Background

Primary care plays a key role in the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We examined primary care practice adherence to recommended care guidelines associated with the prevention and management of CVD for high risk patients.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional baseline data collected from 84 primary care practices participating in a large quality improvement initiative in Eastern Ontario from 2008 to 2010. We collected medical chart data from 4,931 patients who either had, or were at high risk of developing CVD to study adherence rates to recommended guidelines for CVD care and to examine the proportion of patients at target for clinical markers such as blood pressure, lipid levels and hemoglobin A1c.

Results

Adherence to preventive care recommendations was poor. Less than 10% of high risk patients received a waistline measurement, half of the smokers received cessation advice, and 7.7% were referred to a smoking cessation program. Gaps in care exist for diabetes and kidney disease as 54.9% of patients with diabetes received recommended hemoglobin-A1c screenings, and only 55.8% received an albumin excretion test. Adherence rates to recommended guidelines for coronary artery disease, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were high (>75%); however <50% of patients were at target for blood pressure or LDL-cholesterol levels (37.1% and 49.7% respectively), and only 59.3% of patients with diabetes were at target for hemoglobin-A1c.

Conclusions

There remain significant opportunities for primary care providers to engage high risk patients in prevention activities such as weight management and smoking cessation. Despite high adherence rates for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and coronary artery disease, a significant proportion of patients failed to meet treatment targets, highlighting the complexity of caring for people with multiple chronic conditions.

Trial Registration

NCT00574808

Background:

Use of the serum creatinine concentration, the most widely used marker of kidney function, has been associated with under-reporting of chronic kidney disease and late referral to nephrologists, especially among women and elderly people. To improve appropriateness of referrals, automatic reporting of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by laboratories was introduced in the province of Ontario, Canada, in March 2006. We hypothesized that such reporting, along with an ad hoc educational component for primary care physicians, would increase the number of appropriate referrals.

Methods:

We conducted a population-based before–after study with interrupted time-series analysis at a tertiary care centre. All referrals to nephrologists received at the centre during the year before and the year after automatic reporting of the eGFR was introduced were eligible for inclusion. We used regression analysis with autoregressive errors to evaluate whether such reporting by laboratories, along with ad hoc educational activities for primary care physicians, had an impact on the number and appropriateness of referrals to nephrologists.

Results:

A total of 2672 patients were included in the study. In the year after automatic reporting began, the number of referrals from primary care physicians increased by 80.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74.8% to 86.9%). The number of appropriate referrals increased by 43.2% (95% CI 38.0% to 48.2%). There was no significant change in the proportion of appropriate referrals between the two periods (−2.8%, 95% CI −26.4% to 43.4%). The proportion of elderly and female patients who were referred increased after reporting was introduced.

Interpretation:

The total number of referrals increased after automatic reporting of the eGFR began, especially among women and elderly people. The number of appropriate referrals also increased, but the proportion of appropriate referrals did not change significantly. Future research should be directed to understanding the reasons for inappropriate referral and to develop novel interventions for improving the referral process.

Background

There is a need to find innovative approaches for translating best practices for chronic disease care into daily primary care practice routines. Primary care plays a crucial role in the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease. There is, however, a substantive care gap, and many challenges exist in implementing evidence-based care. The Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project is a pragmatic trial designed to improve the delivery of evidence-based care for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in primary care practices using practice outreach facilitation.

Methods

The IDOCC project is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial in which Practice Outreach Facilitators work with primary care practices to improve cardiovascular disease prevention and management for patients at highest risk. Primary care practices in a large health region in Eastern Ontario, Canada, were eligible to participate. The intervention consists of regular monthly meetings with the Practice Outreach Facilitator over a one- to two-year period. Starting with audit and feedback, consensus building, and goal setting, the practices are supported in changing practice behavior by incorporating chronic care model elements. These elements include (a) evidence-based decision support for providers, (b) delivery system redesign for practices, (c) enhanced self-management support tools provided to practices to help them engage patients, and (d) increased community resource linkages for practices to enhance referral of patients. The primary outcome is a composite score measured at the level of the patient to represent each practice's adherence to evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular care. Qualitative analysis of the Practice Outreach Facilitators' written narratives of their ongoing practice interactions will be done. These textual analyses will add further insight into understanding critical factors impacting project implementation.

Discussion

This pragmatic, stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial with both quantitative and process evaluations demonstrates innovative methods of implementing large-scale quality improvement and evidence-based approaches to care delivery. This is the first Canadian study to examine the impact of a large-scale multifaceted cardiovascular quality-improvement program in primary care. It is anticipated that through the evaluation of IDOCC, we will demonstrate an effective, practical, and sustainable means of improving the cardiovascular health of patients across Canada.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00574808

Abstract

Problem addressed

A well documented gap remains between evidence and practice for clinical practice guidelines in cardiovascular disease (CVD) care.

Objective of program

As part of the Champlain CVD Prevention Strategy, practitioners in the Champlain District of Ontario launched a large quality-improvement initiative that focused on increasing the uptake in primary care practice settings of clinical guidelines for heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and CVD risk factors.

Program description

The Champlain Primary Care CVD Prevention and Management Guideline is a desktop resource for primary care clinicians working in the Champlain District. The guideline was developed by more than 45 local experts to summarize the latest evidence-based strategies for CVD prevention and management, as well as to increase awareness of local community-based programs and services.

Conclusion

Evidence suggests that tailored strategies are important when implementing specific practice guidelines. This article describes the process of creating an integrated clinical guideline for improvement in the delivery of cardiovascular care.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate why many patients with renal impairment (30.7%) were not recognized by their family physicians despite an earlier educational intervention on detecting renal impairment; and to determine whether certain factors related to physicians, patients, or the intervention itself were associated with whether renal impairment was detected.

DESIGN

Qualitative approach using grounded theory.

SETTING

A Health Service Organization in Ottawa, Ont.

PARTICIPANTS

A purposeful sample of six family physicians.

METHODS

In semistructured interviews, participants were asked to describe the workup ordered and their decision-making processes for patients in whom they had recently detected renal impairment. They were also asked to evaluate the six components of an educational intervention designed to help them to detect renal impairment. Finally, one patient’s chart was reviewed (a chart containing a laboratory report noting an abnormal result for kidney function and having no indication that renal impairment had been recognized) to identify reasons for lack of detection.

RESULTS

Most physicians did not investigate every patient with renal impairment (glomerular filtration rate of <78 mL/min) in the same way because they took individual patient factors into consideration. Reasons for not detecting renal impairment were “managed differently” or “missed,” with the former being the most common. The educational intervention physicians remembered most often was chart rounds, and these were viewed as helpful. “Missed” cases were more often deliberately managed differently than unintentionally not detected.

CONCLUSION

Physicians used various approaches to detect and manage renal impairment despite interventions that recommended a consistent procedure.