A continuous quality improvement cycle for teaching the identification of psychosocial problems to general internal medicine residents.

PURPOSE: To study a continuous quality improvement (CQI) cycle intended to enhance general internal medicine residents' identification of psychosocial problems in an ambulatory-care setting. METHOD: From 1986 through 1990, the authors compared two groups of comprehensive examinations of patients by 34 residents at the University of Vermont College of Medicine before and after the implementation of a CQI cycle. After data on the first group of 17 residents' examinations of patients had been retrospectively audited by a clinical social worker, the CQI cycle was developed for the next group of 17 residents' examinations to reinforce the importance of psychosocial problems in primary care and the use of diagnostic case-finding instruments, flow sheets, and real-time feedback from social workers to the residents on their performances, according to accepted predefined specifications. The t-test was then used to measure the difference in the residents' performances between the two groups of examinations. RESULTS: The CQI intervention resulted in a statistically significant (p < .05) improvement in performance: an increased rate of residents' identifications of patients with psychosocial problems, from 72% (36 of 50 patients) to 85% (140 of 165 patients). CONCLUSION: That the CQI cycle resulted in improved performance suggests that an effective psychosocial training program for residents in ambulatory primary-care general internal medicine can be organized around CQI and a problem-oriented system of care.

Cardiac and skeletal muscle adaptations to training in systemic hypertension and effect of beta blockade (metoprolol or propranolol).

Cardiovascular and peripheral adaptations to an aerobic conditioning program were studied in 30 hypertensive adults taking either placebo, beta 1-selective beta-adrenergic blocker (metoprolol) or beta 1-nonselective beta-adrenergic blocker (propranolol). The placebo group increased aerobic capacity (VO2max) 24% (p less than 0.002), largely explained by an increased peripheral arteriovenous (AV) oxygen difference with minimal changes in cardiac size and function. Resting blood pressure and total systemic resistance also decreased. The group taking a beta 1-selective beta blocker increased VO2max 8% (p less than 0.05), reduced resting blood pressure but had no significant change of AV oxygen difference or cardiac size or function. The group taking the beta 1-nonselective beta blocker propranolol had no increase in VO2max, no decrease in resting blood pressure and no cardiovascular or peripheral adaptations to the exercise program. Thus, beta 1-selective and beta 1-nonselective beta blockers attenuate conditioning in hypertensive patients to differing degrees, in each case by blocking peripheral mechanisms of conditioning.

Hypertension, exercise, and beta-adrenergic blockade.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether beta-adrenergic blocking agents affect exercise tolerance, exercise conditioning response, and blood pressure response to conditioning in hypertensive patients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial with a 10-week exercise period. SETTING: Outpatient, monitored exercise program at a community-based, university-sponsored cardiac rehabilitation facility. PATIENTS: Thirty adults with mean resting blood pressure of 145 mm Hg or greater (systolic), 95 mm Hg or greater (diastolic), or a combined systolic and diastolic pressure of 140/90 mm Hg or greater. Mean systolic pressure of 170 mm Hg or more or mean diastolic pressure of 105 mm Hg or more was exclusionary. Mean blood pressure was 145/95 mm Hg; mean age was 46.5 years. INTERVENTION: The beta-1-nonselective blocker was propranolol, 80 mg twice daily. The beta-1-selective blocker was metoprolol, 100 mg twice daily, compared with placebo. All patients did exercise conditioning consisting of 40 sessions of aerobic exercise with heart rate monitoring. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Resting systolic blood pressure measured without drug therapy was lowered markedly after exercise conditioning on placebo (146 to 135 mm Hg) and on metoprolol (144 to 133 mm Hg) (P less than 0.05), but not on propranolol (no change). Acutely, propranolol decreased both maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) and exercise duration compared with metoprolol and placebo. Chronically, VO2max increased 24% (95% CI, 8 to 40) in response to training on placebo and 8% on metoprolol (95% CI, 3 to 14); it did not increase on propranolol (95% CI, -10 to 15). CONCLUSIONS: If an exercise program is to be recommended as an adjunct to pharmacologic beta-blockade for hypertension, blood-pressure-lowering effects are preserved and exercise capacity is less affected with a beta-1-selective agent than with a beta-1-nonselective agent. Antihypertensive medications may be avoided altogether for selected patients who sustain an aerobic exercise program.

Exercise conditioning in the elderly coronary patient.

We compared conditioning effects of a supervised exercise program in 100 elderly and younger patients with a recent coronary event. Twenty-one patients were greater than or equal to 62 years of age (mean, 65 years) and 79 were less than or equal to 61 years of age (mean, 48.7 years). While the elderly patients attained a lower peak exercise intensity on entry and on completion of the exercise protocol, they obtained a similar relative training benefit as the younger patients. Peak exercise intensity increased 68% in each group and submaximal (five METS) heart rate-blood pressure product decreased 27% in the older patients and 26% in the younger patients. Rate of entry into our program was substantially lower in the elderly patient group, 19% v 57% in younger patients (P less than 0.001) despite a similar inhospital recruiting effort. Thus, although elderly coronary patients obtain similar training benefits as younger patients, they are less likely to participate in a program designed to decrease cardiac disability.