Clinical practice guidelines aim to help providers make decisions that optimize patient care (1). Both developers and users of guidelines understand that guidelines could be improved by tailoring the recommendations to the specific circumstances of an individual patient. Tailored guideline recommendations may improve health outcomes when a group of patients can be divided into subgroups in which the tailored recommendations would increase benefits, reduce harms, or save costs relative to more generic recommendations. For example, a guideline for hypertension may recommend antihypertensive treatment in patients whose blood pressure is higher than 140/90 mm Hg. However, patients with diabetes or high cardiovascular risk may benefit from receiving treatment at lower blood pressures, whereas other patients may benefit from less aggressive treatment.

However, for both guideline developers and clinicians, tailoring recommendations is easier said than done. Developers of guidelines face a difficult tradeoff: Issue simplified, easy-to-follow guidelines or, instead, guidelines targeted more precisely to each patient, at the cost of greater complexity and more challenging implementation. In addition, little evidence may exist to guide how to tailor recommendations, because trials may exclude patients who have the comorbid conditions and other factors that would warrant tailoring a recommendation.

Clinicians also may have far more information about an individual patient than even complex guidelines can accommodate. Should a patient with atrial fibrillation receive guideline-concordant anticoagulation therapy even if he or she is at increased risk for falls? Such …

Study objective: We describe the availability of preventive health services in US emergency departments (EDs), as well as ED directors' preferred service and perceptions of barriers to offering preventive services.

Methods: Using the 2007 National Emergency Department Inventory (NEDI)-USA, we randomly sampled 350 (7%) of 4,874 EDs. We surveyed directors of these EDs to determine the availability of

1. screening and referral programs for alcohol, tobacco, geriatric falls, intimate partner violence, HIV, diabetes, and hypertension;
   
2. vaccination programs for influenza and pneumococcus; and
   
3. linkage programs to primary care and health insurance.
   

ED directors were asked to select the service they would most like to implement and to rate 5 potential barriers to offering preventive services.

Results: Two hundred seventy-seven EDs (80%) responded across 46 states. Availability of services ranged from 66% for intimate partner violence screening to 19% for HIV screening. ED directors wanted to implement primary care linkage most (17%) and HIV screening least (2%). ED directors "agreed/strongly agreed" that the following are barriers to ED preventive care: cost (74%), increased patient length of stay (64%), lack of follow-up (60%), resource shifting leading to worse patient outcomes (53%), and philosophical opposition (27%).

Conclusion: Most US EDs offer preventive services, but availability and ED director preference for type of service vary greatly. The maj ority of EDs do not routinely offer Centers for Disease Control and Prevention- recommended HIV screening. Most ED directors are not philosophically opposed to offering preventive services but are concerned with added costs, effects on ED operations, and potential lack of follow- up.

Background: Many patients with hypertension have legitimate reasons to forego standard blood pressure targets yet are nonetheless included in performance measurement systems. An approach to performance measurement incorporating clinical reasoning was developed to determine which patients to include in a performance measure.

Design: A 10-member multispecialty advisory panel refined a taxonomy of situations in which the balance of benefits and harms of anti-hypertensive treatment does not clearly favor tight blood pressure control (< 140/90 mm Hg).

Findings: The panel identified several broad categories of reasons for exempting a patient from performance measurement for blood pressure control. These included

1. patients who have suffered adverse effects from multiple classes of antihypertensive medications;
   
2. patients already taking four or more antihypertensive medications;
   
3. patients with terminal disease, moderate to severe dementia, or other conditions that overwhelmingly dominate the patient's clinical status; and
   
4. other patient factors, including comfort care orientation and poor medication adherence despite attempts to remedy adherence difficulties.

Several general principles also emerged. Performance measurement should focus on patients for whom the benefits of treatment clearly outweigh the harms and should incorporate a longitudinal approach. In addition, the criteria for exempting a patient from performance measurement should be more strict in patients at higher risk of adverse health outcomes from hypertension and more lenient for patients at lower risk.

Conclusions: Incorporating "real world" clinical principles and judgment into performance measurement systems may improve targeting of care and, by accounting for patient case mix, allow for better comparison of performance between institutions.

