Project description:Hypertension remains the leading cause of global mortality, with elevated systolic blood pressure (BP) leading to 10.8 million deaths each year. Despite this, only around 50% of individuals with hypertension are aware of their condition. Alongside low awareness rates, lack of patient adherence to medication and therapeutic inertia have been identified as factors contributing to the lack of hypertension control worldwide. This report summarizes presentations from the "one of a kind" Servier-sponsored symposium, Improving the Management of Hypertension: Acting on Key Factors, which was conducted as part of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)-International Society of Hypertension (ISH) 2021 ON-AIR meeting. The symposium focused on how low awareness, therapeutic inertia, and nonadherence can be addressed by combining the experience of a patient with the expertise of physicians. May Measurement Month, the ongoing global BP measurement program, is raising awareness of hypertension in over 90 countries, and the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/ESH guidelines and the 2020 ISH guidelines now include recommendations that specifically address low adherence and therapeutic inertia, including involving patients in a shared decision-making process and the use of single-pill combination therapy. Understanding the role of emotion in decision making and addressing the different psychological states and attitudes in the patient's "cycle of change" are key to effective shared decision making and improving adherence.
Project description:Early glycaemic control leads to better outcomes, including a reduction in long-term macrovascular and microvascular complications. Despite good-quality evidence, glycaemic control has been shown to be inadequate globally. Therapeutic inertia has been shown present in all stages of treatment intensification, from the first oral antihyperglycaemic drug (OAD), all the way to the initiation of insulin. The causes and possible solutions to the problem of therapeutic inertia are complex but can be understood better when viewed from the perspective of the providers [healthcare professionals (HCPs)], patients and healthcare systems. In this review, we will discuss the possible aetiologies, consequences and solutions of therapeutic inertia, drawing upon evidence from published literature on the subject of type 2 diabetes.
Project description:To explore reasons for clinical inertia in the management of persistent depression symptoms.We characterized patterns of treatment adjustment in primary care and their relation to the patient's clinical condition by modeling transition to a given treatment "state" conditional on the current state of treatment. We assessed associations of patient, clinician, and practice barriers with adjustment decisions.Survey data on patients in active care for major depression were collected at 6-month intervals over a 2-year period for the quality improvement for depression (QID) studies.Patient and clinician characteristics were collected at baseline. Depression severity and treatment were measured at each interval.Approximately, one-third of the observation periods ending with less than a full response resulted in an adjustment recommendation. Clinicians often respond correctly to the combination of severe depression symptoms and less than maximal treatment by changing the treatment. Appropriate adjustment is less common, however, in management of less severely depressed patients who do not improve after starting treatment, particularly if their care already meets minimal treatment intensity guidelines.Our findings suggest that quality improvement efforts should focus on promoting appropriate adjustments for patients with persistent depression symptoms, particularly those with less severe depression.
Project description:ObjectiveHypertension quality improvement programs reduce uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) but impact may differ by sex and age.MethodsThis study examined uncontrolled BP, defined as a BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg, and therapeutic inertia, defined as absence of medication initiation or escalation during visits with uncontrolled BP, by sex and by age group (19-40, 41-65, 66-75, and 76+ years) during a 12 month follow-up period among 21, 861 patients with hypertension and ≥ two visits in primary care clinics enrolled in the American Medical Association (AMA) Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner with Patients (MAP) BP hypertension quality improvement program.ResultsThe mean age was 64.8 years (standard deviation [SD 12.8]) and ranged from 19 to 87 years; 53.6% were female. In age groups 19-40, 41-65, 66-75, 76-87 years, uncontrolled BP at the first clinic visit was present in 51.5%, 42.5%, 37.5% and 36.6% of males, respectively, and in 40.0%, 38.0%, 36.0% and 39.6% of females, respectively. Based on vital signs at the first vs. last clinic visit, the proportion of patients with uncontrolled BP in age groups 19-40, 41-65, 66-75 years declined by 19.4%, 13.5%, 10.1% and 8.7% in males, respectively, and 14.4%, 12.5%, 9.3%, and 8.4%, among females, respectively. Therapeutic inertia ranged from 66.5% and 75.9% of clinic visits among males and females age 19-40 years, to 85.6% and 84.9% of clinic visits among males and females age 76-87 years, respectively. The proportion of clinic visits with therapeutic inertia was lower among males vs. females across all age groups until age 76-87 years.ConclusionA quality improvement program improves BP control but declines in uncontrolled BP are larger and therapeutic inertia is lower for younger vs. older age groups and for males vs. females. More interventions are needed to reduce sex and age disparities in hypertension management.
