IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are lower among Latinos and people living in poverty. Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is one recommended screening modality that may overcome cost and access barriers. However, the ability of FOBT to reduce CRC mortality depends on high rates of adherence to annual screening. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a multifaceted intervention increases adherence to annual FOBT compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patient-level randomized controlled trial conducted in a network of community health centers. Included were 450 patients who had previously completed a home FOBT from March 2011 through February 2012 and had a negative test result: 72% of participants were women; 87% were Latino; 83% stated that Spanish was their preferred language; and 77% were uninsured. INTERVENTIONS Usual care at participating health centers included computerized reminders, standing orders for medical assistants to give patients home fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), and clinician feedback on CRC screening rates. The intervention group also received (1) a mailed reminder letter, a free FIT with low-literacy instructions, and a postage-paid return envelope; (2) an automated telephone and text message reminding them that they were due for screening and that a FIT was being mailed to them; (3) an automated telephone and text reminder 2 weeks later for those who did not return the FIT; and (4) personal telephone outreach by a CRC screening navigator after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Completion of FOBT within 6 months of the date the patient was due for annual screening. RESULTS Intervention patients were much more likely than those in usual care to complete FOBT (82.2% vs 37.3%; P < .001). Of the 185 intervention patients completing screening, 10.2% completed prior to their due date (intervention was not given), 39.6% within 2 weeks (after initial intervention), 24.0% within 2 to 13 weeks (after automated call/text reminder), and 8.4% between 13 and 26 weeks (after personal call). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This intervention greatly increased adherence to annual CRC screening; most screenings were achieved without personal calls. It is possible to improve annual CRC screening for vulnerable populations with relatively low-cost strategies that are facilitated by health information technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01453894

IMPORTANCE Mobile applications (apps) may help improve hypertension self-management. OBJECTIVE To investigate the effect of an artificial intelligence smartphone coaching app to promote home monitoring and hypertension-related behaviors on systolic blood pressure level compared with a blood pressure tracking app. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a 2-group, open, randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE Complex medication regimens pose self-management challenges, particularly among populations with low levels of health literacy. OBJECTIVE To test medication management tools delivered through a commercial electronic health record (EHR) with and without a nurse-led education intervention. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This 3-group cluster randomized clinical trial was performed in community health centers in Chicago, Illinois. Participants included 794 patients with hypertension who self-reported using 3 or more medications concurrently (for any purpose). Data were collected from April 30, 2012, through February 29, 2016, and analyzed by intention to treat. INTERVENTIONS Clinics were randomly assigned to to groups: electronic health record-based medication management tools (medication review sheets at visit check-in, lay medication information sheets printed after visits; EHR-alone group), EHR-based tools plus nurse-led medication management support (EHR plus education group), or usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Outcomes at 12 months included systolic blood pressure (primary outcome), medication reconciliation, knowledge of drug indications, understanding of medication instructions and dosing, and self-reported medication adherence. Medication outcomes were assessed for all hypertension prescriptions, all prescriptions to treat chronic disease, and all medications. RESULTS Among the 794 participants (68.6% women; mean [SD] age, 52.7 [9.6] years), systolic blood pressure at 12 months was greater in the EHR-alone group compared with the usual care group by 3.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.3 to 6.9 mm Hg). Systolic blood pressure in the EHR plus education group was not significantly lower compared with the usual care group (difference, −2.0 mm Hg; 95% CI, −5.2 to 1.3 mm Hg) but was lower compared with the EHR-alone group (−5.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, −8.8 to −2.4 mm Hg). At 12 months, hypertension medication reconciliation was improved in the EHR-alone group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9) and the EHR plus education group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.3) compared with usual care. Understanding of medication instructions and dosing was greater in the EHR plus education group than the usual care group for hypertension medications (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.8) and all medications combined (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.8). Compared with usual care, the EHR tools alone and EHR plus education interventions did not improve hypertension medication adherence (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6-1.4 for both) or knowledge of chronic drug indications (OR for EHR tools alone, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5] and OR for EHR plus education, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.7-1.7]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The study found that EHR tools in isolation improved medication reconciliation but worsened blood pressure. Combining these tools with nurse-led support suggested improved understanding of medication instructions and dosing but did not lower blood pressure compared with usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: N...

