Department of Population Health, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, MS 1008, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Population Health, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, 1000 North Oak Ave (ML2), Marshfield, WI, 54449, USA.
BMC Fam Pract. 2020 Mar 3;21(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01117-w.
Obesity is a major risk factor behind some of the most common problems encountered in primary care. Although effective models for obesity treatment have been developed, the 'reach' of these interventions is poor and only a small fraction of primary care patients receive evidence-based treatment. The purpose of this study is to identify factors that impact the uptake (reach) of an evidence-based obesity treatment program within the context of a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial comparing three models of care delivery.
Recruitment and reach were evaluated by the following measures: 1) mailing response rates, 2) referral sources among participants contacting the study team, 3) eligibility rates, 4) participation rates, and 5) representativeness based on demographics, co-morbid conditions, and healthcare utilization of 1432 enrolled participants compared to > 17,000 non-participants from the clinic-based patient populations. Referral sources and participation rates were compared across study arms and level of clinic engagement.
The response rate to clinic-based mailings was 13.2% and accounted for 66% of overall program recruitment. An additional 22% of recruitment came from direct clinic referrals and 11% from media, family, or friends. Of those screened, 87% were eligible; among those eligible, 86% enrolled in the trial. Participation rates did not vary across the three care delivery arms, but were higher at clinics with high compared to low provider involvement. In addition, clinics with high provider involvement had a higher rate of in clinic referrals (33% versus 16%) and a more representative sample with regards to BMI, rurality, and months since last clinic visit. However, across clinics, enrolled participants compared to non-participants were older, more likely to be female, more likely to have had a joint replacement but less likely to have CVD or smoke, and had fewer hospitalizations.
A combination of direct patient mailings and in-clinic referrals may enhance the reach of primary care behavioral weight loss interventions, although more proactive outreach is likely necessary for men, younger patients, and those at greater medial risk. Strategies are needed to enhance provider engagement in referring patients to behavioral weight loss programs.
clnicialtrials.gov NCT02456636. Registered May 28, 2015, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=RE-POWER&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=.
肥胖是初级保健中最常见问题的主要危险因素之一。尽管已经开发出有效的肥胖治疗模式,但这些干预措施的“覆盖面”很差,只有一小部分初级保健患者接受循证治疗。本研究的目的是确定在一项实用的聚类随机对照试验中影响循证肥胖治疗计划实施(覆盖面)的因素,该试验比较了三种护理提供模式。
通过以下措施评估招募和实施情况:1)邮寄回复率,2)与研究小组联系的参与者的转介来源,3)合格率,4)参与率,以及 5)基于 1432 名入组参与者的人口统计学、合并症和医疗保健利用情况与来自诊所患者群体的>17000 名非参与者的代表性。比较了研究臂和诊所参与程度之间的转介来源和参与率。
诊所邮件的回复率为 13.2%,占整个计划招募人数的 66%。另外 22%的入组来自直接诊所转介,11%来自媒体、家庭或朋友。在筛选出的人群中,87%符合条件;在符合条件的人群中,86%入组了试验。参与率在三种护理提供臂之间没有差异,但在提供者参与度高的诊所更高。此外,提供者参与度高的诊所的门诊转介率更高(33%比 16%),并且在 BMI、农村地区和上次就诊后月份方面更具代表性。然而,在所有诊所中,与非参与者相比,入组参与者年龄更大,女性更多,接受过关节置换术的可能性更大,但心血管疾病或吸烟的可能性更小,住院次数更少。
直接患者邮件和诊所转介相结合可能会增加初级保健行为减肥干预措施的覆盖面,尽管对于男性、年轻患者和处于更高医疗风险的患者来说,可能需要更积极的拓展。需要采取策略来增强提供者对将患者转介到行为减肥计划的参与度。
clnicialtrials.gov NCT02456636。2015 年 5 月 28 日注册,https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=RE-POWER&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=。