VA Center for Clinical Management Research

BACKGROUND: Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. METHODS: We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. RESULTS: The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. CONCLUSION: The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.

IMPORTANCE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused a worldwide sudden and substantial increase in hospitalizations for pneumonia with multiorgan disease. This review discusses current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19. OBSERVATIONS: SARS-CoV-2 is spread primarily via respiratory droplets during close face-to-face contact. Infection can be spread by asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic carriers. The average time from exposure to symptom onset is 5 days, and 97.5% of people who develop symptoms do so within 11.5 days. The most common symptoms are fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath. Radiographic and laboratory abnormalities, such as lymphopenia and elevated lactate dehydrogenase, are common, but nonspecific. Diagnosis is made by detection of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, although false-negative test results may occur in up to 20% to 67% of patients; however, this is dependent on the quality and timing of testing. Manifestations of COVID-19 include asymptomatic carriers and fulminant disease characterized by sepsis and acute respiratory failure. Approximately 5% of patients with COVID-19, and 20% of those hospitalized, experience severe symptoms necessitating intensive care. More than 75% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 require supplemental oxygen. Treatment for individuals with COVID-19 includes best practices for supportive management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Emerging data indicate that dexamethasone therapy reduces 28-day mortality in patients requiring supplemental oxygen compared with usual care (21.6% vs 24.6%; age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.92]) and that remdesivir improves time to recovery (hospital discharge or no supplemental oxygen requirement) from 15 to 11 days. In a randomized trial of 103 patients with COVID-19, convalescent plasma did not shorten time to recovery. Ongoing trials are testing antiviral therapies, immune modulators, and anticoagulants. The case-fatality rate for COVID-19 varies markedly by age, ranging from 0.3 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 5 to 17 years to 304.9 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 85 years or older in the US. Among patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit, the case fatality is up to 40%. At least 120 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are under development. Until an effective vaccine is available, the primary methods to reduce spread are face masks, social distancing, and contact tracing. Monoclonal antibodies and hyperimmune globulin may provide additional preventive strategies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: As of July 1, 2020, more than 10 million people worldwide had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Many aspects of transmission, infection, and treatment remain unclear. Advances in prevention and effective management of COVID-19 will require basic and clinical investigation and public health and clinical interventions.

