Dataset Information

Shared medical appointments in pulmonary hypertension.

ABSTRACT: We aimed to adapt the shared medical appointment (SMA) model to the care of pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients and evaluate patient satisfaction. Our SMA team included a PH specialist, a PH nurse, and one research fellow. Eight to twelve PH patients with a family member were invited during office visits and by phone calls. Attendance was verified and encouraged by phone calls and informational letters. The meetings started with a 30-minute presentation on various PH topics, which was followed by each patient's individual visit and a focused examination in front of the group, allowing group questions and interaction. Of the total number of patients (n = 53), 84% stated that they would attend a future SMA. The care provided was rated excellent to very good by 98% of the patients. Ninety-two percent stated that they improved their understanding of the disease and treatment options, and 59% acknowledged a preference for the group visit over the private visit. Twenty-five percent of patients stated that they were very likely to likely to some extent to agree to change or seek a change in treatment modality on the basis of conversation with other patients in the SMA. The majority of our patients expressed no privacy concerns before the meeting (76%), and even more expressed no such concerns afterward (88%). In conclusion, the SMA model allows PH patients to increase understanding of their disease process while integrating peer support, promoting social interaction, and addressing patients' emotional needs. Other (rare) pulmonary diseases may benefit from this model.

SUBMITTER: Rahaghi FF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4070761 | biostudies-other | 2014 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesShared medical appointments (SMAs) are an increasingly used system-redesign strategy for improving access to and quality of chronic illness care. We conducted a systematic review of the existing literature on SMA interventions for patients with diabetes in order to understand their impact on outcomes.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from January 1996 through April 2012. PubMed search updated June 2013.Study selectionEnglish-language peer-reviewed publications of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomized cluster controlled trials, controlled before-and-after studies, or interrupted time-series designs conducted among adult patients with diabetes. Two independent reviewers used prespecified criteria to screen titles and abstracts for full text review.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsTwo different reviewers abstracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence. When possible, we used random-effects models to synthesize the effects quantitatively, reporting by a weighted difference of the means when the same scale was used across studies, and a standardized mean difference when the scales differed. We measured heterogeneity in study effects using Forest Plots, Cochran's Q, and I(2), and explored heterogeneity by using subgroup analyses for categorical variables and meta-regression analyses for continuous or discrete variables. Outcomes not suitable to meta-analysis were summarized qualitatively.ResultsTwenty-five articles representing 17 unique studies compared SMA interventions with usual care. Among patients with diabetes, SMAs improved hemoglobin A1c (? = -0.55 percentage points [95 % CI, -0.11 to -0.99]); improved systolic blood pressure (? = -5.2 mmHg [95 % CI, -3.0 to -7.4]); and did not improve LDL cholesterol (? = -6.6 mg/dl [95 % CI, 2.8 to -16.1]). Nonbiophysical outcomes, including economic outcomes, were reported too infrequently to meta-analyze, or to draw conclusions from. The A1c result had significant heterogeneity among studies, likely secondary to the heterogeneity among included SMA interventions.LimitationHeterogeneity among the components of diabetes SMAs leads to uncertainty about what makes a particular SMA successful.ConclusionSMA interventions improve biophysical outcomes among patients with diabetes. There was inadequate literature to determine SMA effects on patient experience, utilization, and costs.

Project description:IntroductionType 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a major health concern with significant personal and healthcare system costs. There is growing interest in using shared medical appointments (SMAs) for management of T2DM. We hypothesize that adding mindfulness to SMAs may be beneficial. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of SMAs with mindfulness for T2DM within primary care in Australia.Materials and methodsWe conducted a single-blind randomized controlled feasibility study of SMAs within primary care for people with T2DM living in Western Sydney, Australia. People with T2DM, age 21 years and over, with HbA1c > 6.5% or fasting glucose >7.00 mmol/L within the past 3 months were eligible to enroll. The intervention group attended six 2-h programmed SMAs (pSMAs) which were held fortnightly. pSMAs included a structured education program and mindfulness component. The control group received usual care from their healthcare providers. We collected quantitative and qualitative data on acceptability as well as glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin and continuous glucose monitoring), lipids, anthropometric measures, blood pressure, self-reported psychological outcomes, quality of life, diet, and physical activity using an ActiGraph accelerometer.ResultsOver a 2-month period, we enrolled 18 participants (10 females, 8 males) with a mean age of 58 years (standard deviation 9.8). We had 94.4% retention. All participants in the intervention group completed at least four pSMAs. Participants reported that attending pSMAs had been a positive experience that allowed them to accept their diagnosis and empowered them to make changes, which led to beneficial effects including weight loss and better glycemic control. Four pSMA participants found the mindfulness component helpful while two did not. All of the seven participants who contributed to qualitative evaluation reported improved psychosocial wellbeing and found the group setting beneficial. There was a significant difference in total cholesterol levels at 12 weeks between groups (3.86 mmol/L in intervention group vs. 4.15 mmol/L in the control group; p = 0.025) as well as pain intensity levels as measured by the PROMIS-29 (2.11 vs. 2.38; p = 0.034).ConclusionpSMAs are feasible and acceptable to people with T2DM and may result in clinical improvement. A follow-up fully-powered randomized controlled trial is warranted.Clinical trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, identifier ACTRN12619000892112.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-management is essential for good outcomes in type 2 diabetes and patients often benefit from self-management education. Shared medical appointments (SMAs) can increase self-efficacy for self management but are difficult for some primary care practices to implement. Understanding how practices adapt processes and delivery of SMAs for patients with type 2 diabetes may provide helpful strategies for other practices interested in implementing SMAs.MethodsThe Invested in Diabetes study was a pragmatic cluster-randomized, comparative effectiveness trial designed to compare two different models of diabetes SMAs delivered in primary care. We used a multi-method approach guided by the FRAME to assess practices' experience with implementation, including any planned and unplanned adaptations. Data sources included interviews, practice observations and field notes from practice facilitator check-ins.ResultsSeveral findings were identified from the data: 1) Modifications and adaptations are common in implementation of SMAs, 2) while most adaptations were fidelity-consistent supporting the core components of the intervention conditions as designed, some were not, 3) Adaptations were perceived to be necessary to help SMAs meet patient and practice needs and overcome implementation challenges, and 4) Content changes in the sessions were often planned and enacted to better address the contextual circumstances such as patient needs and culture.DiscussionImplementing SMAs in primary care can be challenging and adaptations of both implementation processes and content and delivery of SMAS for patients with type 2 diabetes were common in the Invested in Diabetes study. Recognizing the need for adaptations based on practice context prior to implementation may help improve fit and success with SMAs, but care needs to be given to ensure that adaptations do not weaken the impact of the intervention. Practices may be able to assess what might need to adapted for them to be successful prior to implementation but likely will continue to adapt after implementation.ConclusionAdaptations were common in the Invested in Diabetes study. Practices may benefit from understanding common challenges in implementing SMAs and adapting processes and delivery based on their own context.Trial registrationThis trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov under Trial number NCT03590041, posted 18/07/2018.

Dataset Information

Shared medical appointments in pulmonary hypertension.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets