motivation

Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes

Bethie Seay — Thu, 26 Aug 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

August 26, 2021

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2021.12531

The U.S. Preventive Services Advisory Committee recommends screening nonpregnant adults aged 35 – 70 with BMI >25 for prediabetes and diabetes. While there is no recommendation regarding how often to screen, they mention that every 3 years seems reasonable based upon the evidence they reviewed.

View

IMPORTANCE An estimated 13% of all US adults (18 years or older) have diabetes, and 34.5%
meet criteria for prediabetes. The prevalences of prediabetes and diabetes are higher in older
adults. Estimates of the risk of progression from prediabetes to diabetes vary widely, perhaps
because of differences in the definition of prediabetes or the heterogeneity of prediabetes.
Diabetes is the leading cause of kidney failure and new cases of blindness among adults in the
US. It is also associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver
disease, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and was estimated to be the seventh leading cause
of death in the US in 2017. Screening asymptomatic adults for prediabetes and type 2
diabetes may allow earlier detection, diagnosis, and treatment, with the ultimate goal of
improving health outcomes.
OBJECTIVE To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a systematic
review to evaluate screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic,
nonpregnant adults and preventive interventions for those with prediabetes.
POPULATION Nonpregnant adults aged 35 to 70 years seen in primary care settings who have
overweight or obesity (defined as a body mass index 25 and 30, respectively) and no
symptoms of diabetes.
EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for
prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and offering or referring patients with prediabetes to
effective preventive interventions has a moderate net benefit.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for prediabetes
and type 2 diabetes in adults aged 35 to 70 years who have overweight or obesity. Clinicians
should offer or refer patients with prediabetes to effective preventive interventions.
(B recommendation)

Author/s:

US Preventative Services task Force

Perioperative alcohol cessation intervention for postoperative complications

Brian Desmarais — Sat, 15 Aug 2020 19:59:34 +0000

Date Added:

August 15, 2020

Journal/Publication:

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Publication Date:

November 8, 2018

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

Perioperative alcohol cessation intervention for postoperative complications

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1002/14651858.CD008343.pub3.

MeSH

Postoperative Complications

This Cochrane review suggests that efforts to help adults with a history of risky alcohol consumption to quit prior to and following surgery reduces surgical complications including mortality. That isn’t surprising, but we haven’t always paid as much attention to alcohol consumption as we have to smoking as a risk factor for surgical complications. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background: Risky consumption of alcohol is a global problem. More than 3.3 million deaths annually are associated with risky use of alcohol, and global alcohol consumption continues to increase. People who have high alcohol consumption often require planned and emergency surgical procedures.Risky drinking is associated with increased postoperative complications such as infections, cardiopulmonary complications, and bleeding episodes. Alcohol causes disorders of the liver, pancreas, and nervous system. Stopping consumption of alcohol can normalize these organ systems to some degree and may reduce the occurrence of complications after surgery.This review was first published in 2012 and was updated in 2018.

Objectives: To assess the effects of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions on rates of postoperative complications and alcohol consumption.

Search methods: We searched the following databases up until 21 September 2018: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL via EBSCOhost; and two trials registers. We scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials and any identified relevant systematic reviews for further references to additional trials. When necessary, we contacted trial authors to ask for additional information.

Selection criteria: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions on postoperative complications and alcohol consumption. We included participants with risky consumption of alcohol who were undergoing all types of elective or acute surgical procedures under general or regional anaesthesia or sedation, who were offered a perioperative alcohol cessation intervention or no intervention.We defined 'risky drinking' as alcohol consumption equivalent to more than 3 alcoholic units (AU)/d or 21 AU/week (with 1 AU containing 12 grams of ethanol) with or without symptoms of alcohol abuse or dependency. This corresponds to the amount of alcohol associated with increased postoperative complication rates in most clinical studies.

Data collection and analysis: We used guidance provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We presented main outcomes as dichotomous variables in a meta-analysis. When data were available, we conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses to explore the risk of bias. Primary outcome measures were postoperative complications and in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were successful quitting at the end of the programme, postoperative alcohol use, and length of hospital stay. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.