IMPORTANCE: The Third International Consensus Definitions Task Force defined sepsis as "life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection." The performance of clinical criteria for this sepsis definition is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of clinical criteria to identify patients with suspected infection who are at risk of sepsis. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND POPULATION: Among 1.3 million electronic health record encounters from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2012, at 12 hospitals in southwestern Pennsylvania, we identified those with suspected infection in whom to compare criteria. Confirmatory analyses were performed in 4 data sets of 706,399 out-of-hospital and hospital encounters at 165 US and non-US hospitals ranging from January 1, 2008, until December 31, 2013. EXPOSURES: Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) score, and a new model derived using multivariable logistic regression in a split sample, the quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score (range, 0-3 points, with 1 point each for systolic hypotension [≤100 mm Hg], tachypnea [≥22/min], or altered mentation). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: For construct validity, pairwise agreement was assessed. For predictive validity, the discrimination for outcomes (primary: in-hospital mortality; secondary: in-hospital mortality or intensive care unit [ICU] length of stay ≥3 days) more common in sepsis than uncomplicated infection was determined. Results were expressed as the fold change in outcome over deciles of baseline risk of death and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: In the primary cohort, 148,907 encounters had suspected infection (n = 74,453 derivation; n = 74,454 validation), of whom 6347 (4%) died. Among ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 7932 with suspected infection, of whom 1289 [16%] died), the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality was lower for SIRS (AUROC = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.62-0.66) and qSOFA (AUROC = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68) vs SOFA (AUROC = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both) or LODS (AUROC = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both). Among non-ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 66 522 with suspected infection, of whom 1886 [3%] died), qSOFA had predictive validity (AUROC = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82) that was greater than SOFA (AUROC = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.78-0.80; P < .001) and SIRS (AUROC = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.75-0.77; P < .001). Relative to qSOFA scores lower than 2, encounters with qSOFA scores of 2 or higher had a 3- to 14-fold increase in hospital mortality across baseline risk deciles. Findings were similar in external data sets and for the secondary outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among ICU encounters with suspected infection, the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality of SOFA was not significantly different than the more complex LODS but was statistically greater than SIRS and qSOFA, supporting its use in clinical criteria for sepsis. Among encounters with suspected infection outside of the ICU, the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality of qSOFA was statistically greater than SOFA and SIRS, supporting its use as a prompt to consider possible sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Many implementation efforts fail, even with highly developed plans for execution, because contextual factors can be powerful forces working against implementation in the real world. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is one of the most commonly used determinant frameworks to assess these contextual factors; however, it has been over 10 years since publication and there is a need for updates. The purpose of this project was to elicit feedback from experienced CFIR users to inform updates to the framework. METHODS: User feedback was obtained from two sources: (1) a literature review with a systematic search; and (2) a survey of authors who used the CFIR in a published study. Data were combined across both sources and reviewed to identify themes; a consensus approach was used to finalize all CFIR updates. The VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System IRB declared this study exempt from the requirements of 38 CFR 16 based on category 2. RESULTS: The systematic search yielded 376 articles that contained the CFIR in the title and/or abstract and 334 unique authors with contact information; 59 articles included feedback on the CFIR. Forty percent (n = 134/334) of authors completed the survey. The CFIR received positive ratings on most framework sensibility items (e.g., applicability, usability), but respondents also provided recommendations for changes. Overall, updates to the CFIR include revisions to existing domains and constructs as well as the addition, removal, or relocation of constructs. These changes address important critiques of the CFIR, including better centering innovation recipients and adding determinants to equity in implementation. CONCLUSION: The updates in the CFIR reflect feedback from a growing community of CFIR users. Although there are many updates, constructs can be mapped back to the original CFIR to ensure longitudinal consistency. We encourage users to continue critiquing the CFIR, facilitating the evolution of the framework as implementation science advances.

The Health and Retirement Study (HRS) is a nationally representative longitudinal survey of more than 37 000 individuals over age 50 in 23 000 households in the USA. The survey, which has been fielded every 2 years since 1992, was established to provide a national resource for data on the changing health and economic circumstances associated with ageing at both individual and population levels. Its multidisciplinary approach is focused on four broad topics-income and wealth; health, cognition and use of healthcare services; work and retirement; and family connections. HRS data are also linked at the individual level to administrative records from Social Security and Medicare, Veteran's Administration, the National Death Index and employer-provided pension plan information. Since 2006, data collection has expanded to include biomarkers and genetics as well as much greater depth in psychology and social context. This blend of economic, health and psychosocial information provides unprecedented potential to study increasingly complex questions about ageing and retirement. The HRS has been a leading force for rapid release of data while simultaneously protecting the confidentiality of respondents. Three categories of data-public, sensitive and restricted-can be accessed through procedures described on the HRS website (hrsonline.isr.umich.edu).

BACKGROUND: In 2013, New York began requiring hospitals to follow protocols for the early identification and treatment of sepsis. However, there is controversy about whether more rapid treatment of sepsis improves outcomes in patients. METHODS: We studied data from patients with sepsis and septic shock that were reported to the New York State Department of Health from April 1, 2014, to June 30, 2016. Patients had a sepsis protocol initiated within 6 hours after arrival in the emergency department and had all items in a 3-hour bundle of care for patients with sepsis (i.e., blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotic agents, and lactate measurement) completed within 12 hours. Multilevel models were used to assess the associations between the time until completion of the 3-hour bundle and risk-adjusted mortality. We also examined the times to the administration of antibiotics and to the completion of an initial bolus of intravenous fluid. RESULTS: Among 49,331 patients at 149 hospitals, 40,696 (82.5%) had the 3-hour bundle completed within 3 hours. The median time to completion of the 3-hour bundle was 1.30 hours (interquartile range, 0.65 to 2.35), the median time to the administration of antibiotics was 0.95 hours (interquartile range, 0.35 to 1.95), and the median time to completion of the fluid bolus was 2.56 hours (interquartile range, 1.33 to 4.20). Among patients who had the 3-hour bundle completed within 12 hours, a longer time to the completion of the bundle was associated with higher risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.04 per hour; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.05; P<0.001), as was a longer time to the administration of antibiotics (odds ratio, 1.04 per hour; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.06; P<0.001) but not a longer time to the completion of a bolus of intravenous fluids (odds ratio, 1.01 per hour; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.02; P=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: More rapid completion of a 3-hour bundle of sepsis care and rapid administration of antibiotics, but not rapid completion of an initial bolus of intravenous fluids, were associated with lower risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others.).

The experience of pain arises from both physiological and psychological factors, including one's beliefs and expectations. Thus, placebo treatments that have no intrinsic pharmacological effects may produce analgesia by altering expectations. However, controversy exists regarding whether placebos alter sensory pain transmission, pain affect, or simply produce compliance with the suggestions of investigators. In two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments, we found that placebo analgesia was related to decreased brain activity in pain-sensitive brain regions, including the thalamus, insula, and anterior cingulate cortex, and was associated with increased activity during anticipation of pain in the prefrontal cortex, providing evidence that placebos alter the experience of pain.

Importance: Despite increased focus on reducing opioid prescribing for long-term pain, little is known regarding the incidence and risk factors for persistent opioid use after surgery. Objective: To determine the incidence of new persistent opioid use after minor and major surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a nationwide insurance claims data set from 2013 to 2014, we identified US adults aged 18 to 64 years without opioid use in the year prior to surgery (ie, no opioid prescription fulfillments from 12 months to 1 month prior to the procedure). For patients filling a perioperative opioid prescription, we calculated the incidence of persistent opioid use for more than 90 days among opioid-naive patients after both minor surgical procedures (ie, varicose vein removal, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, thyroidectomy, transurethral prostate surgery, parathyroidectomy, and carpal tunnel) and major surgical procedures (ie, ventral incisional hernia repair, colectomy, reflux surgery, bariatric surgery, and hysterectomy). We then assessed data for patient-level predictors of persistent opioid use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was defined a priori prior to data extraction. The primary outcome was new persistent opioid use, which was defined as an opioid prescription fulfillment between 90 and 180 days after the surgical procedure. Results: A total of 36 177 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 29 068 (80.3%) receiving minor surgical procedures and 7109 (19.7%) receiving major procedures. The cohort had a mean (SD) age of 44.6 (11.9) years and was predominately female (23 913 [66.1%]) and white (26 091 [72.1%]). The rates of new persistent opioid use were similar between the 2 groups, ranging from 5.9% to 6.5%. By comparison, the incidence in the nonoperative control cohort was only 0.4%. Risk factors independently associated with new persistent opioid use included preoperative tobacco use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.21-1.49), alcohol and substance abuse disorders (aOR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.05-1.72), mood disorders (aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30), anxiety (aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.42), and preoperative pain disorders (back pain: aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.42-1.75; neck pain: aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.39; arthritis: aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.40-1.73; and centralized pain: aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.26-1.54). Conclusions and Relevance: New persistent opioid use after surgery is common and is not significantly different between minor and major surgical procedures but rather associated with behavioral and pain disorders. This suggests its use is not due to surgical pain but addressable patient-level predictors. New persistent opioid use represents a common but previously underappreciated surgical complication that warrants increased awareness.