Background: Sodium consumption raises blood pressure, increasing the risk for heart attack and stroke. Several countries, including the United States, are considering strategies to decrease population sodium intake.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of 2 population strategies to reduce sodium intake: government collaboration with food manufacturers to voluntarily cut sodium in processed foods, modeled on the United Kingdom experience, and a sodium tax.

Design: A Markov model was constructed with 4 health states: well, acute myocardial infarction (MI), acute stroke, and history of MI or stroke.

Data Sources: Medical Panel Expenditure Survey (2006), Framingham Heart Study (1980 to 2003), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension trial, and other published data.

Target Population: U.S. adults aged 40 to 85 years.

Time Horizon: Lifetime.

Perspective: Societal.

Outcome Measures: Incremental costs (2008 U.S. dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and MIs and strokes averted.

Results of Base-case Analysis: Collaboration with industry that decreases mean population sodium intake by 9.5% averts 513 885 strokes and 480 358 MIs over the lifetime of adults aged 40 to 85 years who are alive today compared with the status quo, increasing QALYs by 2.1 million and saving $32.1 billion in medical costs. A tax on sodium that decreases population sodium intake by 6% increases QALYs by 1.3 million and saves $22.4 billion over the same period.

Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Results are sensitive to the assumption that consumers have no disutility with modest reductions in sodium intake.

Limitation: Efforts to reduce population sodium intake could result in other dietary changes that are difficult to predict.

Conclusion: Strategies to reduce sodium intake on a population level in the United States are likely to substantially reduce stroke and MI incidence, which would save billions of dollars in medical expenses.

Primary Funding Source: Department of Veterans Affairs, Stanford University, and the National Science Foundation.

Background: Sodium consumption raises blood pressure, increasing the risk for heart attack and stroke. Several countries, including the United States, are considering strategies to decrease population sodium intake.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of 2 population strategies to reduce sodium intake: government collaboration with food manufacturers to voluntarily cut sodium in processed foods, modeled on the United Kingdom experience, and a sodium tax.

Design: A Markov model was constructed with 4 health states: well, acute myocardial infarction (MI), acute stroke, and history of MI or stroke.

Data Sources: Medical Panel Expenditure Survey (2006), Framingham Heart Study (1980 to 2003), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension trial, and other published data.

Target Population: U.S. adults aged 40 to 85 years.

Time Horizon: Lifetime.

Perspective: Societal.

Outcome Measures: Incremental costs (2008 U.S. dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and MIs and strokes averted.

Results of Base-case Analysis: Collaboration with industry that decreases mean population sodium intake by 9.5% averts 513 885 strokes and 480 358 MIs over the lifetime of adults aged 40 to 85 years who are alive today compared with the status quo, increasing QALYs by 2.1 million and saving $32.1 billion in medical costs. A tax on sodium that decreases population sodium intake by 6% increases QALYs by 1.3 million and saves $22.4 billion over the same period.

Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Results are sensitive to the assumption that consumers have no disutility with modest reductions in sodium intake.

Limitation: Efforts to reduce population sodium intake could result in other dietary changes that are difficult to predict.

Conclusion: Strategies to reduce sodium intake on a population level in the United States are likely to substantially reduce stroke and MI incidence, which would save billions of dollars in medical expenses.

Primary Funding Source: Department of Veterans Affairs, Stanford University, and the National Science Foundation.

Abstract

Objectives. We assessed the potential health and economic benefits of reducing common risk factors in older Americans.
Methods. A dynamic simulation model tracked a national cohort of persons 51 and 52 years of age to project their health and medical spending in prevention scenarios for diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and smoking.
Results. The gain in life span from successful treatment of a person aged 51 or 52 years for obesity would be 0.85 years; for hypertension, 2.05 years; and for diabetes, 3.17 years. A 51- or 52-year-old person who quit smoking would gain 3.44 years. Despite living longer, those successfully treated for obesity, hypertension, or diabetes would have lower lifetime medical spending, exclusive of prevention costs. Smoking cessation would lead to increased lifetime spending. We used traditional valuations for a life-year to calculate that successful treatments would be worth, per capita, $198018 (diabetes), $137964 (hypertension), $118946 (smoking), and $51750 (obesity).
Conclusions. Effective prevention could substantially improve the health of older Americans, and—despite increases in longevity—such benefits could be achieved with little or no additional lifetime medical spending.

