Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) confers a 1.5‐ to 2.0‐fold increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). A prior multifaceted quality improvement approach to improving CVD preventive care increased CVD risk factor assessments, but there was no significant effect on the management of risk factors. We tested the impact of adding a proactive outreach strategy promoting primary care treatment of CVD risk factors among patients with RA through their rheumatology practice. Methods Through electronic health record searches, we identified patients with RA who were potential candidates for hypertension treatment initiation or intensification, statin therapy, or a smoking‐cessation intervention. A nonclinician care manager contacted patients by phone and mail on behalf of the rheumatologists, provided information about the identified risk factor(s), recommend follow‐up with primary care physicians (PCPs), sent correspondence to PCPs, and followed up with patients to see what actions had been taken. We measured preventive cardiology quality indicators and compared preintervention and intervention time periods using interrupted time series methods. Results During the 6‐month intervention period, the proportion of patients prescribed at least moderate‐intensity statin treatment for primary prevention rose from 18.4% to 23.8%. The rate of increase was 1.06% greater per month than during the preceding period (P < 0.001). Rates of increase in hypertension diagnosis and control improved more rapidly during this phase (P < 0.001 for each) and reversed preceding negative trends. Conclusion Implementing proactive nonclinician outreach to encourage primary care–based treatment of CVD risk factors was associated with increases in statin prescribing and in hypertension diagnosis and control. Smoking was not affected.

Mobile applications (apps) may help improve hypertension self-management. To investigate the effect of an artificial intelligence smartphone coaching app to promote home monitoring and hypertension-related behaviors on systolic blood pressure level compared with a blood pressure tracking app. This was a 2-group, open, randomized clinical trial. Participants with uncontrolled hypertension were recruited in 2016 and 2017 and were followed up for 6 months. Data analysis was performed from April 2019 to December 2019. Intervention group participants received a smartphone coaching app to promote home monitoring and behavioral changes associated with hypertension self-management plus a home blood pressure monitor. Control participants received a blood pressure tracking app plus a home blood pressure monitor. The primary study outcome was systolic blood pressure at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-reported antihypertensive medication adherence, home monitoring and self-management practices, measures of self-efficacy associated with blood pressure, weight, and self-reported health behaviors. There were 333 participants randomized, and 297 completed the follow-up assessment. Among the participants who completed the study, the mean (SD) age was 58.9 (12.8) years, 182 (61.3%) were women, and 103 (34.7%) were black. Baseline mean (SD) systolic blood pressure was 140.6 (12.2) mm Hg among intervention participants and 141.8 (13.4) mm Hg among control participants. After 6 months, the corresponding mean (SD) systolic blood pressures were 132.3 (15.0) mm Hg and 135.0 (13.9) mm Hg, with a between-group adjusted difference of -2.0 mm Hg (95% CI, -4.9 mm Hg to 0.8 mm Hg; P = .16). At 6 months, self-confidence in controlling blood pressure was greater in the intervention group (0.36 point on a 5-point scale; 95% CI, 0.18 point to 0.54 point; P < .001). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in other secondary outcomes. The adjusted difference in self-reported physical activity was 26.7 minutes per week (95% CI, -5.4 minutes per week to 58.8 minutes per week; P = .10). Subgroup analysis raised the possibility that intervention effects differed by age. Among individuals with uncontrolled hypertension, those randomized to a smartphone coaching app plus home monitor had similar systolic blood pressure compared with those who received a blood pressure tracking app plus home monitor. Given the direction of the difference in systolic blood pressure between groups and the possibility for differences in treatment effects across subgroups, future studies are warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288142.

