The CARE Plus study - a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary care patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-utility analysis

Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care.

AIM

To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices.

METHOD

Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD.

CONCLUSION

The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Health economic evaluation of blended collaborative care for older multimorbid heart failure patients: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Integrated care, in particular the 'Blended Collaborative Care (BCC)' strategy, may have the potential to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in multimorbid patients with heart failure (HF) and psychosocial burden at no or low additional cost. The ESCAPE trial is a randomised controlled trial for the evaluation of a BCC approach in five European countries. For the economic evaluation of alongside this trial, the four main objectives were: (i) to document the costs of delivering the intervention, (ii) to assess the running costs across study sites, (iii) to evaluate short-term cost-effectiveness and cost-utility compared to providers' usual care, and (iv) to examine the budgetary implications.

METHODS

The trial-based economic analyses will include cross-country cost-effectiveness and cost-utility assessments from a payer perspective. The cost-utility analysis will calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ-5D-5L and national value sets. Cost-effectiveness will include the cost per hospital admission avoided and the cost per depression-free days (DFD). Resource use will be measured from different sources, including electronic medical health records, standardised questionnaires, patient receipts and a care manager survey. Uncertainty will be addressed using bootstrapping.

DISCUSSION

The various methods and approaches used for data acquisition should provide insights into the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of a BCC intervention. Providing the economic evaluation of ESCAPE will contribute to a country-based structural and organisational planning of BCC (e.g., the number of patients that may benefit, how many care managers are needed). Improved care is expected to enhance health-related quality of life at little or no extra cost.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study follows CHEERS2022 and is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00025120).

Co-designing care for multimorbidity: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The co-design of health care enables patient-centredness by partnering patients, clinicians and other stakeholders together to create services.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of co-designed health interventions for people living with multimorbidity and assessed (a) their effectiveness in improving health outcomes, (b) the co-design approaches used and (c) barriers and facilitators to the co-design process with people living with multimorbidity. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO between 2000 and March 2022. Included experimental studies were quality assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB-2 and ROBINS-I).

RESULTS

We screened 14,376 reports, with 13 reports meeting the eligibility criteria. Two reported health and well-being outcomes: one randomised clinical trial (n = 134) and one controlled cohort (n = 1933). Outcome measures included quality of life, self-efficacy, well-being, anxiety, depression, functional status, healthcare utilisation and mortality. Outcomes favouring the co-design interventions compared to control were minimal, with only 4 of 17 outcomes considered beneficial. Co-design approaches included needs assessment/ideation (12 of 13), prototype (11 of 13), pilot testing (5 of 13) (i.e. focus on usability) and health and well-being evaluations (2 of 13). Common challenges to the co-design process include poor stakeholder interest, passive participation, power imbalances and a lack of representativeness in the design group. Enablers include flexibility in approach, smaller group work, advocating for stakeholders' views and commitment to the process or decisions made.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review of co-design health interventions, we found that few projects assessed health and well-being outcomes, and the observed health and well-being benefits were minimal. The intensity and variability in the co-design approaches were substantial, and challenges were evident. Co-design aided the design of novel services and interventions for those with multimorbidity, improving their relevance, usability and acceptability. However, the clinical benefits of co-designed interventions for those with multimorbidity are unclear.

Effectiveness of an adaptive, multifaceted intervention to enhance care for patients with complex multimorbidity in general practice: protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (the MM600 trial)

INTRODUCTION

Patients with complex multimorbidity face a high treatment burden and frequently have low quality of life. General practice is the key organisational setting in terms of offering people with complex multimorbidity integrated, longitudinal, patient-centred care. This protocol describes a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of an adaptive, multifaceted intervention in general practice for patients with complex multimorbidity.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this study, 250 recruited general practices will be randomly assigned 1:1 to either the intervention or control group. The eligible population are adult patients with two or more chronic conditions, at least one contact with secondary care within the last year, taking at least five repeat prescription drugs, living independently, who experience significant problems with their life and health due to their multimorbidity. During 2023 and 2024, intervention practices are financially incentivised to provide an extended consultation based on a patient-centred framework to eligible patients. Control practices continue care as usual. The primary outcome is need-based quality of life. Outcomes will be evaluated using linear and logistic regression models, with clustering considered. The analysis will be performed as intention to treat. In addition, a process evaluation will be carried out and reported elsewhere.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol, the Helsinki Declaration in its most recent form and good clinical practice recommendations, as well as the regulation for informed consent. The study was submitted to the Danish Capital Region Ethical Committee (ref: H-22041229). As defined by Section 2 of the Danish Act on Research Ethics in Research Projects, this project does not constitute a health research project but is considered a quality improvement project that does not require formal ethical approval. All results from the study (whether positive, negative or inconclusive) will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05676541.