Importance: Estimates from claims-based analyses suggest that the incidence of sepsis is increasing and mortality rates from sepsis are decreasing. However, estimates from claims data may lack clinical fidelity and can be affected by changing diagnosis and coding practices over time. Objective: To estimate the US national incidence of sepsis and trends using detailed clinical data from the electronic health record (EHR) systems of diverse hospitals. Design, Setting, and Population: Retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to 409 academic, community, and federal hospitals from 2009-2014. Exposures: Sepsis was identified using clinical indicators of presumed infection and concurrent acute organ dysfunction, adapting Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) criteria for objective and consistent EHR-based surveillance. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sepsis incidence, outcomes, and trends from 2009-2014 were calculated using regression models and compared with claims-based estimates using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for severe sepsis or septic shock. Case-finding criteria were validated against Sepsis-3 criteria using medical record reviews. Results: A total of 173 690 sepsis cases (mean age, 66.5 [SD, 15.5] y; 77 660 [42.4%] women) were identified using clinical criteria among 2 901 019 adults admitted to study hospitals in 2014 (6.0% incidence). Of these, 26 061 (15.0%) died in the hospital and 10 731 (6.2%) were discharged to hospice. From 2009-2014, sepsis incidence using clinical criteria was stable (+0.6% relative change/y [95% CI, -2.3% to 3.5%], P = .67) whereas incidence per claims increased (+10.3%/y [95% CI, 7.2% to 13.3%], P < .001). In-hospital mortality using clinical criteria declined (-3.3%/y [95% CI, -5.6% to -1.0%], P = .004), but there was no significant change in the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice (-1.3%/y [95% CI, -3.2% to 0.6%], P = .19). In contrast, mortality using claims declined significantly (-7.0%/y [95% CI, -8.8% to -5.2%], P < .001), as did death or discharge to hospice (-4.5%/y [95% CI, -6.1% to -2.8%], P < .001). Clinical criteria were more sensitive in identifying sepsis than claims (69.7% [95% CI, 52.9% to 92.0%] vs 32.3% [95% CI, 24.4% to 43.0%], P < .001), with comparable positive predictive value (70.4% [95% CI, 64.0% to 76.8%] vs 75.2% [95% CI, 69.8% to 80.6%], P = .23). Conclusions and Relevance: In clinical data from 409 hospitals, sepsis was present in 6% of adult hospitalizations, and in contrast to claims-based analyses, neither the incidence of sepsis nor the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice changed significantly between 2009-2014. The findings also suggest that EHR-based clinical data provide more objective estimates than claims-based data for sepsis surveillance.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, Damschroder et al. developed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which provides a comprehensive listing of constructs thought to influence implementation. This systematic review assesses the extent to which the CFIR's use in implementation research fulfills goals set forth by Damschroder et al. in terms of breadth of use, depth of application, and contribution to implementation research. METHODS: We searched Scopus and Web of Science for publications that cited the original CFIR publication by Damschroder et al. (Implement Sci 4:50, 2009) and downloaded each unique result for review. After applying exclusion criteria, the final articles were empirical studies published in peer-review journals that used the CFIR in a meaningful way (i.e., used the CFIR to guide data collection, measurement, coding, analysis, and/or reporting). A framework analysis approach was used to guide abstraction and synthesis of the included articles. RESULTS: Twenty-six of 429 unique articles (6 %) met inclusion criteria. We found great breadth in CFIR application; the CFIR was applied across a wide variety of study objectives, settings, and units of analysis. There was also variation in the method of included studies (mixed methods (n = 13); qualitative (n = 10); quantitative (n = 3)). Depth of CFIR application revealed some areas for improvement. Few studies (n = 3) reported justification for selection of CFIR constructs used; the majority of studies (n = 14) used the CFIR to guide data analysis only; and few studies investigated any outcomes (n = 11). Finally, reflections on the contribution of the CFIR to implementation research were scarce. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the CFIR has been used across a wide range of studies, though more in-depth use of the CFIR may help advance implementation science. To harness its potential, researchers should consider how to most meaningfully use the CFIR. Specific recommendations for applying the CFIR include explicitly justifying selection of CFIR constructs; integrating the CFIR throughout the research process (in study design, data collection, and analysis); and appropriately using the CFIR given the phase of implementation of the research (e.g., if the research is post-implementation, using the CFIR to link determinants of implementation to outcomes).

