Montori, Víctor M.

Abstract Objective This study aims to describe the experience of implementing a psychosocial distress screening system for children with serious or chronic medical conditions. Methods Achieving RoutIne Screening for Emotional health (ARISE) was developed to systematically evaluate psychosocial distress in children with serious medical or chronic medical illnesses, by integrating patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) into care delivery. ARISE was developed using a user-centered approach with extensive input from patients, families, and healthcare professionals to overcome barriers to routine PROM collection and integration into care as usual. It comprises a system to capture PROMs and then relay results to clinicians for changing care. We sought to implement ARISE at four subspecialty pediatric clinics caring for patients with cystic fibrosis, sickle cell disease, hemophilia, and neurological malignancy. Results Problems with acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility represented barriers to implementation which were overcome by modifying the intervention using stakeholder input during the planning phase, leading to broad program acceptance. ARISE was implemented in three of the four clinics, in which 79.8% of eligible children and their family completed PROMs. Conclusion The ARISE program demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating psychosocial screenings into subspecialty pediatric clinics, thereby enhancing the identification and management of psychosocial issues in children with serious and chronic medical illnesses.

Introduction Empowering people living with multimorbidity (multiple chronic conditions) to gain greater confidence in managing their health can enhance their quality of life. Education focused on self-management is a key tool for fostering patient empowerment and is mostly provided on an individual basis. Virtual communities of practice (VCoP) present a unique opportunity for online education in chronic condition self-management within a social context. This research aims to evaluate the effectiveness/cost-effectiveness of individualised, online self-management education compared with VCoP among middle-aged individuals living with multiple chronic conditions. Methods and analysis People aged 30–60, living with ≥2 chronic conditions and receiving care in primary care (PC) centres and outpatient hospital-based clinics in Madrid and Canary Islands will enrol in an 18-month parallel-design, blinded (intervention assessment and data analysts), pragmatic (adhering to the intention-to-treat principle), individually randomised trial. The trial will compare two 12-month web-based educational offers of identical content; one delivered individually (control) and the other with online social interaction (VCoP, intervention). Using repeated measures mixed linear models, with the patient as random effect and allocation groups and time per group as fixed effects, we will estimate between-arm differences in the change in Patient Activation Measure from baseline to 12 months (primary endpoint), including measurements at 6-month and 18-month follow-up. Other outcomes will include measures of depression and anxiety, treatment burden, quality of life. In addition to a process evaluation of the VCoP, we will conduct an economic evaluation estimating the relative cost-effectiveness of the VCoP from the perspectives of both the National Health System and the Community. Ethics and dissemination The trial was approved by Clinical Research Ethics Committees of Gregorio Marañón University Hospital in Madrid/Nuestra Señora Candelaria University Hospital in Santa Cruz de Tenerife. The results will be disseminated through workshops, policy briefs, peer-reviewed publications and local/international conferences. Trial registration number NCT06046326 .

Introduction: We validated the “Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) Decision Aid” to promote shared decision making (SDM) about lipid lowering therapy, based on patient-clinician encounters. Methods: Validation of the DA included an assessment of whether the content and design of the tool facilitated SDM and patient engagement and to determine how well the tool integrated with clinical workflow. Validation was conducted during patient-clinician encounters in the Mayo preventive cardiology clinic. As inclusion criteria we considered an upcoming appointment in the clinic, an LDL-C level ≥ ~160 mg/dL, and no prior diagnosis of FH. Prior to the encounters, each clinician viewed a demonstration of the online, interactive DA. During the encounters, the DA was shared with patients using the clinic room computer screen, either in-person or virtually. Patient-clinician encounters were video recorded for further analysis by two design researchers and experts in SDM. Results: Ten patients were enrolled in the study (7 male; average age 51 years). The average patient LDL-C level was 207 mg/dL, range 157 - 248 mg/dL. Review and qualitative analysis of the encounter recordings yielded 4 key findings: i) clinicians primarily used the cardiovascular risk estimate in the DA to guide conversation with patients; ii) highly trained specialists needed to change their usual approach to care and conversation to integrate the DA with their clinical workflows; iii) as clinicians became more familiar with the DA, they moved through the tool at a more efficient pace; and iv) each clinician developed his/her own style of navigating the DA, either moving through it one screen at a time or focusing on one specific section for the duration of the conversation. The DA effectively guided conversation and facilitated active patient engagement in 6 of 10 encounters. Social distancing and use of telemedicine encounters, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, limited patient engagement in 2 of 10 encounters. Overall, the DA promoted SDM regarding FH management in 9 of 10 encounters. Conclusion: Using patient-clinician encounters, we found the FH DA to facilitate SDM regarding lipid-lowering therapy. The tool has potential to improve care of FH patients and increase patient engagement and knowledge.

Introduction: Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common inherited disorder of lipid metabolism. FH patients are at an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) due to elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Patients with FH may not reach target LDL-C levels despite maximally tolerated statin (±ezetimibe) therapy (MTT). The AHA scientific statement on FH highlighted the need for developing decision aids (DAs) to facilitate shared decision making (SDM) regarding additional therapy including PCSK9 inhibitors. Methods: A user-centered design process was initiated to understand FH treatment decisions and to develop prototype interventions. Patients with FH had their diagnosis confirmed by genetic testing. Encounters between FH patients and health care providers were video recorded and analyzed to assess how decisions are made regarding lipid lowering therapy. Nine encounters were recorded: 3 with a genetic counselor and 6 with an FH specialist. Informed by clinical encounters and literature review, we developed content for a DA related to available therapeutic options for FH patients on MTT. Results: A prototype online DA was created to support in-encounter discussion of a patient’s risk of adverse cardiovascular events and which therapies may be best suited to the patient (Figure). 5 and 10-year ASCVD risk is estimated using the SAFEHEART Risk Score (SRS). Risk is communicated in numbers using a 100-person icon array and the language “Out of 100 persons like you...”. Therapeutic options include watchful waiting, bile acid sequestrants, and PCSK9 inhibitors. For each option, the degree of risk reduction, costs, and side effects are presented. The tool is currently being refined by analyzing additional encounters with FH patients. Conclusion: We developed an interactive prototype DA to facilitate SDM for FH patients on MTT. After further iterative testing the tool will be deployed in the electronic health record.

AbstractIntroductionShared decision‐making (SDM) is a method of care by which patients and clinicians work together to co‐create a plan of care. Electronic health record (EHR) integration of SDM tools may increase adoption of SDM. We conducted a “lightweight” integration of a freely available electronic SDM tool, CV Prevention Choice, within the EHRs of three healthcare systems. Here, we report how the healthcare systems collaborated to achieve integration.MethodsThis work was conducted as part of a stepped wedge randomized pragmatic trial. CV Prevention Choice was developed using guidelines for HTML5‐based web applications. Healthcare systems integrated the tool in their EHR using documentation the study team developed and refined with lessons learned after each system integrated the electronic SDM tool into their EHR. CV Prevention Choice integration populates the tool with individual patient data locally without sending protected health information between the EHR and the web. Data abstraction and secure transfer systems were developed to manage data collection to assess tool implementation and effectiveness outcomes.ResultsTime to integrate CV Prevention Choice in the EHR was 12.1 weeks for the first system, 10.4 weeks for the second, and 9.7 weeks for the third. One system required two 1‐hour meetings with study team members and two healthcare systems required a single 1‐hour meeting. Healthcare system information technology teams collaborated by sharing information and offering improvements to documentation. Challenges included tracking CV Prevention Choice use for reporting and capture of combination medications. Data abstraction required refinements to address differences in how each healthcare system captured data elements.ConclusionTargeted documentation on tool features and resource mapping supported collaboration of IT teams across healthcare systems, enabling them to integrate a web‐based SDM tool with little additional research team effort or oversight. Their collaboration helped overcome difficulties integrating the web application and address challenges to data harmonization for trial outcome analyses.

Abstract Rationale Endotracheal intubation is the third most common bedside procedure in U.S. hospitals. In over 40% of intubations, preventable complications attributable to human factors occur. A better understanding of team dynamics during intubation may improve patient safety. Objectives To explore team dynamics and safety-related actions during emergent endotracheal intubations in the emergency department and intensive care unit and to engage members of the care team in reflection for process improvement through a novel video-based team debriefing technique. Methods Video-reflexive ethnography involves in situ video recording and reflexive discussions with practitioners to scrutinize behaviors and to identify opportunities for improvement. In this study, real-time intubations were recorded in the emergency department and intensive care unit at Mayo Clinic Rochester, and facilitated video-reflexive sessions were conducted with the multidisciplinary procedural teams. Themes about team dynamics and safety-related action were identified inductively from transcriptions of recorded sessions. Results Between December 2022 and January 2023, eight video-reflexive sessions were conducted with a total of 78 participants. Multidisciplinary members included nurses (n = 23), respiratory therapists (n = 16), pharmacists (n = 7), advanced practitioners (n = 5), and physicians (n = 26). In video-reflexive discussions, major safety gaps were identified and several solutions were proposed related to the use of a multidisciplinary intubation checklist, standardized communication and team positioning, developing a culture of safety, and routinely debriefing after the procedure. Conclusions The findings of this study may inform the development of a team supervision model for emergent endotracheal intubations. This approach could integrate key components such as a multidisciplinary intubation checklist, standardized communication and team positioning, a culture of safety, and debriefing as part of the procedure itself.

Background The occurrence of shared decision making (SDM) in daily practice remains limited. Various patient characteristics have been suggested to potentially influence the extent to which clinicians involve patients in SDM. Objective To assess associations between patient characteristics and the extent to which clinicians involve patients in SDM. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of data pooled from 10 studies comparing the care of adult patients with (intervention) or without (control) a within-encounter SDM conversation tool. We included studies with audio(-visual) recordings of clinical encounters in which decisions about starting or reconsidering treatment were discussed. Main Measures In the original studies, the Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making 12-items (OPTION 12 item ) scale was used to code the extent to which clinicians involved patients in SDM in clinical encounters. We conducted multivariable analyses with patient characteristics (age, gender, race, education, marital status, number of daily medications, general health status, health literacy) as independent variables and OPTION 12 as a dependent variable. Results We included data from 1,614 patients. The between-arm difference in OPTION 12 scores was 7.7 of 100 points ( P < 0.001). We found no association between any patient characteristics and the OPTION 12 score except for education level ( p = 0.030), an association that was very small (2.8 points between the least and most educated), contributed mostly by, and only significant in, control arms (6.5 points). Subanalyses of a stroke prevention trial showed a positive association between age and OPTION 12 score ( P = 0.033). Conclusions Most characteristics showed no association with the extent to which clinicians involved patients in SDM. Without an SDM conversation tool, clinicians devoted more efforts to involve patients with higher education, a difference not observed when the tool was used. Highlights Most sociodemographic patient characteristics show no association with the extent to which clinicians involve patients in shared decision making. Clinicians devoted less effort to involve patients with lower education, a difference that was not observed when a shared decision-making conversation tool was used. SDM conversation tools can be useful for clinicians to better involve patients and ensure patients get involved equally regardless of educational background.