Literature Collection

Background: Screening for unhealthy drug use is now recommended for adult primary care patients, but primary care providers (PCPs) generally lack the time and knowledge required to screen and deliver an intervention during the medical visit. To address these barriers, we developed a tablet computer-based 'Substance Use Screening and Intervention Tool (SUSIT)'. Using the SUSIT, patients self-administer screening questionnaires prior to the medical visit, and results are presented to the PCP at the point of care, paired with clinical decision support (CDS) that guides them in providing a brief intervention (BI) for unhealthy drug use. Methods: PCPs and their patients with moderate-risk drug use were recruited from primary care and HIV clinics. A pre-post design compared a control 'screening only' (SO) period to an intervention 'SUSIT' period. Unique patients were enrolled in each period. In both conditions, patients completed screening and identified their drug of most concern (DOMC) before the visit, and completed a questionnaire about BI delivery by the PCP after the visit. In the SUSIT condition only, PCPs received the tablet with the patient's screening results and CDS. Multilevel models with random intercepts and patients nested within PCPs examined the effect of the SUSIT intervention on PCP delivery of BI. Results: 20 PCPs and 79 patients (42 SO, 37 SUSIT) participated. Most patients had moderate-risk marijuana use (92.4%), and selected marijuana as the DOMC (68.4%). Moderate-risk use of drugs other than marijuana included cocaine (15.2%), hallucinogens (12.7%), and sedatives (12.7%). Compared to the SO condition, patients in SUSIT had higher odds of receiving any BI for drug use, with an adjusted odds ratio of 11.59 (95% confidence interval: 3.39, 39.25), and received more elements of BI for drug use. Conclusions: The SUSIT significantly increased delivery of BI for drug use by PCPs during routine primary care encounters.

In the United States, disparities in access to quality oral health care exist at every stage across the life course. The net result is a greater likelihood of poor oral health at every age for people who live in underserved and rural communities than for people who live in communities with better access to quality oral health care. Both universal and targeted interventions at multiple levels of influence across the life course and intergenerationally are needed to eliminate disparities in access to oral health care and end the disgrace of poor oral health as the US national symbol of social inequality. While community health centers hold promise for delivering patient-centered, value-based care, they experience challenges related to the oral health literacy of patients and organizations and to the building of sufficient capacity to meet the high demand for oral health care services. To address the training needs of the US dentistry workforce, the long-term goal of the New York University Langone Dental Medicine Postdoctoral Residency Programs is to improve oral health care access and delivery across the life course for people of all ages and intergenerationally. The short-term goal is to recruit and train dentists to lead patient-centered models of integrated care delivery at community health centers in underserved and rural communities of 30 US states, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands. This paper presents the capstone findings of a 5-year postdoctoral dental residency training project built upon a foundation of shared decision-making and motivational interviewing training for dental faculty and residents. Improving patient experience and patient-reported outcomes are critical in transforming dentistry from a fee-for-service to a value-based health care model. Scaling up promising interventions and addressing time and resource constraints in community health centers require the broad commitment of communities, organizations, patients and their families in demanding and realizing the US societal goal of oral health for all.

Objective: Diabetes is a defining disease of the 21st century because of its rising prevalence, association with obesity, and enormous health impact. Abundant evidence shows that lifestyle interventions can delay or prevent type 2 diabetes (T2D) in adults, offer relief, and sometimes achieve complete remission. Despite this empowering message, there are no clinical practice guidelines that focus primarily on lifestyle interventions as first-line management of prediabetes and T2D. Our objective, therefore, is to offer pragmatic, trustworthy, and evidence-based guidance for clinicians in using the 6 pillars of lifestyle medicine-nutrition, physical activity, stress management, sleep, social connectedness, avoidance of risky substances-for managing adults with T2D and in preventing T2D in adults with prediabetes or a history of gestational diabetes mellitus. Methods: We used well-established, peer-reviewed guideline methodology to develop evidence-based key action statements (recommendations) that facilitate quality improvement in clinical practice. The guideline development group included 20 members representing consumers, advanced practice nursing, cardiology, clinical pharmacology, behavioral medicine, endocrinology, family medicine, lifestyle medicine, nutrition and dietetics, health education, health and wellness coaching, sleep medicine, sports medicine, and obesity medicine. Recommendation strength was based on the aggregate evidence supporting a key action statement plus a comparison of associated benefits vs harms/costs. Multiple literature searches, conducted by an information specialist, identified 8 relevant guidelines, 118 relevant systematic reviews, and 112 randomized clinical trials. The guideline underwent extensive internal, external, and public review and comment prior to publication. Results: We developed 14 key action statements and associated evidence profiles, each with a distinct quality improvement goal in the context of lifestyle interventions for T2D. Strong recommendations were made regarding advocacy for lifestyle interventions; assessing baseline lifestyle habits; establishing priorities for lifestyle change; prescribing aerobic and muscle strength physical activity; reducing sedentary time; identifying sleep disorders; prescribing nutrition plans for prevention and treatment; promoting peer/familial support and social connections; counseling regarding tobacco, alcohol, and recreational drugs, and establishing a plan for continuity of care. Recommendations were made regarding identifying the need for psychological interventions and for adjusting (deprescribing) pharmacologic therapy. We include numerous tables and figures to facilitate implementation, a plain-language summary for consumers, and an executive summary for clinicians as separate publications. Conclusions: There is robust research evidence supporting the efficacy of lifestyle interventions in preventing, treating, and achieving remission of T2D in adults. Our multidisciplinary guideline development group successfully synthesized this evidence into 14 key action statements that can be used by clinicians and other healthcare professionals to improve quality of care for adults with, or at-risk for, T2D. Despite the research gaps and implementation challenges we highlight in the guideline we believe strongly that our recommendations have immediate relevance and can help raise awareness and shift the paradigm of T2D management towards optimal use of lifestyle interventions.