Nurse-led behavioral management of diabetes and hypertension in community practices: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Several trials have demonstrated the efficacy of nurse telephone case management for diabetes (DM) and hypertension (HTN) in academic or vertically integrated systems. Little is known about the real-world potency of these interventions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of nurse behavioral management of DM and HTN in community practices among patients with both diseases. DESIGN: The study was designed as a patient-level randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included adult patients with both type 2 DM and HTN who were receiving care at one of nine community fee-for-service practices. Subjects were required to have inadequately controlled DM (hemoglobin A1c [A1c] ≥ 7.5%) but could have well-controlled HTN. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received a call from a nurse experienced in DM and HTN management once every two months over a period of two years, for a total of 12 calls. Intervention patients received tailored DM- and HTN- focused behavioral content; control patients received non-tailored, non-interactive information regarding health issues unrelated to DM and HTN (e.g., skin cancer prevention). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and A1c were co-primary outcomes, measured at 6, 12, and 24 months; 24 months was the primary time point. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-seven subjects were enrolled; 193 were randomized to intervention, 184 to control. Subjects were 55% female and 50% white; the mean baseline A1c was 9.1% (SD = 1%) and mean SBP was 142 mmHg (SD = 20). Eighty-two percent of scheduled interviews were conducted; 69% of intervention patients and 70% of control patients reached the 24-month time point. Expressing model estimated differences as (intervention--control), at 24 months, intervention patients had similar A1c [diff = 0.1 %, 95 % CI (-0.3, 0.5), p = 0.51] and SBP [diff = -0.9 mmHg, 95% CI (-5.4, 3.5), p = 0.68] values compared to control patients. Likewise, DBP (diff = 0.4 mmHg, p = 0.76), weight (diff = 0.3 kg, p = 0.80), and physical activity levels (diff = 153 MET-min/week, p = 0.41) were similar between control and intervention patients. Results were also similar at the 6- and 12-month time points. CONCLUSIONS: In nine community fee-for-service practices, telephonic nurse case management did not lead to improvement in A1c or SBP. Gains seen in telephonic behavioral self-management interventions in optimal settings may not translate to the wider range of primary care settings.

Psychiatric correlates of snuff and chewing tobacco use.

Compared to the association between cigarette smoking and psychiatric disorders, relatively little is known about the relationship between smokeless tobacco use and psychiatric disorders. To identify the psychiatric correlates of smokeless tobacco use, the analysis used a national representative sample from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) wave 1. Smokeless tobacco use was classified as exclusive snuff use, exclusive chewing tobacco, and dual use of both snuff and chewing tobacco at some time in the smokeless tobacco user's life. Lifetime psychiatric disorders were obtained via structured diagnostic interviews. The results show that the prevalence of lifetime exclusive snuff use, exclusive chewing tobacco, and dual use of both snuff and chewing tobacco was 2.16%, 2.52%, and 2.79%, respectively. After controlling for sociodemographic variables and cigarette smoking, the odds of exclusive chewing tobacco in persons with panic disorder and specific phobia were 1.53 and 1.41 times the odds in persons without those disorders, respectively. The odds of exclusive snuff use, exclusive chewing tobacco, and dual use of both products for individuals with alcohol use disorder were 1.97, 2.01, and 2.99 times the odds for those without alcohol use disorder, respectively. Respondents with cannabis use disorder were 1.44 times more likely to use snuff exclusively than those without cannabis use disorder. Respondents with inhalant/solvent use disorder were associated with 3.33 times the odds of exclusive chewing tobacco. In conclusion, this study highlights the specific links of anxiety disorder, alcohol, cannabis, and inhalant/solvent use disorders with different types of smokeless tobacco use.