.02); however, no other physician characteristics were significantly associated with actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients.ConclusionsPhysician teaching responsibilities and confidence levels were associated with self-reported beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients. Educational efforts focused on improving confidence levels in HF care and increasing exposure to teaching may improve beta-blocker presciption in HF patients managed in primary care.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study sought to describe the patterns of heart failure (HF)-exacerbating medications used among older adults hospitalized for HF and to examine determinants of HF-exacerbating medication use.BackgroundHF-exacerbating medications can potentially contribute to adverse outcomes and could represent an important target for future strategies to improve post-hospitalization outcomes.MethodsMedicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age with an adjudicated HF hospitalization between 2003 and 2014 were derived from the geographically diverse REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Difference in Stroke) cohort study. Major HF-exacerbating medications, defined as those listed on the 2016 American Heart Association Scientific Statement listing medications that can precipitate or induce HF, were examined. Patterns of prescribing medications at hospital admission and at discharge were examined, as well as changes that occurred between admission and discharge; and a multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify determinants of harmful prescribing practices following HF hospitalization (defined as either the continuation of an HF-exacerbating medications or an increase in the number of HF-exacerbating medications between hospital admission and discharge).ResultsAmong 558 unique individuals, 18% experienced a decrease in the number of HF-exacerbating medications between admission and discharge, 19% remained at the same number, and 12% experienced an increase. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18 to 2.75]) and small hospital size (OR: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.18 to 3.16) were the strongest, independently associated determinants of harmful prescribing practices.ConclusionsHF-exacerbating medication regimens are often continued or started following an HF hospitalization. These findings highlight an ongoing need to develop strategies to improve safe prescribing practices in this vulnerable population.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify patient, physician and geographic level factors that are associated with variation in initial stress testing strategy in patients evaluated for chest pain.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingPopulation-based study of patients undergoing evaluation for chest pain in Ontario, Canada between 1 January 2011 and 31 March 2018.Participants103 368 patients who underwent stress testing (graded exercise stress testing (GXT), stress echocardiography (stress echo) or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI)) following evaluation for chest pain.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTo identify the patient, physician and geographic level factors associated with variation in initial test selection, we fit two separate 2-level hierarchical multinomial logistic regression models for which the outcome was initial stress testing strategy (GXT, MPI or stress echo).ResultsThere was significant variability in the initial type of stress test performed, with approximately 50% receiving a GXT compared with approximately 36% who received MPI and 14% who received a stress echo. Physician-level factors were key drivers of this variation, accounting for up to 59.0% of the variation in initial testing. Physicians who graduated medical school >30 years ago were approximately 45% more likely to order an initial stress echo (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.80) than a GXT. Cardiovascular disease specialists were approximately sevenfold more likely to order an initial MPI (OR 7.35, 95% CI 5.38 to 10.03) than a GXT. Patients aged >70 years were approximately fivefold more likely to receive an MPI (OR 4.74, 95% CI 4.42 to 5.08) and approximately 26% more likely to receive a stress echo (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.38) than a GXT.ConclusionsWe report significant variability in initial stress testing strategy in Ontario. Much of that variability was driven by physician-level factors that could potentially be addressed through educational campaigns geared at reducing this variability and improving guideline adherence.

Project description:BackgroundHeart failure (HF) remains a major public health challenge, while HF self-care is particularly challenging. Mobile health (mHealth)-based interventions taking advantage of smartphone technology have shown particular promise in increasing the quality of self-care among these patients, and in turn improving the outcomes of their disease.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to co-develop with physicians, patients with HF, and their caregivers a patient-oriented mHealth app, perform usability assessment, and investigate its effect on the quality of life of patients with HF and rate of hospitalizations in a pilot study.MethodsThe development of an mHealth app (The Hellenic Educational Self-care and Support Heart Failure app [ThessHF app]) was evidence based, including features based on previous clinically tested mHealth interventions and selected by a panel of HF expert physicians and discussed with patients with HF. At the end of alpha development, the app was rated by mHealth experts with the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). The beta version was tested by patients with HF, who rated its design and content by means of the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). Subsequently, a prospective pilot study (THESS-HF [THe Effect of a Specialized Smartphone app on Heart Failure patients' quality of self-care, quality of life and hospitalization rate]) was performed to investigate the effect of app use on patients with HF over a 3-month follow-up period. The primary endpoint was patients' quality of life, which was measured with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the 5-level EQ-5D version (EQ-5D-5L). The secondary endpoints were the European Heart Failure Self-care Behavior Scale (EHFScBS) score and the hospitalization rate.ResultsA systematic review of mHealth-based HF interventions and expert panel suggestions yielded 18 separate app features, most of which were incorporated into the ThessHF app. A total of 14 patients and 5 mHealth experts evaluated the app. The results demonstrated a very good user experience (overall PSSUQ score 2.37 [SD 0.63], where 1 is the best, and a median MARS score of 4.55/5). Finally, 30 patients (male: n=26, 87%) participated in the THESS-HF pilot study (mean age 68.7 [SD 12.4] years). A significant increase in the quality of self-care was noted according to the EHFScBS, which increased by 4.4% (SD 7.2%) (P=.002). The mean quality of life increased nonsignificantly after 3 months according to both KCCQ (mean increase 5.8 [SD 15] points, P=.054) and EQ-5D-5L (mean increase 5.6% [SD 15.6%], P=.06) scores. The hospitalization rate for the follow-up duration was 3%.ConclusionsThe need for telehealth services and remote self-care management in HF is of vital importance, especially in periods such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We developed a user-friendly mHealth app to promote remote self-care support in HF. In this pilot study, the use of the ThessHF app was associated with an increase in the quality of self-care. A future multicenter study will investigate the effect of the app use on long-term outcomes in patients with HF.