Project description:AimsTherapeutic inertia, defined as the failure to initiate or intensify therapy in a timely manner according to evidence-based clinical guidelines, is a key reason for uncontrolled hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. The aims of this systematic review were to identify how therapeutic inertia in the management of hyperglycaemia was measured and to assess its extent over the past decade.Materials and methodsSystematic searches for articles published from January 1, 2004 to August 1, 2016 were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase. Two researchers independently screened all of the titles and abstracts, and the full texts of publications deemed relevant. Data were extracted by a single researcher using a standardized data extraction form.ResultsThe final selection for the review included 53 articles. Measurements used to assess therapeutic inertia varied across studies, making comparisons difficult. Data from low- to middle-income countries were scarce. In most studies, the median time to treatment intensification after a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement above target was more than 1 year (range 0.3 to >7.2 years). Therapeutic inertia increased as the number of antidiabetic drugs rose and decreased with increasing HbA1c levels. Data were mainly available from Western countries. Diversity of inertia measures precluded meta-analysis.ConclusionsTherapeutic inertia in the management of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes is a major concern. This is well documented in Western countries, but corresponding data are urgently needed in low- and middle-income countries, in view of their high prevalence of type 2 diabetes.
Project description:Importance: The prescription of generic (non-proprietary) compared to brand-name drugs is increasing worldwide. In many developing and emerging countries, generics companies market products at similar costs as brand-name competitors benefiting from more flexible compliance rules and regulations for marketing their products in the health system. Together, this phenomenon may influence prescriber's behavior (e.g., maintaining the same treatment despite guideline's recommendations or despite evidence of disease progression). Objectives: To compare the prevalence of therapeutic inertia (TI) between primary prescription of brand-name vs. generic drugs in the management of MS in Argentina. Design: We conducted a population-based online study comprising 117 neurologists with expertise in MS. Participants answered questions regarding their clinical practice, most commonly prescribed disease modifying agents, and therapeutic choices of 10 simulated case-scenarios that assessed TI. Inertia was defined as the lack of treatment initiation or escalation despite evidence of clinical and radiological activity (8 case-scenarios, 720 individual responses). We created the generic-brand name score (GBS) according to the 5 most frequently prescribed generic (n = 16) vs. brand-name (n = 9) drugs for MS, where scores higher than 1 indicated higher prescription of generic drugs and scores lower than 1 indicated higher prescription of brand-name agents. Candidate predictors of prescribing generic drugs included demographic data, MS specialist vs. general neurologist, practice setting, years of practice, volume of MS patients, risk preferences, costs of annual treatment. Participants and setting: population-based prospective study using including neurologists who care for patients with multiple sclerosis across Argentina. Exposure: prescription of generic vs. brand-name MS drugs Main outcome of interest: Therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as lack of treatment escalation when goals are unmet. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with generic drug prescription and costs of MS treatment. Results: Ninety participants completed the study (completion rate 76.9%). TI was observed in 153 (21.3%) of participants' responses. The evaluation of aggregate responses revealed a mean GBS score (SD) of 3.44 (2.1), with 46 (51.1%) participants having a GBS equal to or higher than 1. Older age (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.00-1.42), being a general neurologist (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19-12.8), and being more willing to take risks in multiple domains (SOEP score OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.12) were associated with higher prescription of generic drugs in MS care. Costs of treatment were not associated with prescribing generic drugs. There was no difference in the annual costs of MS treatment for primary prescribers of brand-name vs. generic drugs (67,500 US$ vs. 67,496 US$; p = 0.99). The evaluation of individual responses revealed that participants with higher prescription of generics-reflected by a higher GBS-had higher incident risk of TI (mean GBS 3.61 for TI vs. 2.96 for no TI; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a prescription of generic agents was associated with an increased incident risk of TI (OR 1.56; 95%CI 1.07-2.29). There was no difference in the annual costs of MS treatment for participants that exhibited TI vs. those without TI (67,426 US$ vs. 67,704 US$; p = 0.66). Conclusions: General neurologist, older age, and willingness to take risks were associated with increased prescription of generic drugs despite similar costs compared to brand-name agents. In our study, the prescription of generic-MS drugs was associated with a higher incident risk of therapeutic inertia.