BACKGROUND: Dementia affects a large and growing number of older adults in the United States. The monetary costs attributable to dementia are likely to be similarly large and to continue to increase. METHODS: In a subsample (856 persons) of the population in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative longitudinal study of older adults, the diagnosis of dementia was determined with the use of a detailed in-home cognitive assessment that was 3 to 4 hours in duration and a review by an expert panel. We then imputed cognitive status to the full HRS sample (10,903 persons, 31,936 person-years) on the basis of measures of cognitive and functional status available for all HRS respondents, thereby identifying persons in the larger sample with a high probability of dementia. The market costs associated with care for persons with dementia were determined on the basis of self-reported out-of-pocket spending and the utilization of nursing home care; Medicare claims data were used to identify costs paid by Medicare. Hours of informal (unpaid) care were valued either as the cost of equivalent formal (paid) care or as the estimated wages forgone by informal caregivers. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of dementia among persons older than 70 years of age in the United States in 2010 was 14.7%. The yearly monetary cost per person that was attributable to dementia was either $56,290 (95% confidence interval [CI], $42,746 to $69,834) or $41,689 (95% CI, $31,017 to $52,362), depending on the method used to value informal care. These individual costs suggest that the total monetary cost of dementia in 2010 was between $157 billion and $215 billion. Medicare paid approximately $11 billion of this cost. CONCLUSIONS: Dementia represents a substantial financial burden on society, one that is similar to the financial burden of heart disease and cancer. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging.).

IMPORTANCE: Cognitive decline is a common and feared aspect of aging. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is defined as the symptomatic predementia stage on the continuum of cognitive decline, characterized by objective impairment in cognition that is not severe enough to require help with usual activities of daily living. OBJECTIVE: To present evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of MCI and to provide physicians with an evidence-based framework for caring for older patients with MCI and their caregivers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed for English-language articles in peer-reviewed journals and the Cochrane Library database from inception through July 2014. Relevant references from retrieved articles were also evaluated. FINDINGS: The prevalence of MCI in adults aged 65 years and older is 10% to 20%; risk increases with age and men appear to be at higher risk than women. In older patients with MCI, clinicians should consider depression, polypharmacy, and uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors, all of which may increase risk for cognitive impairment and other negative outcomes. Currently, no medications have proven effective for MCI; treatments and interventions should be aimed at reducing cardiovascular risk factors and prevention of stroke. Aerobic exercise, mental activity, and social engagement may help decrease risk of further cognitive decline. Although patients with MCI are at greater risk for developing dementia compared with the general population, there is currently substantial variation in risk estimates (from <5% to 20% annual conversion rates), depending on the population studied. Current research targets improving early detection and treatment of MCI, particularly in patients at high risk for progression to dementia. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cognitive decline and MCI have important implications for patients and their families and will require that primary care clinicians be skilled in identifying and managing this common disorder as the number of older adults increases in coming decades. Current evidence supports aerobic exercise, mental activity, and cardiovascular risk factor control in patients with MCI.

BACKGROUND: Recent discussions about health care reform have raised questions regarding the value of advance directives. METHODS: We used data from survey proxies in the Health and Retirement Study involving adults 60 years of age or older who had died between 2000 and 2006 to determine the prevalence of the need for decision making and lost decision-making capacity and to test the association between preferences documented in advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making. RESULTS: Of 3746 subjects, 42.5% required decision making, of whom 70.3% lacked decision-making capacity and 67.6% of those subjects, in turn, had advance directives. Subjects who had living wills were more likely to want limited care (92.7%) or comfort care (96.2%) than all care possible (1.9%); 83.2% of subjects who requested limited care and 97.1% of subjects who requested comfort care received care consistent with their preferences. Among the 10 subjects who requested all care possible, only 5 received it; however, subjects who requested all care possible were far more likely to receive aggressive care as compared with those who did not request it (adjusted odds ratio, 22.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.45 to 115.00). Subjects with living wills were less likely to receive all care possible (adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.56) than were subjects without living wills. Subjects who had assigned a durable power of attorney for health care were less likely to die in a hospital (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.93) or receive all care possible (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.86) than were subjects who had not assigned a durable power of attorney for health care. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2000 and 2006, many elderly Americans needed decision making near the end of life at a time when most lacked the capacity to make decisions. Patients who had prepared advance directives received care that was strongly associated with their preferences. These findings support the continued use of advance directives.

Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia include agitation, depression, apathy, repetitive questioning, psychosis, aggression, sleep problems, wandering, and a variety of inappropriate behaviors. One or more of these symptoms will affect nearly all people with dementia over the course of their illness. These symptoms are among the most complex, stressful, and costly aspects of care, and they lead to a myriad of poor patient health outcomes, healthcare problems, and income loss for family care givers. The causes include neurobiologically related disease factors; unmet needs; care giver factors; environmental triggers; and interactions of individual, care giver, and environmental factors. The complexity of these symptoms means that there is no "one size fits all solution," and approaches tailored to the patient and the care giver are needed. Non-pharmacologic approaches should be used first line, although several exceptions are discussed. Non-pharmacologic approaches with the strongest evidence base involve family care giver interventions. Regarding pharmacologic treatments, antipsychotics have the strongest evidence base, although the risk to benefit ratio is a concern. An approach to integrating non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments is described. Finally, the paradigm shift needed to fully institute tailored treatments for people and families dealing with these symptoms in the community is discussed.

BACKGROUND: A fundamental challenge of implementation is identifying contextual determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators) and determining which implementation strategies will address them. Numerous conceptual frameworks (e.g., the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research; CFIR) have been developed to guide the identification of contextual determinants, and compilations of implementation strategies (e.g., the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation; ERIC) have been developed which can support selection and reporting of implementation strategies. The aim of this study was to identify which ERIC implementation strategies would best address specific CFIR-based contextual barriers. METHODS: Implementation researchers and practitioners were recruited to participate in an online series of tasks involving matching specific ERIC implementation strategies to specific implementation barriers. Participants were presented with brief descriptions of barriers based on CFIR construct definitions. They were asked to rank up to seven implementation strategies that would best address each barrier. Barriers were presented in a random order, and participants had the option to respond to the barrier or skip to another barrier. Participants were also asked about considerations that most influenced their choices. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-five invitations were emailed and 169 (39%) individuals participated. Respondents had considerable heterogeneity in opinions regarding which ERIC strategies best addressed each CFIR barrier. Across the 39 CFIR barriers, an average of 47 different ERIC strategies (SD = 4.8, range 35 to 55) was endorsed at least once for each, as being one of seven strategies that would best address the barrier. A tool was developed that allows users to specify high-priority CFIR-based barriers and receive a prioritized list of strategies based on endorsements provided by participants. CONCLUSIONS: The wide heterogeneity of endorsements obtained in this study's task suggests that there are relatively few consistent relationships between CFIR-based barriers and ERIC implementation strategies. Despite this heterogeneity, a tool aggregating endorsements across multiple barriers can support taking a structured approach to consider a broad range of strategies given those barriers. This study's results point to the need for a more detailed evaluation of the underlying determinants of barriers and how these determinants are addressed by strategies as part of the implementation planning process.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the similarity of cognitive assessments using 1 interview in a large population study, the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), and a subsample in which a detailed neuropsychiatric assessment has been performed (Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study [ADAMS]). METHODS: Respondents are diagnosed in ADAMS as demented, cognitively impaired without dementia (CIND), or as having normal cognitive function. Multinomial logistic analysis is used to predict diagnosis using a variety of cognitive and noncognitive measures from the HRS and additional measures and information from ADAMS. RESULTS: The cognitive tests in HRS predict the ADAMS diagnosis in 74% of the sample able to complete the HRS survey on their own. Proxy respondents answer for a large proportion of HRS respondents who are diagnosed as demented in ADAMS. Classification of proxy respondents with some cognitive impairment can be predicted in 86% of the sample. Adding a small number of additional tests from ADAMS can increase each of these percentages to 84% and 93%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Cognitive assessment appropriate for diagnosis of dementia and CIND in large population surveys could be improved with more targeted information from informants and additional cognitive tests targeting other areas of brain function.