Main results: We included in this updated review one new study (70 participants), resulting in a total of three RCTs (140 participants who drank 3 to 40 AU/d). All three studies were of moderate to good quality. All studies evaluated the effects of intensive alcohol cessation interventions, including pharmacological strategies for alcohol withdrawal symptoms, patient education, and relapse prophylaxis. We identified one ongoing study.Overall, 53 of the 122 participants from three studies who underwent surgery developed any type of postoperative complication that required treatment. Of 61 participants in the intervention groups, 20 had complications, compared with 33 of 61 participants in the control groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.96). Results show differences between the three clinical studies regarding outcome measurement and intensity of the interventions. However, all alcohol cessation programmes were intensive and included pharmacological therapy. The overall quality of evidence for this outcome is moderate.In-hospital and 30-day postoperative mortality rates were low in the three studies. Researchers reported one death among 61 participants in the intervention groups, and three deaths among 61 participants in the control groups (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.96). The quality of evidence for this outcome is low.Investigators describe more successful quitters at the end of the intervention programme than among controls. Forty-one out of 70 participants in the intervention groups successfully quit drinking compared with only five out of 70 participants in the control groups (RR 8.22, 95% CI 1.67 to 40.44). The quality of evidence for this outcome is moderate.All three studies reported postoperative alcohol consumption (grams of alcohol/week) at the end of the programme as median and range values; therefore it was not possible to estimate the mean and the standard deviation (SD). We performed no meta-analysis. All three studies reported length of stay, and none of these studies described a significant difference in length of stay. Data were insufficient for review authors to perform a meta-analysis. No studies reported on the prevalence of participants without risky drinking in the longer term.

Authors' conclusions: This systematic review assessed the efficacy of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions for postoperative complications and alcohol consumption. All three studies showed a significant reduction in the number of participants who quit drinking alcohol during the intervention period. Intensive alcohol cessation interventions offered for four to eight weeks to participants undergoing all types of surgical procedures to achieve complete alcohol cessation before surgery probably reduced the number of postoperative complications. Data were insufficient for review authors to assess their effects on postoperative mortality. No studies reported an effect on length of stay, and no studies addressed the prevalence of risky drinking in the longer term.Included studies were few and reported small sample sizes; therefore one should be careful about drawing firm conclusions based on these study results. All three studies were conducted in Denmark, and most participants were men. The included participants may represent a selective group, as they could have been more motivated and/or more interested in participating in clinical research or otherwise different, and effects may have been overestimated for both intervention and control groups in these studies. Trial results indicate that these studies are difficult to perform, that strong research competencies are necessary for future studies, and that further evaluation of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions in high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed. Once published and assessed, the one 'ongoing' study identified may alter the conclusions of this review.

Conflict of interest statement

Hanne Tønnesen has authored all three of the studies included in this review (Egholm 2017; Tønnesen 1999a; Tønnesen 2002).

Julie Weber Melchior Egholm, Johanna Adami, and Bolette Pedersen have authored one of the included studies (Egholm 2017).

Hanne Tønnesen is also the primary investigator for the ongoing study (NCT02188446).

Therefore, to avoid any potential bias, Carsten B Juhl extracted data and checked the interpretation against study reports and any available study registration details or protocols as an independent review author.

Author/s:

Egholm, Julie W., Pedersen, Bolette, Møller, Ann M., Adami, Johanna, Juhl, Carsten B., Tønnesen, Hanne

Summary of Revisions: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020

John Bayhi — Sat, 14 Mar 2020 19:35:38 +0000

Date Added:

March 14, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Diabetes Care

Publisher:

American Diabetes Association

Publication Date:

January 1, 2020

Issue:

Supplement 1

Volume:

Pages:

S4-S6

URL:

Summary of Revisions: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.2337/dc20-Srev

Keywords

PMID (1):

31862743

MeSH

Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors

Diabetic Ketoacidosis

Ficus

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor

glycated hemoglobin a

cardiovascular diseases

Consensus

Farmers

Cystic Fibrosis

Transients and Migrants

Pharmaceutical Preparations

depression

Smell

Patient Comfort

electronic nicotine delivery systems

Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring

celiac disease

follow-up studies

Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults

seasons

social determinants of health

Standard of Care

Time-to-Treatment

united states food and drug administration

risk reduction behavior

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

glucagon-like peptide 1

anxiety disorders

Feeding and Eating Disorders

thyroid diseases

Infections

This is a three-page summary of the 2020 updates to the ADA Guidelines for Type 2 diabetes. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

No abstract available.