Effective quality improvement (QI) strategies are needed for small practices. The objective of this study was to compare practice facilitation implementing point-of-care (POC) QI strategies alone versus facilitation implementing point-of-care plus population management (POC+PM) strategies on preventive cardiovascular care. Two arm, practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study. Small and mid-sized primary care practices. Practices worked with facilitators on QI for 12 months to implement POC or POC+PM strategies. Proportion of eligible patients in a practice meeting \"ABCS\" measures: (Aspirin) Aspirin/antiplatelet therapy for ischemic vascular disease, (Blood pressure) Controlling High Blood Pressure, (Cholesterol) Statin Therapy for the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease, and (Smoking) Tobacco Use: Screening and Cessation Intervention, and the Change Process Capability Questionnaire. Measurements were performed at baseline, 12, and 18 months. A total of 226 practices were randomized, 179 contributed follow-up data. The mean proportion of patients meeting each performance measure was greater at 12 months compared with baseline: Aspirin 0.04 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.06), Blood pressure 0.04 (0.02-0.06), Cholesterol 0.05 (0.03-0.07), Smoking 0.05 (0.02-0.07); P<0.001 for each. Improvements were sustained at 18 months. At 12 months, baseline-adjusted difference-in-differences in proportions for the POC+PM arm versus POC was: Aspirin 0.02 (-0.02 to 0.05), Blood pressure -0.01 (-0.04 to 0.03), Cholesterol 0.03 (0.00-0.07), and Smoking 0.02 (-0.02 to 0.06); P>0.05 for all. Change Process Capability Questionnaire improved slightly, mean change 0.30 (0.09-0.51) but did not significantly differ across arms. Facilitator-led QI promoting population management approaches plus POC improvement strategies was not clearly superior to POC strategies alone.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background:Effective quality improvement (QI) strategies are needed for small practices.Objective:The objective of this study was to compare practice facilitation implementing point-of-care (POC) QI strategies alone versus facilitation implementing point-of-care plus population management (POC+PM) strategies on preventive cardiovascular care.Design:Two arm, practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study.Participants:Small and mid-sized primary care practices.Interventions:Practices worked with facilitators on QI for 12 months to implement POC or POC+PM strategies.Measures:Proportion of eligible patients in a practice meeting \"ABCS\" measures: (Aspirin) Aspirin/antiplatelet therapy for ischemic vascular disease, (Blood pressure) Controlling High Blood Pressure, (Cholesterol) Statin Therapy for the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease, and (Smoking) Tobacco Use: Screening and Cessation Intervention, and the Change Process Capability Questionnaire. Measurements were performed at baseline, 12, and 18 months.Results:A total of 226 practices were randomized, 179 contributed follow-up data. The mean proportion of patients meeting each performance measure was greater at 12 months compared with baseline: Aspirin 0.04 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.06), Blood pressure 0.04 (0.02-0.06), Cholesterol 0.05 (0.03-0.07), Smoking 0.05 (0.02-0.07); P<0.001 for each. Improvements were sustained at 18 months. At 12 months, baseline-adjusted difference-in-differences in proportions for the POC+PM arm versus POC was: Aspirin 0.02 (−0.02 to 0.05), Blood pressure −0.01 (−0.04 to 0.03), Cholesterol 0.03 (0.00-0.07), and Smoking 0.02 (−0.02 to 0.06); P>0.05 for all. Change Process Capability Questionnaire improved slightly, mean change 0.30 (0.09-0.51) but did not significantly differ across arms.Conclusion:Facilitator-led QI promoting population management approaches plus POC improvement strategies was not clearly superior to POC strategies alone.

This study surveyed the use of systematic strategies to address social determinants of health in the primary care clinical training environment. We designed a 51-item questionnaire targeting medical educators from internal medicine, pediatrics, and family practice to assess strategies to identify and mitigate social needs, the role of trainees in this process, and barriers/facilitators to systematic approaches. The survey was completed by 104 medical educators from 77 institutions. Of the 104 respondents, 28% were not familiar with any standardized tools used for screening for social needs, 27% use geospatial (GIS) or geographic information system (GIG) data, and 35% reported that trainees were not involved in any part of assisting. Nearly one third of medical educators lack familiarity with standardized screening tools for social needs. More than one third reported that trainees are not involved with mitigating social needs. Geospatial and GIS data are not utilized frequently.