Objective Vaccination rates for influenza, pneumococcus, and zoster in rheumatoid arthritis patients have remained low. Simple electronic or paper reminders have produced only small increases in vaccination rates. We sought to identify a more effective approach to improve vaccination rates. Methods We conducted a system-level intervention at an academic rheumatology clinic that included electronic reminders with linked order sets, physician auditing and feedback, patient outreach, and optional printed prescriptions for zoster vaccination at an outside pharmacy. Results We targeted 1255 eligible patients with rheumatoid arthritis. There was no change in patients’ self-reported influenza vaccination rates, although the baseline self-reported rate was already high and much higher than that documented in the electronic health record. Pneumococcal vaccination rates increased from 28.7% to 45.8%; in regression analysis, the rate of change in pneumococcal vaccination increased by 9.4% per year above baseline trends (95% CI = 3.9% - 15.5%; p = 0.002). The rate of zoster vaccination increased from 2.5% to 4.5% (p = 0.01) overall and from 3.0% to 6.6% among patients not receiving biologic therapy that preclude zoster vaccination. Conclusion Although the intervention improved pneumococcal and zoster vaccination rates, the improvement in pneumococcal vaccination rate was less than expected, and the zoster vaccination rate remained low even for ideal candidates. Likely barriers include lack of familiarity and difficulty using electronic reminders and order sets, uncertainty about the value and safety of recommended vaccines, and uncertainty about patients’ insurance coverage and prior vaccination history. Future interventions should include strategies to address these.

BackgroundIn 2015, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended targeted screening for prediabetes and diabetes (dysglycemia) in adults who are aged 40 to 70 y old and overweight or obese. Given increasing prevalence of dysglycemia at younger ages and lower body weight, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities, we sought to determine whether the current screening criteria may fail to identify some high-risk population subgroups.Methods and FindingsWe investigated the performance of the 2015 USPSTF screening recommendation in detecting dysglycemia among US community health center patients. A retrospective analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data from 50,515 adult primary care patients was conducted. Longitudinal EHR data were collected in six health centers in the Midwest and Southwest. Patients with a first office visit between 2008 and 2010 were identified and followed for up to 3 y through 2013. We excluded patients who had dysglycemia at baseline and those with fewer than two office visits during the follow-up period. The exposure of interest was eligibility for screening according to the 2015 USPSTF criteria. The primary outcome was development of dysglycemia during follow-up, determined by: (1) laboratory results (fasting/2-h postload/random glucose ≥ 100/140/200 mg/dL [5.55/7.77/11.10 mmol/L] or hemoglobin A1C ≥ 5.7% [39 mmol/mol]); (2) diagnosis codes for prediabetes or type 2 diabetes; or (3) antidiabetic medication order. At baseline, 18,846 (37.3%) participants were aged ≥40 y, 33,537 (66.4%) were overweight or obese, and 39,061 (77.3%) were racial/ethnic minorities (34.6% Black, 33.9% Hispanic/Latino, and 8.7% Other). Overall, 29,946 (59.3%) patients had a glycemic test within 3 y of follow-up, and 8,478 of them developed dysglycemia. Only 12,679 (25.1%) patients were eligible for screening according to the 2015 USPSTF criteria, which demonstrated the following sensitivity and specificity (95% CI): 45.0% (43.9%–46.1%) and 71.9% (71.3%–72.5%), respectively. Racial/ethnic minorities were significantly less likely to be eligible for screening yet had higher odds of developing dysglycemia than whites (odds ratio [95% CI]: Blacks 1.24 [1.09–1.40]; Hispanics 1.46 [1.30–1.64]; and Other 1.33 [1.16–1.54]). In addition, the screening criteria had lower sensitivity in all racial/ethnic minority groups compared to whites. Limitations of this study include the ascertainment of dysglycemia only among patients with available test results and findings that may not be generalizable at the population level.ConclusionsTargeted diabetes screening based on new USPSTF criteria may detect approximately half of adult community health center patients with undiagnosed dysglycemia and proportionately fewer racial/ethnic minorities than whites. Future research is needed to estimate the performance of these screening criteria in population-based samples.

ObjectiveColorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain lower among some racial/ethnic groups and individuals with low income or educational attainment who are often cared for within community health centers (CHCs). We surveyed clinicians in a network of CHCs to understand their attitudes, practice patterns, and perceived barriers to CRC screening.MethodsA clinician survey was conducted in 2013 within the Community Health Applied Research Network (CHARN).Results180 clinicians completed the survey (47.9% response rate). Participants had an average of 11.5 (SD: 9.8) years in practice, 62% were female, and 57% were physicians. The majority of respondents somewhat agreed (30.2%) or strongly agreed (57.5%) that colonoscopy was the best screening test. However, only 15.8% of respondents strongly agreed and 32.2% somewhat agreed that colonoscopy was readily available for their patients. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), a type of fecal occult blood test (FOBT), was viewed less favorably; 24.6% rated FIT as very effective.ConclusionsAlthough there are no data showing that screening colonoscopy is superior to FIT, CHC clinicians believe colonoscopy is the best CRC screening test for their patients, despite the high prevalence of financial barriers to colonoscopy. These attitudes could be due to lack of knowledge about the evidence supporting long-term benefits of fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), lack of awareness about the improved test characteristics of FIT compared to older guaiac-based FOBT, or the absence of systems to ensure adherence to regular FOBT screening. Interventions to improve CRC screening at CHCs must address clinicians' negative attitudes towards FIT.

Purpose: Examine associations between health literacy and several medication selfmanagement constructs among a population of adults with uncontrolled hypertension. Patients and Methods: Cross-sectional study of health center patients from the Chicago area with uncontrolled hypertension enrolled between April 2012 and February 2015. Medication self-management constructs-applied to hypertension medications, chronic condition medications and all medications-included: 1) medication reconciliation, 2) knowledge of drug indications, 3) understanding instructions and dosing, and 4) self-reported adherence over 4 days (no missed doses). We determined associations between health literacy and self-management outcomes using multivariable generalized linear regression. Results: There were 1460 patients who completed screening interviews; 62.9% enrolled and had complete baseline data collected, and were included in the analysis. Of 919 participants, 47.4% had likely limited (low), 33.2% possibly limited, and 19.4% likely adequate health literacy. Compared to participants with likely adequate health literacy, participants with low health literacy were less likely to have chronic medications reconciled (18.0% versus 29.6%, p=0.007), know indications for chronic medications (64.1% versus 83.1%, p<0.001), and demonstrate understanding of instructions and dosing (68.1% versus 82.9%, p=0.001). Selfreported adherence to hypertension medications was higher among the low health literacy group (65.6% versus 56.0%, p=0.010). In multivariable models, health literacy was strongly associated with knowledge of drug indications, and understanding of instructions and dosing. Conclusion: Low health literacy was associated with worse medication self-management in several domains. However, non-adherence was greatest in the most health literate in unadjusted analysis. Among a population of patients with uncontrolled hypertension, the drivers of poor control may vary by health literacy.

Abstract The proportion of sinusitis visits that meet antibiotic prescribing criteria is unknown. Of 425 randomly selected sinusitis visits, 50% (214) met antibiotic prescribing criteria. There was no significant difference in antibiotic prescribing at visits that did (205/214 [96%]) and did not (193/211 [92%]; P = .07) meet antibiotic prescribing criteria.