Building a Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) blueprint: a qualitative study delineating GBOT implementation

John Bayhi — Thu, 02 Jan 2020 21:06:56 +0000

Date Added:

January 2, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice

Publisher:

BioMed Central Ltd

Publication Date:

December 27, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

Building a Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) blueprint: a qualitative study delineating GBOT implementation

Type:

Practice Management Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1186/s13722-019-0176-y

Keywords

Buprenorphine-naloxone

GBOT

Group psychotherapy

Group visit

Implementation science

Shared medical appointment

Group-Based Opioid Treatment

PMID (1):

31882001

MeSH

Humans

Focus Groups

Patient Participation

outpatients

motivation

opioid-related disorders

This article could be helpful to medical directors, practice facilitators, and QI managers who are tasked with creating systems for addressing patients with opioid use disorders. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

BACKGROUND:

Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) has recently emerged as a mechanism for treating patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the outpatient setting. However, the more practical "how to" components of successfully delivering GBOT has received little attention in the medical literature, potentially limiting its widespread implementation and utilization. Building on a previous case series, this paper delineates the key components to implementing GBOT by asking: (a) What are the core components to GBOT implementation, and how are they defined? (b) What are the malleable components to GBOT implementation, and what conceptual framework should providers use in determining how to apply these components for effective delivery in their unique clinical environment?

METHODS:

To create a blueprint delineating GBOT implementation, we integrated findings from a previously conducted and separately published systematic review of existing GBOT studies, conducted additional literature review, reviewed best practice recommendations and policies related to GBOT and organizational frameworks for implementing health systems change. We triangulated this data with a qualitative thematic analysis from 5 individual interviews and 2 focus groups representing leaders from 5 different GBOT programs across our institution to identify the key components to GBOT implementation, distinguish "core" and "malleable" components, and provide a conceptual framework for considering various options for implementing the malleable components.

RESULTS:

We identified 6 core components to GBOT implementation that optimize clinical outcomes, comply with mandatory policies and regulations, ensure patient and staff safety, and promote sustainability in delivery. These included consistent group expectations, team-based approach to care, safe and confidential space, billing compliance, regular monitoring, and regular patient participation. We identified 14 malleable components and developed a novel conceptual framework that providers can apply when deciding how to employ each malleable component that considers empirical, theoretical and practical dimensions.

CONCLUSION:

While further research on the effectiveness of GBOT and its individual implementation components is needed, the blueprint outlined here provides an initial framework to help office-based opioid treatment sites implement a successful GBOT approach and hence potentially serve as future study sites to establish efficacy of the model. This blueprint can also be used to continuously monitor how components of GBOT influence treatment outcomes, providing an empirical framework for the ongoing process of refining implementation strategies.

Author/s:

Sokol, R, Albanese, M, Chew, A, Early, J, Grossman, E, Roll, D, Sawin, G, Wu, DJ, Schuman-Olivier, Z

Effectiveness of Behaviorally Designed Gamification Interventions With Social Incentives for Increasing Physical Activity Among Overweight and Obese Adults Across the United States: The STEP UP Randomized Clinical Trial

Brian Desmarais — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:46:36 +0000

Date Added:

September 11, 2019

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Internal Medicine

Publisher:

JAMA

Publication Date:

September 9, 2019

URL:

Effectiveness of Behaviorally Designed Gamification Interventions With Social Incentives for Increasing Physical Activity Among Overweight and Obese Adults Across the United States: The STEP UP Randomized Clinical Trial

Type:

Practice Management Reviews and Guidelines

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3505.

