Examining Coronary Revascularization Practice Patterns for Diabetics: Perceived Barriers, Facilitators, and Implications for Knowledge Translation

Abstract

BackgroundThe FREEDOM trial provided robust evidence that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). The present study examined practice pattern changes and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing FREEDOM trial evidence in British Columbia (BC). MethodsUsing a population-based database of cardiac procedures in BC, PCI:CABG ratios from 2007-2014 were compared before and after publication of the FREEDOM trial in the 4 tertiary cardiac centres that provided both CABG and PCI. Surveys of barriers and facilitators to implementation of evidence in practice were completed by 57 health care providers (HCPs) attending educational outreach sessions conducted in 2016-17 at 5 tertiary cardiac centres in BC. ResultsThe overall PCI:CABG ratio declined from 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-1.70, range 1.16-1.86) before publication to 0.88 (95% CI 0.75-1.01, range 0.56-0.82) after publication (P < 0.01). This decline from before to after publication was significant in 3 centres, but not in the fourth centre (from 1.62 to 1.49; P = 0.61). Barriers were identified at the levels of evidence (applicability, credibility), HCP (awareness/knowledge, practice behaviours), patient (knowledge/misconceptions, preferences), and systems (siloing of care, financial disincentives, resource limitations, geography). Facilitators were additional studies/guidelines, education/dissemination, shared decision making, a heart team approach, changes to remuneration models, and increased resources. ConclusionsFollowing publication of the FREEDOM trial, the proportion of patients with DM and MV-CAD undergoing CABG increased in BC; however, practice patterns varied across cardiac centres. HCPs attributed these practice variations to multilevel barriers and facilitators. Future knowledge translation strategies should be multifaceted and tailored to identified determinants.