Attitudes and other barriers to the utilization of clinical research findings by American physicians: A systematic review

Background: The Institute of Medicine estimates that only a maximum of 25% of clinical research findings are incorporated into practice by physicians. To improve clinical practice, efforts have been made to promote evidence-based medicine and the use of clinical guidelines. Despite these efforts, the gap between research and clinical practice remains wide.^ Objective: To systematically review the literature describing the factors which influence the use of clinical research recommendations by American physicians.^ Hypothesis: Barriers exist in the application of clinical research into clinical practice, and are multifactorial. The establishment of the Clinical and Translational Awards (CTSA; special federal grants awarded to selected institutions to support clinical and translational research) has reduced the effect of these barriers and improved the process of clinical research translation into practice among American physicians.^ Aims: Identify barriers and facilitators of the use of research findings in clinical practice by American physicians. Contrast studies published six years before and after the creation of the CTSA.^ Methods: The sources of data include published literature from Medline, PubMed and PsycINFO. Selected studies must be qualitative, a survey of American clinicians, based on evidence-based medicine practice, clinical guidelines or treatment pathways. Systematic reviews and reports were excluded, as well as studies with less than 100 respondents.^ Results: In total, 1036 abstracts were reviewed; 115 full text potential articles were identified and reviewed, and a total of 31 studies met all criteria for inclusion in the final review.^ Conclusions: The barriers against the application of clinical research findings, in the forms of clinical guidelines, evidence-based medicine guides and clinical pathways, can be divided broadly into physician barriers, practice/system barriers and patient barriers. Physician barriers are the most common barriers, especially the lack of familiarity with guidelines and the lack of time. Of the factors which improve the use of research based guidelines, physician factors such as younger age, lower duration of clinical practice, specialty training, and practice in large group Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) settings with fewer patients seen were the most commonly cited.^

Mechanism of molecular regulation of nuclear -encoded mitochondrial gene expression by electrical stimulation in the cultured neonatal rat cardiac myocytes

To answer the question whether increased energy demand resulting from myocyte hypertrophy and enhanced $\beta$-myosin heavy chain mRNA, contractile protein synthesis and assembly leads to mitochondrial proliferation and differentiation, we set up an electrical stimulation model of cultured neonatal rat cardiac myocytes. We describe, as a result of increased contractile activity, increased mitochondrial profiles, cytochrome oxidase mRNA, and activity, as well as a switch in mitochondrial carnitine palmitoyltransferase-I (CPT-I) from the liver to muscle isoform. We investigate physiological pathways that lead to accumulation of gene transcripts for nuclear encoded mitochondrial proteins in the heart. Cardiomyocytes were stimulated for varying times up to 72 hr in serum-free culture. The mRNA contents for genes associated with transcriptional activation (c-fos, c-jun, junB, nuclear respiratory factor 1 (Nrf-1)), mitochondrial proliferation (cytochrome c (Cyt c), cytochrome oxidase), and mitochondrial differentiation (carnitine palmitonyltransferase I (CPT-I) isoforms) were measured. The results establish a temporal pattern of mRNA induction beginning with c-fos (0.25-3 hr) and followed by c-jun (0.5-3 hr), junB (0.5-6 hr), NRF-1 (1-12 hr), Cyt c (12-72 hr), cytochrome c oxidase (12-72 hr). Induction of the latter was accompanied by a marked decrease in the liver-specific CPT-I mRNA. Electrical stimulation increased c-fos, $\beta$-myosin heavy chain, and Cyt c promoter activities. These increases coincided with a rise in their respective endogenous gene transcripts. NRF-1, cAMP response element (CRE), and Sp-1 site mutations within the Cyt c promoter reduced luciferase expression in both stimulated and nonstimulated myocytes. Mutations in the Nrf-1 and CRE sites inhibited the induction by electrical stimulation or by transfection of c-jun into non-paced cardiac myocytes whereas mutation of the Sp-1 site maintained or increased the fold induction. This is consistent with the appearance of NRF-1 and fos/jun mRNAs prior to that of Cyt c. Overexpression of c-jun by transfection also activates the Nrf-1 and Cyt c mRNA sequentially. Electrical stimulation of cardiac myocytes activates the c-Jun-N-terminal kinase so that the fold-activation of the cyt c promoter is increased by pacing when either c-jun or c-fos/c-jun are cotransfected. We have identified physical association of Nrf-1 protein with the Nrf-1 enhancer element and of c-Jun with the CRE binding sites on the Cyt c promoter. This is the first demonstration that induction of Nrf-1 and c-Jun by pacing of cardiac myocytes directly mediates Cyt c gene expression and mitochondrial proliferation in response to hypertrophic stimuli in the heart.^ Subsequent to gene activation pathways that lead to mitochondrial proliferation, we observed an isoform switch in CPT-I from the liver to muscle mRNA. We have found that the half-life for the muscle CPT-I is not affected by electrical stimulation, but electrical decrease the T1/2 in the liver CPT-I by greater than 50%. This suggests that the liver CPT-I switch to muscle isoform is due to (1) a decrease in T1/2 of liver CPT-I and (2) activation of muscle CPT-Itranscripts by electrical stimulation. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) ^

ATTITUDES TOWARD AND UTILIZATION OF NON-INVASIVE PRENATAL TESTING FOR CHROMOSOME ANEUPLOIDY AMONG OB/GYNS

Prenatal diagnosis is traditionally made via invasive procedures such as amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS). However, both procedures carry a risk of complications, including miscarriage. Many groups have spent years searching for a way to diagnose a chromosome aneuploidy without putting the fetus or the mother at risk for complications. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for chromosome aneuploidy became commercially available in the fall of 2011, with detection rates similar to those of invasive procedures for the common autosomal aneuploidies (Palomaki et al., 2011; Ashoor et al. 2012; Bianchi et al. 2012). Eventually NIPT may become the diagnostic standard of care and reduce invasive procedure-related losses (Palomaki et al., 2011). The integration of NIPT into clinical practice has potential to revolutionize prenatal diagnosis; however, it also raises some crucial issues for practitioners. Now that the test is clinically available, no studies have looked at the physicians that will be ordering the testing or referring patients to practitioners who do. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of OB/GYN’s and how they are incorporating the test into clinical practice. Our study shows that most physicians are offering this new, non-invasive technology to their patients, and that their practices were congruent with the literature and available professional society opinions. Those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients would like more literature on the topic as well as instructive guidelines from their professional societies. Additionally, this study shows that the practices and attitudes of MFMs and OBs differ. Our population feels that the incorporation of NIPT will change their practices by lowering the amount of invasive procedures, possibly replacing maternal serum screening, and that it will simplify prenatal diagnosis. However, those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients are not quite sure how the test will affect their clinical practice. From this study we are able to glean how physicians are incorporating this new technology into their practice and how they feel about the addition to their repertoire of tests. This knowledge gives insight as to how to best move forward with the quickly changing field of prenatal diagnosis.