Keywords

weigh loss programs

competition

MeSH

Wearable Electronic Devices

Economics, Behavioral

Goals

motivation

body mass index

Adding competition to a weight loss program enhanced and sustained its effectiveness. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

IMPORTANCE:

Gamification, the use of game design elements in nongame contexts, is increasingly being used in workplace wellness programs and digital health applications. However, the best way to design social incentives in gamification interventions has not been well examined.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the effectiveness of support, collaboration, and competition within a behaviorally designed gamification intervention to increase physical activity among overweight and obese adults.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

This 36-week randomized clinical trial with a 24-week intervention and 12-week follow-up assessed 602 adults from 40 states with body mass indexes (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 25 or higher from February 12, 2018, to March 17, 2019.

INTERVENTIONS:

Participants used a wearable device to track daily steps, established a baseline, selected a step goal increase, were randomly assigned to a control (n = 151) or to 1 of 3 gamification interventions (support [n = 151], collaboration [n = 150], and competition [n = 150]), and were remotely monitored. The control group received feedback from the wearable device but no other interventions for 36 weeks. The gamification arms were entered into a 24-week game designed using insights from behavioral economics with points and levels for achieving step goals. No gamification interventions occurred during follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

The primary outcome was change in mean daily steps from baseline through the 24-week intervention period.

RESULTS:

A total of 602 participants (mean [SD] age, 39 [10] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 30 [5]; 427 [70.9%] male) were included in the study. Compared with controls, participants had a significantly greater increase in mean daily steps from baseline during the intervention in the competition arm (adjusted difference, 920; 95% CI, 513-1328; P < .001), support arm (adjusted difference, 689; 95% CI, 267-977; P < .001), and collaboration arm (adjusted difference, 637; 95% CI, 258-1017; P = .001). During follow-up, physical activity remained significantly greater in the competition arm than in the control arm (adjusted difference, 569; 95% CI, 142-996; P = .009) but was not significantly greater in the support (adjusted difference, 428; 95% CI, 19-837; P = .04) and collaboration (adjusted difference, 126; 95% CI, -248 to 468; P = .49) arms than in the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

All 3 gamification interventions significantly increased physical activity during the 24-week intervention, and competition was the most effective. Physical activity was lower in all arms during follow-up and only remained significantly greater in the competition arm than in the control arm.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03311230.

Author/s:

Patel, M.S., Small, D.S., Harrison, J.D., Fortunato, M.P., Oon, A.L., Rareshide, C.A.L., Reh, G., Szwartz, G., Guszcza, J., Steier, D., Kalra, P., Hilbert V.

Motivational Interviewing and Field Instruction: The FRAMES model

Jeffrey Wilson — Mon, 19 Nov 2018 16:38:36 +0000

Date Added:

November 19, 2018

Journal/Publication:

Field Educator

Publisher:

Simmons School of Social Work

Publication Date:

April 1, 2012

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

Motivational Interviewing and Field Instruction: The FRAMES model

Type:

Clinical Decision Aids

Format:

Article

Keywords

motivational interviewing

motivation

burnout, professional

MeSH

burnout, professional

motivation

motivational interviewing

alcoholism

FRAMES is a brief intervention technique found to be effective with patients with unhealthy alcohol use.

Free full text

Motivational interviewing is defined as a “client-centered, directive method for enhancing intrinsic motivation to change by exploring and resolving ambivalence” (Miller & Rollnick, 2002). In supervision of staff, the ultimate goal is to improve an organization’s efficiency by increasing productivity, decreasing employee stress, vicarious trauma and burnout, and reducing clinical negligence and malpractice. In supervision of interns, the major focus is on meeting the intern’s learning needs and on developing competent practitioners. Motivational interviewing in supervision maximizes focus and positive change by developing action plans and addressing ambivalence toward change. Motivational interviewing uses a guide toward change called FRAMES; the acronym stands for Feedback, Responsibility, Advice, Menu Options, Empathy and Self-Efficacy.

Author/s:

Kamya, Hugo