Importance: Survival from sepsis has improved in recent years, resulting in an increasing number of patients who have survived sepsis treatment. Current sepsis guidelines do not provide guidance on posthospital care or recovery. Observations: Each year, more than 19 million individuals develop sepsis, defined as a life-threatening acute organ dysfunction secondary to infection. Approximately 14 million survive to hospital discharge and their prognosis varies. Half of patients recover, one-third die during the following year, and one-sixth have severe persistent impairments. Impairments include development of an average of 1 to 2 new functional limitations (eg, inability to bathe or dress independently), a 3-fold increase in prevalence of moderate to severe cognitive impairment (from 6.1% before hospitalization to 16.7% after hospitalization), and a high prevalence of mental health problems, including anxiety (32% of patients who survive), depression (29%), or posttraumatic stress disorder (44%). About 40% of patients are rehospitalized within 90 days of discharge, often for conditions that are potentially treatable in the outpatient setting, such as infection (11.9%) and exacerbation of heart failure (5.5%). Compared with patients hospitalized for other diagnoses, those who survive sepsis (11.9%) are at increased risk of recurrent infection than matched patients (8.0%) matched patients (P < .001), acute renal failure (3.3% vs 1.2%, P < .001), and new cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] range, 1.1-1.4). Reasons for deterioration of health after sepsis are multifactorial and include accelerated progression of preexisting chronic conditions, residual organ damage, and impaired immune function. Characteristics associated with complications after hospital discharge for sepsis treatment are not fully understood but include both poorer presepsis health status, characteristics of the acute septic episode (eg, severity of infection, host response to infection), and quality of hospital treatment (eg, timeliness of initial sepsis care, avoidance of treatment-related harms). Although there is a paucity of clinical trial evidence to support specific postdischarge rehabilitation treatment, experts recommend referral to physical therapy to improve exercise capacity, strength, and independent completion of activities of daily living. This recommendation is supported by an observational study involving 30 000 sepsis survivors that found that referral to rehabilitation within 90 days was associated with lower risk of 10-year mortality compared with propensity-matched controls (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.97, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In the months after hospital discharge for sepsis, management should focus on (1) identifying new physical, mental, and cognitive problems and referring for appropriate treatment, (2) reviewing and adjusting long-term medications, and (3) evaluating for treatable conditions that commonly result in hospitalization, such as infection, heart failure, renal failure, and aspiration. For patients with poor or declining health prior to sepsis who experience further deterioration after sepsis, it may be appropriate to focus on palliation of symptoms.

RATIONALE: Prior sepsis studies evaluating antibiotic timing have shown mixed results. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between antibiotic timing and mortality among patients with sepsis receiving antibiotics within 6 hours of emergency department registration. METHODS: Retrospective study of 35,000 randomly selected inpatients with sepsis treated at 21 emergency departments between 2010 and 2013 in Northern California. The primary exposure was antibiotics given within 6 hours of emergency department registration. The primary outcome was adjusted in-hospital mortality. We used detailed physiologic data to quantify severity of illness within 1 hour of registration and logistic regression to estimate the odds of hospital mortality based on antibiotic timing and patient factors. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The median time to antibiotic administration was 2.1 hours (interquartile range, 1.4-3.1 h). The adjusted odds ratio for hospital mortality based on each hour of delay in antibiotics after registration was 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.13) for each elapsed hour between registration and antibiotic administration. The increase in absolute mortality associated with an hour's delay in antibiotic administration was 0.3% (95% CI, 0.01-0.6%; P = 0.04) for sepsis, 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1-0.8%; P = 0.02) for severe sepsis, and 1.8% (95% CI, 0.8-3.0%; P = 0.001) for shock. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, contemporary, and multicenter sample of patients with sepsis in the emergency department, hourly delays in antibiotic administration were associated with increased odds of hospital mortality even among patients who received antibiotics within 6 hours. The odds increased within each sepsis severity strata, and the increased odds of mortality were greatest in septic shock.