Project description:BackgroundAdult chronic heart failure mainly affects an elderly population with multiple comorbidities that often require frequent medical visits to prevent poor health outcomes. However, the heart failure disease process reduces their independence by reducing mobility, exercise tolerance, and cognitive decline. Remote care technologies can bridge the gap in care for these patients by allowing them to be followed up within the comfort of their home and encourage their self-care. However, patients, carers, and health care professionals need to engage with the technology for it to be useful.ObjectiveThis systematic review explores qualitative primary studies of remote care technologies used in heart failure, to determine the factors that affect user engagement with the technology. This is explored from the perspective of patients, carers, and health care professionals.MethodsRelevant studies published between January 1, 1990, and September 19, 2020, were identified from EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. These studies were then synthesized using thematic analysis. Relevant user experiences with remote care were extracted using line-by-line coding. These codes were summarized into secondary codes and core concepts, which were further merged into overarching themes that encapsulate user experience with remote care.ResultsThe review included 47 studies, which led to the generation of 5 overarching themes that affect engagement: (1) "Convenience" relates to time saved by the intervention; (2) "Clinical Care" relates to perceived quality of care and health outcomes; (3) "Communication" involves feedback and interaction between patients, staff, and carers; (4) "Education" concerns the tailored information provided; and (5) "Ease of Use" relates to accessibility and technical barriers to engagement. Each theme was applied to each user base of patient, carer, and health care professional in a different manner.ConclusionsThe 5 themes identified highlight aspects of remote care that facilitate engagement, and should be considered in both future design and trials evaluating these technologies.

Project description:BackgroundVariability in antimicrobial prescribing may indicate an opportunity for improvement in antimicrobial use. We sought to measure physician-level antimicrobial prescribing in adult general medical wards, assess the contribution of patient-level factors to antimicrobial prescribing and evaluate the association between antimicrobial prescribing and clinical outcomes.MethodsUsing the General Medicine Inpatient Initiative (GEMINI) database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of physician-level volume and spectrum of antimicrobial prescribing in adult general medical wards in 4 academic teaching hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, between April 2010 and December 2019. We stratified physicians into quartiles by hospital site based on volume of antimicrobial prescribing (days of therapy per 100 patient-days and antimicrobial-free days) and antibacterial spectrum (modified spectrum score). The modified spectrum score assigns a value to each antibacterial agent based on the breadth of coverage. We assessed patient-level differences among physician quartiles using age, sex, Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, discharge diagnosis and Charlson Comorbidity Index. We evaluated the association of clinical outcomes (in-hospital 30-day mortality, length of stay, intensive care unit [ICU] transfer and hospital readmission) with antimicrobial volume and spectrum using multilevel modelling.ResultsThe cohort consisted of 124 physicians responsible for 124 158 hospital admissions. The median physician-level volume of antimicrobial prescribing was 56.1 (interquartile range 51.7-67.5) days of therapy per 100 patient-days. We did not find any differences in baseline patient characteristics by physician prescribing quartile. The difference in mean prescribing between quartile 4 and quartile 1 was 15.8 days of therapy per 100 patient-days (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.6-22.0), representing 30% higher antimicrobial prescribing in the fourth quartile than the first quartile. Patient in-hospital deaths, length of stay, ICU transfer and hospital readmission did not differ by physician quartile. In-hospital mortality was higher among patients cared for by prescribers with higher modified spectrum scores (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.24).InterpretationWe found that physician-level variability in antimicrobial prescribing was not associated with differences in patient characteristics or outcomes in academic general medicine wards. These findings provide support for considering the lowest quartile of physician antimicrobial prescribing within each hospital as a target for antimicrobial stewardship.

Dataset Information

Physician and patient predictors of evidence-based prescribing in heart failure: a multilevel study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Physician and patient predictors of evidence-based prescribing in heart failure: a multilevel study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets