Faculty Bibliography

CONTEXT: A diagnosis of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), or end stage renal disease (ESRD) represents a significant life change for patients and families. Individuals often experience high symptom burden, decreased quality of life, increased health care utilization, and end-of-life care discordant with their preferences. Early integration of palliative care with standard nephrology practice in the outpatient setting has the potential to improve quality of life through provision of expert symptom management, emotional support, and facilitation of advance care planning that honors the individual's values and goals. OBJECTIVES: This special report describes application of participatory action research (PAR) methods to develop an outpatient integrated nephrology and palliative care program. METHODS: Stakeholder concerns were thematically analyzed to inform translation of a known successful model of outpatient kidney palliative care to a practice in a large, urban medical center in the United States. RESULTS: Stakeholder needs and challenges to meeting these needs were identified. We uncovered a shared understanding of the clinical need for palliative care services in nephrology practice, but apprehension towards practice change. Action steps to modify the base model were created in response to stakeholder feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a model of care that provides a new approach to clinical practice requires attention to relevant stakeholder concerns. PAR is a useful methodological approach that engages stakeholders and builds partnerships. This creation of shared ownership can facilitate innovation and practice change. We synthesized stakeholder concerns to build a conceptual model for an integrated nephrology and palliative care clinical program.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The Community Healthy Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS) survey, summarized into weekly caloric expenditures, is a common physical activity (PA) assessment tool among older adults. Specific types of PA reported in the CHAMPS have not been systematically analyzed. We applied latent class analysis to identify the patterns of PA among sedentary older adults with diabetes reported in the CHAMPS survey. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Latent class models of PA were identified using the CHAMPS survey data reported by 115 individuals aged ≥60 years with type 2 diabetes whom volunteered for a clinical study of PA. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess independent predictors of a specific latent class, including age, sex, and performance in physical function tests. Results/UNASSIGNED: = 0.03). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Individual PA response in CHAMPS can be categorized using latent class models into meaningful patterns which can inform PA interventions. Customized PA programs should consider the heterogeneity of the activities among sedentary older adults. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00344240; retrospectively registered 23 June 2006.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:In 2009 and 2010, 17 primary care sites within 1 healthcare system became patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), but the sites trained different personnel (pharmacists vs nurses) to improve diabetes care using self-management support (SMS). We report the challenges and successes of our efforts to: 1) assemble a new multipayer (Medicare, Medicaid, commercial) claims dataset linked to a clinical registry and 2) use the new dataset to perform comparative effectiveness research on implementation of the 2 SMS models. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Longitudinal cohort study. METHODS:We lost permission to use private-payer data. Therefore, we used claims from Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible patients merged with chronic disease registry data. We studied 2008 to 2010, which included 1 year pre- and 1 year post the 2009 implementation time period. Outcomes were outpatient and emergency department visits, hospitalizations, care process (use of statin), and 3 intermediate outcomes (glycemic control, blood pressure [BP], and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]). RESULTS:In our sample of 2826 patients, quality of care improved and utilization decreased over the 2.5 years. Both approaches improved lipid control (LDL-C decreased by an average of 4 mg/dL for pharmacy-SMS and 5.6 mg/dL for nurse-SMS) and diastolic BP (-1.5 mm Hg for pharmacy-SMS and -1.3 mm Hg for nurse-SMS), whereas only the pharmacy-led approach decreased primary care visits (by 0.8 visits). The groups differed slightly on 2 measures (glycated hemoglobin, systolic BP) with respect to the trajectory of improvement over time, but performance was similar by 2.5 years. CONCLUSIONS:Diabetes care improved during PCMH implementation systemwide, supporting both nurse-led and pharmacist-led SMS models.