BACKGROUND: The burden of hypertension and related health care needs among Mexican Americans will likely increase substantially in the near future.

OBJECTIVES: In a nationally representative sample of U.S. Mexican American adults we examined: 1) the full range of blood pressure categories, from normal to severe; 2) predictors of hypertension awareness, treatment and control and; 3) prevalence of comorbidities among those with hypertension.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of pooled data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), 1999-2004. PARTICIPANTS: The group of participants encompassed 1,359 Mexican American women and 1,421 Mexican American men, aged 25-84 years, who underwent a standardized physical examination.

MEASUREMENTS: Physiologic measures of blood pressure, body mass index, and diabetes. Questionnaire assessment of blood pressure awareness and treatment.

RESULTS: Prevalence of Stage 1 hypertension was low and similar between women and men ( approximately 10%). Among hypertensives, awareness and treatment were suboptimal, particularly among younger adults (65% unaware, 71% untreated) and those without health insurance (51% unaware, 62% untreated). Among treated hypertensives, control was suboptimal for 56%; of these, 23% had stage >/=2 hypertension. Clustering of CVD risk factors was common; among hypertensive adults, 51% of women and 55% of men were also overweight or obese; 24% of women and 23% of men had all three chronic conditions-hypertension, overweight/obesity and diabetes.

CONCLUSION: Management of hypertension in Mexican American adults fails at multiple critical points along an optimal treatment pathway. Tailored strategies to improve hypertension awareness, treatment and control rates must be a public health priority.

BACKGROUND: Less than one third of the 65 million Americans with hypertension have adequate blood pressure (BP) control. This study examined the effectiveness of 2 interventions for improving patient BP control. METHODS: This was a 2-level (primary care provider and patient) cluster randomized trial with 2-year follow-up occurring among patients with hypertension enrolled from a Veterans Affairs Medical Center primary care clinic. Primary care providers (n = 17) in the intervention received computer-generated decision support designed to improve guideline concordant medical therapy at each visit; control providers (n = 15) received a reminder at each visit. Patients received usual care or a bimonthly tailored nurse-delivered behavioral telephone intervention to improve hypertension treatment. The primary outcome was proportion of patients who achieved a BP <140/90 mm Hg (<130/85 for diabetic patients) over the 24-month intervention. RESULTS: Of the 816 eligible patients contacted, 190 refused and 38 were excluded. The 588 enrolled patients had a mean age of 63 years, 43% had adequate baseline BP control, and 482 (82%) completed the 24-month follow-up. There were no significant differences in amount of change in BP control in the 3 intervention groups as compared to the hypertension reminder control group. In secondary analyses, rates of BP control for all patients receiving the patient behavioral intervention (n = 294) improved from 40.1% to 54.4% at 24 months (P = .03); patients in the nonbehavioral intervention group improved from 38.2% to 43.9% (P = .38), but there was no between-group differences at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: The brief behavioral intervention showed improved outcomes over time, but there were not significant between group differences.

Nationally representative data on the quality of care for obese patients in US-ambulatory care settings are limited. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 2005 and 2006 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). We examined obesity screening, diagnosis, and counseling during adult visits and associations with patient and provider characteristics. We also assessed performance on 15 previously published ambulatory quality indicators for obese vs. normal/overweight patients. Nearly 50% (95% confidence interval (CI): 46–54%) of visits lacked complete height and weight data needed to screen for obesity using BMI. Of visits by patients with clinical obesity (BMI ≥30.0 kg/m²), 70% (66–74%) were not diagnosed and 63% (59–68%) received no counseling for diet, exercise, or weight reduction. The percentage of visits not being screened (48%), diagnosed (66%), or counseled (54%) for obesity was also notably higher than expected even for patients with known obesity comorbidities. Performance (defined as the percentage of applicable visits receiving appropriate care) on the quality indicators was suboptimal overall. In particular, performance was no better than 50% for eight quality indicators, which are all related to the prevention and treatment of obesity comorbidities, e.g., coronary artery disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, asthma, and depression. Performance did not differ by weight status for any of the 15 quality indicators; however, poorer performance was consistently associated with lack of height and weight measurements. In conclusion, many opportunities are missed for obesity screening and diagnosis, as well as for the prevention and treatment of obesity comorbidities, in office-based practices across the United States, regardless of patient and provider characteristics.