Citations

Objective The objective of this study was to assess patients’ achievement of ADA (American Diabetes Association) guideline recommendations for glycosylated hemoglobin, lipid profile, and blood pressure in a type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) outpatient clinic in a low-middle income country (LMIC) setting. Methods This is a descriptive cross-sectional study with 123 ambulatory T2DM patients who are being treated at a public hospital in Lima, Peru. Data was gathered via standardized interviews, clinical surveys, and anthropomorphic measurements for each patient. Blood samples were drawn in fasting state for measures of glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and lipid profile. Laboratory parameters and blood pressure were evaluated according to ADA recommendations. Results Of the 123 patients, 81 were women and the mean age was 61.8 years. Glycemic control was abnormal in 82 (68.33%) participants, and 45 (37.50%) were unable to control their blood pressure. Lipid profile was abnormal in 73 (60.83%) participants. Only nine (7.50%) participants fulfilled ADA recommendations for glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control. Conclusions Amongst individuals with type 2 diabetes, there was poor attainment of the ADA recommendations (HbA1c, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol) for ambulatory T2DM patients. Interventions are urgently needed in order to prevent long-term diabetic complications.

AbstractAlthough studies suggest that patients with limited health literacy and/or low numeracy skills may stand to gain the most from shared decision making (SDM), the impact of these conditions on the effective implementation of SDM in the emergency department (ED) is not well understood. In this article from the proceedings of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference on Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department we discuss knowledge gaps identified and propose consensus‐driven research priorities to help guide future work to improve SDM for this patient population in the ED.

Background: Thyrotoxicosis has multiple etiologies, manifestations, and potential therapies. Appropriate treatment requires an accurate diagnosis and is influenced by coexisting medical conditions and patient preference. This document describes evidence-based clinical guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that would be useful to generalist and subspecialty physicians and others providing care for patients with this condition. Methods: The American Thyroid Association (ATA) previously cosponsored guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that were published in 2011. Considerable new literature has been published since then, and the ATA felt updated evidence-based guidelines were needed. The association assembled a task force of expert clinicians who authored this report. They examined relevant literature using a systematic PubMed search supplemented with additional published materials. An evidence-based medicine approach that incorporated the knowledge and experience of the panel was used to update the 2011 text and recommendations. The strength of the recommendations and the quality of evidence supporting them were rated according to the approach recommended by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Group. Results: Clinical topics addressed include the initial evaluation and management of thyrotoxicosis; management of Graves' hyperthyroidism using radioactive iodine, antithyroid drugs, or surgery; management of toxic multinodular goiter or toxic adenoma using radioactive iodine or surgery; Graves' disease in children, adolescents, or pregnant patients; subclinical hyperthyroidism; hyperthyroidism in patients with Graves' orbitopathy; and management of other miscellaneous causes of thyrotoxicosis. New paradigms since publication of the 2011 guidelines are presented for the evaluation of the etiology of thyrotoxicosis, the management of Graves' hyperthyroidism with antithyroid drugs, the management of pregnant hyperthyroid patients, and the preparation of patients for thyroid surgery. The sections on less common causes of thyrotoxicosis have been expanded. Conclusions: One hundred twenty-four evidence-based recommendations were developed to aid in the care of patients with thyrotoxicosis and to share what the task force believes is current, rational, and optimal medical practice.

Background: The best treatment option for patients with Graves' disease (GD) depends on each person's situation and how the differences between the treatment options matter to them in bringing resolution to their illness. The objective of this study was to develop and test an encounter decision tool (GD Choice) for patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making about the treatment of GD. Methods: GD Choice was developed using an iterative process based on the principles of interaction design and participatory action research. To evaluate the impact of the tool, a controlled before–after study was conducted, assessing the use of GD Choice versus usual care (UC). Results: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled, 37 to UC and 31 to GD Choice. At baseline, the groups were similar. Treatment discussion length was similar in both arms. After their visit, patients in both groups had similar knowledge about the options, except for GD Choice patients knowing significantly more about the complications of treatment (correctly answered by 83% vs. 55%; p = 0.04). Compared with UC, patients in the GD Choice arm had greater involvement in decision making observed on video recordings of clinical encounters (mean OPTION scale score, 35% vs. 30%; p = 0.02), but reported similar levels of decisional comfort and participation in shared decision making. Conclusions: GD Choice increases engagement in the decision-making process and knowledge regarding intervention complications without increasing the length of consultation. These promising results support the conduct of a randomized trial of GD Choice versus UC in a large multicenter trial.

Background Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) pocket infections are often related to recent CIED placement or manipulation, but these infections are not well characterized. The clinical presentation of CIED pocket infection, based on temporal onset related to last CIED procedure, deserves further study. Methods The MEDIC (Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Infection Cohort) prospectively enrolled subjects with CIED infection. Subjects were stratified into those whose infection occurred <12 months (early) or ≥12 months (late) since their last CIED‐related procedure. Results There were 132 subjects in the early group and 106 in the late group. There were more females (P = 0.009) and anticoagulation use (P = 0.039) in the early group. Subjects with early infections were more likely to have had a generator change or lead addition as their last procedure (P = 0.03) and had more prior CIED procedures (P = 0.023). Early infections were more likely to present with pocket erythema (P < 0.001), swelling (P < 0.001), and pain (P = 0.007). Late infections were more likely to have pocket erosion (P = 0.005) and valvular vegetations (P = 0.009). In bacteremic subjects, early infections were more likely healthcare‐associated (P < 0.001). In‐hospital and 6‐month mortality were equivalent. Conclusion A total of 45% of patients with CIED pocket infection presented >12 months following their last CIED‐related procedure. Patients with early infection were more likely to be female, on anticoagulation, and present with localized inflammation, whereas those with late infection were more likely to have CIED erosion or valvular endocarditis.