Although the field of frailty research has expanded rapidly, it is still a nascent concept within the clinical specialties. Frailty, conceptualized as greater vulnerability to stressors because of significant depletion of physiological reserves, predicts poorer outcomes in several medical specialties, including cardiology, human immunodeficiency virus care, and nephrology, and in the behavioral and social sciences. Lack of a consensus definition, proliferation of measurement tools, inadequate understanding of the biology of frailty, and lack of validated clinical algorithms for frail individuals hinders incorporation of frailty assessment and frailty research into the specialties. In 2015, the American Geriatrics Society, the National Institute on Aging (NIA), and the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine held a conference for awardees of the NIA-sponsored Grants for Early Medical/Surgical Specialists Transition into Aging Research program to review the current state of knowledge regarding frailty in the subspecialties and to highlight examples of integrating frailty research into the medical specialties. Research questions to advance frailty research into specialty medicine are proposed.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 17% of patients are readmitted within 30 days of discharge after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Selected patients are discharged to skilled nursing facilities, yet the association between a hospital's practice to discharge home versus to skilled nursing facilities, and readmission remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) Registry was used to evaluate readmissions among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (2011-2015). Hospitals were divided into quartiles (Q1-Q4) based on the percentage of patients discharged directly home. We assessed patient and hospital level characteristics and used hierarchical logistic regression to analyze the association of discharge disposition with 30-day readmission. Our cohort included 18 568 transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients at 329 US hospitals, of whom 69% were discharged directly home. Hospitals in the highest quartile of direct home discharge (Q4) compared with hospitals in the lowest (Q1) were more likely to use femoral access (75.2% versus 60.1%, P<0.001), had fewer patients receiving transfusion (26.4% versus 40.9%, P<0.001), and were more likely to be located in the Southern United States (48.8% versus 18.3%, P<0.001). Median 30-day readmission rate was 17.9%. There was no significant difference in 30-day readmissions among quartiles (P=0.14), even after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio Q4 versus Q1=0.89, 95%CI 0.76-1.04; P=0.15). Factors most strongly associated with 30-day readmission were glomerular filtration rate, in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack, and nonfemoral access. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant association between hospital practice of direct home discharge post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement and 30-day readmission. Further research is needed to understand regional variations and optimum strategies for postdischarge care.

Importance: While statin therapy for primary cardiovascular prevention has been associated with reductions in cardiovascular morbidity, the effect on all-cause mortality has been variable. There is little evidence to guide the use of statins for primary prevention in adults 75 years and older. Objectives: To examine statin treatment among adults aged 65 to 74 years and 75 years and older when used for primary prevention in the Lipid-Lowering Trial (LLT) component of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT). Design, Setting, and Participants: Post hoc secondary data analyses were conducted of participants 65 years and older without evidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; 2867 ambulatory adults with hypertension and without baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were included. The ALLHAT-LLT was conducted from February 1994 to March 2002 at 513 clinical sites. Interventions: Pravastatin sodium (40 mg/d) vs usual care (UC). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome in the ALLHAT-LLT was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cause-specific mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction or fatal coronary heart disease combined (coronary heart disease events). Results: There were 1467 participants (mean [SD] age, 71.3 [5.2] years) in the pravastatin group (48.0% [n = 704] female) and 1400 participants (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [5.2] years) in the UC group (50.8% [n = 711] female). The baseline mean (SD) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were 147.7 (19.8) mg/dL in the pravastatin group and 147.6 (19.4) mg/dL in the UC group; by year 6, the mean (SD) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were 109.1 (35.4) mg/dL in the pravastatin group and 128.8 (27.5) mg/dL in the UC group. At year 6, of the participants assigned to pravastatin, 42 of 253 (16.6%) were not taking any statin; 71.0% in the UC group were not taking any statin. The hazard ratios for all-cause mortality in the pravastatin group vs the UC group were 1.18 (95% CI, 0.97-1.42; P = .09) for all adults 65 years and older, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.85-1.37; P = .55) for adults aged 65 to 74 years, and 1.34 (95% CI, 0.98-1.84; P = .07) for adults 75 years and older. Coronary heart disease event rates were not significantly different among the groups. In multivariable regression, the results remained nonsignificant, and there was no significant interaction between treatment group and age. Conclusions and Relevance: No benefit was found when pravastatin was given for primary prevention to older adults with moderate hyperlipidemia and hypertension, and a nonsignificant direction toward increased all-cause mortality with pravastatin was observed among adults 75 years and older. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000542.