Importance: The aging of the US population is expected to lead to a large increase in the number of adults with dementia, but some recent studies in the United States and other high-income countries suggest that the age-specific risk of dementia may have declined over the past 25 years. Clarifying current and future population trends in dementia prevalence and risk has important implications for patients, families, and government programs. Objective: To compare the prevalence of dementia in the United States in 2000 and 2012. Design, Setting, and Participants: We used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative, population-based longitudinal survey of individuals in the United States 65 years or older from the 2000 (n = 10 546) and 2012 (n = 10 511) waves of the HRS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Dementia was identified in each year using HRS cognitive measures and validated methods for classifying self-respondents, as well as those represented by a proxy. Logistic regression was used to identify socioeconomic and health variables associated with change in dementia prevalence between 2000 and 2012. Results: The study cohorts had an average age of 75.0 years (95% CI, 74.8-75.2 years) in 2000 and 74.8 years (95% CI, 74.5-75.1 years) in 2012 (P = .24); 58.4% (95% CI, 57.3%-59.4%) of the 2000 cohort was female compared with 56.3% (95% CI, 55.5%-57.0%) of the 2012 cohort (P < .001). Dementia prevalence among those 65 years or older decreased from 11.6% (95% CI, 10.7%-12.7%) in 2000 to 8.8% (95% CI, 8.2%-9.4%) (8.6% with age- and sex-standardization) in 2012 (P < .001). More years of education was associated with a lower risk for dementia, and average years of education increased significantly (from 11.8 years [95% CI, 11.6-11.9 years] to 12.7 years [95% CI, 12.6-12.9 years]; P < .001) between 2000 and 2012. The decline in dementia prevalence occurred even though there was a significant age- and sex-adjusted increase between years in the cardiovascular risk profile (eg, prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity) among older US adults. Conclusions and Relevance: The prevalence of dementia in the United States declined significantly between 2000 and 2012. An increase in educational attainment was associated with some of the decline in dementia prevalence, but the full set of social, behavioral, and medical factors contributing to the decline is still uncertain. Continued monitoring of trends in dementia incidence and prevalence will be important for better gauging the full future societal impact of dementia as the number of older adults increases in the decades ahead.

IMPORTANCE: Genetic factors increase risk of dementia, but the extent to which this can be offset by lifestyle factors is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a healthy lifestyle is associated with lower risk of dementia regardless of genetic risk. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study that included adults of European ancestry aged at least 60 years without cognitive impairment or dementia at baseline. Participants joined the UK Biobank study from 2006 to 2010 and were followed up until 2016 or 2017. EXPOSURES: A polygenic risk score for dementia with low (lowest quintile), intermediate (quintiles 2 to 4), and high (highest quintile) risk categories and a weighted healthy lifestyle score, including no current smoking, regular physical activity, healthy diet, and moderate alcohol consumption, categorized into favorable, intermediate, and unfavorable lifestyles. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incident all-cause dementia, ascertained through hospital inpatient and death records. RESULTS: A total of 196 383 individuals (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [2.9] years; 52.7% were women) were followed up for 1 545 433 person-years (median [interquartile range] follow-up, 8.0 [7.4-8.6] years). Overall, 68.1% of participants followed a favorable lifestyle, 23.6% followed an intermediate lifestyle, and 8.2% followed an unfavorable lifestyle. Twenty percent had high polygenic risk scores, 60% had intermediate risk scores, and 20% had low risk scores. Of the participants with high genetic risk, 1.23% (95% CI, 1.13%-1.35%) developed dementia compared with 0.63% (95% CI, 0.56%-0.71%) of the participants with low genetic risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.64-2.23]). Of the participants with a high genetic risk and unfavorable lifestyle, 1.78% (95% CI, 1.38%-2.28%) developed dementia compared with 0.56% (95% CI, 0.48%-0.66%) of participants with low genetic risk and favorable lifestyle (hazard ratio, 2.83 [95% CI, 2.09-3.83]). There was no significant interaction between genetic risk and lifestyle factors (P = .99). Among participants with high genetic risk, 1.13% (95% CI, 1.01%-1.26%) of those with a favorable lifestyle developed dementia compared with 1.78% (95% CI, 1.38%-2.28%) with an unfavorable lifestyle (hazard ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.51-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among older adults without cognitive impairment or dementia, both an unfavorable lifestyle and high genetic risk were significantly associated with higher dementia risk. A favorable lifestyle was associated with a lower dementia risk among participants with high genetic risk.