Project description:ObjectivesLimited information is available on physician-related factors influencing therapeutic inertia (TI) in multiple sclerosis (MS). Our aim was to evaluate whether physicians' risk preferences are associated with TI in MS care, by applying concepts from behavioral economics.DesignIn this cross-sectional study, participants answered questions regarding the management of 20 MS case scenarios, completed 3 surveys, and 4 experimental paradigms based on behavioral economics. Surveys and experiments included standardized measures of aversion ambiguity in financial and health domains, physicians' reactions to uncertainty in patient care, and questions related to risk preferences in different domains. The primary outcome was TI when physicians faced a need for escalating therapy based on clinical (new relapse) and magnetic resonance imaging activity while patients were on a disease-modifying agent.ResultsOf 161 neurologists who were invited to participate in the project, 136 cooperated with the study (cooperation rate 84.5%) and 96 completed the survey (response rate: 60%). TI was present in 68.8% of participants. Similar results were observed for definitions of TI based on modified Rio or clinical progression. Aversion to ambiguity was associated with higher prevalence of TI (86.4% with high aversion to ambiguity vs. 63.5% with lower or no aversion to ambiguity; p = 0.042). In multivariate analyses, high aversion to ambiguity was the strongest predictor of TI (OR 7.39; 95%CI 1.40-38.9), followed by low tolerance to uncertainty (OR 3.47; 95%CI 1.18-10.2).ConclusionTI is a common phenomenon affecting nearly 7 out of 10 physicians caring for MS patients. Higher prevalence of TI was associated with physician's strong aversion to ambiguity and low tolerance of uncertainty.
Project description:ObjectivesClinical inertia, or therapeutic inertia (TI), is the medical behaviour of not initiating or intensifying treatment when recommended by clinical recommendations. To our knowledge, our survey is the first to assess TI around psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsEight hundred and twenty-five French rheumatologists were contacted via email between January and March 2021 and invited to complete an online questionnaire consisting of seven clinical vignettes: five cases ('oligoarthritis', 'enthesitis', 'polyarthritis', 'neoplastic history', 'cardiovascular risk') requiring treatment OPTImization, and two 'control' cases (distal interphalangeal arthritis, atypical axial involvement) not requiring any change of treatment-according to the most recent PsA recommendations. Rheumatologists were also questioned about their routine practice, continuing medical education and perception of PsA.ResultsOne hundred and one rheumatologists completed this OPTI'PsA survey. Almost half the respondents (47%) demonstrated TI on at least one of the five vignettes that warranted treatment optimization. The complex profiles inducing the most TI were 'oligoarthritis' and 'enthesitis' with 20% and 19% of respondents not modifying treatment, respectively. Conversely, clinical profiles for which there was the least uncertainty ('polyarthritis in relapse', 'neoplastic history' and 'cardiovascular risk') generated less TI with 11%, 8% and 6% of respondents, respectively, choosing not to change the current treatment.ConclusionThe rate of TI we observed for PsA is similar to published data for other chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, gout or multiple sclerosis. Our study is the first to show marked clinical inertia in PsA, and further research is warranted to ascertain the reasons behind this inertia.
Project description:Advances in primary prophylaxis have resulted in improved outcomes for patients with sickle cell anemia (SCA; i.e., hemoglobin SS- and Sβ(0)-thalassemia). Standard prophylactic measures include a first pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) and transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) at age 2 years. Though efficacious, evidence suggests that delivery of these interventions is suboptimal. This study reports adherence to these measures and examines concordance across various data sources, using Registry and Surveillance for Hemoglobinopathies project data.Retrospective database and SCA center chart review identified children with SCA aged 24-36 months between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2008. PPV and TCD administration were determined through Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program administrative claims data, medical record review, and Georgia Registry of Immunization Transaction and Services. Analysis was conducted in 2015.A total of 125 children met inclusion criteria. Forty-five (36.0%) children had documentation of both interventions, whereas 19 (15.2%) had no documentation of either intervention. Sixty-one (48.8%) children obtained only one intervention. Of these, more were likely to have had PPV than TCD (77.0% vs 23.0%, respectively, p<0.001). Agreement between claims data and medical record review was moderate for PPV (κ=0.55) and substantial for TCD (κ=0.74).No single, reliable data source for tracking standard of care for children with SCA statewide was found. According to study data, prophylaxis measures were not universally implemented during the surveillance period. Further research is needed to adequately track changes over time, determine risk groups, and develop methods of evaluating important metrics.