Patients' experiences of GP consultations following the introduction of the new GP contract in Scotland: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

The new Scottish GP contract commenced in April 2018 with a stated aim of mitigating health inequalities.

AIM

To determine the health characteristics and experiences of patients consulting GPs in deprived urban (DU), affluent urban (AU), and remote and rural (RR) areas of Scotland.

DESIGN AND SETTING

In 2022, a postal survey of a random sample of adult patients from 12 practices who had consulted a GP within the previous 30 days was undertaken.

METHOD

Patient characteristics and consultation experiences in the three areas (DU, AU, RR) were evaluated using validated measures including the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure and Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI).

RESULTS

In total, 1053 responses were received. In DU areas, multimorbidity was more common (78% versus 58% AU versus 68% RR, P<0.01), complex presentations (where the consultation addressed both psychosocial and physical problems) were more likely (16% versus 10% AU versus 11% RR, P<0.05), and more consultations were conducted by telephone (42% versus 31% AU versus 31% RR, P<0.01). Patients in DU areas reported lower satisfaction (82% DU completely, very, or fairly satisfied versus 90% AU versus 86% RR, P<0.01), lower perceived GP empathy (mean CARE score 38.9 versus 42.1 AU versus 40.1 RR, P<0.05), lower enablement (mean PEI score 2.6 versus 3.2 AU versus 2.8 RR, P<0.01), and less symptom improvement (P<0.01) than those in AU or RR areas. Face-to-face consultations were associated with significantly higher satisfaction, enablement, and perceived GP empathy than telephone consultations in RR areas (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Four years after the start of the new GP contract in Scotland, patients' experiences of GP consultations suggest that the inverse care law persists.

A tailored psychological intervention for anxiety and depression management in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: TANDEM RCT and process evaluation

Background

People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have high levels of anxiety and depression, which is associated with increased morbidity and poor uptake of effective treatments, such as pulmonary rehabilitation. Cognitive-behavioural therapy improves mental health of people with long-term conditions and could potentially increase uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation, enabling synergies that could enhance the mental health of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Aim

Our aim was to develop and evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a tailored cognitive-behavioural approach intervention, which links into, and optimises the benefits of, routine pulmonary rehabilitation.

Design

We carried out a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial using a 1.25 : 1 ratio (intervention : control) with a parallel process evaluation, including assessment of fidelity.

Setting

Twelve NHS trusts and five Clinical Commissioning Groups in England were recruited into the study. The intervention was delivered in participant's own home or at a local NHS facility, and by telephone.

Participants

Between July 2017 and March 2020 we recruited adults with moderate/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and mild/moderate anxiety and/or depression, meeting eligibility criteria for assessment for pulmonary rehabilitation. Carers of participants were invited to participate.

Intervention

The cognitive-behavioural approach intervention (i.e. six to eight 40- to 60-minute sessions plus telephone support throughout pulmonary rehabilitation) was delivered by 31 trained respiratory healthcare professionals to participants prior to commencing pulmonary rehabilitation. Usual care included routine pulmonary rehabilitation referral.

Main outcome measures

Co-primary outcomes were Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - anxiety and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression at 6 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes at 6 and 12 months included health-related quality of life, smoking status, uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation and healthcare use.

Results

We analysed results from 423 randomised participants (intervention, n = 242; control, n = 181). Forty-three carers participated. Follow-up at 6 and 12 months was 93% and 82%, respectively. Despite good fidelity for intervention delivery, mean between-group differences in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months ruled out clinically important effects (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - anxiety mean difference -0.60, 95% confidence interval -1.40 to 0.21; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression mean difference -0.66, 95% confidence interval -1.39 to 0.07), with similar results at 12 months. There were no between-group differences in any of the secondary outcomes. Sensitivity analyses did not alter these conclusions. More adverse events were reported for intervention participants than for control participants, but none related to the trial. The intervention did not generate quality-of-life improvements to justify the additional cost (adjusted mean difference £770.24, 95% confidence interval -£27.91 to £1568.39) to the NHS. The intervention was well received and many participants described positive affects on their quality of life. Facilitators highlighted the complexity of participants' lives and considered the intervention to be of potential valuable; however, the intervention would be difficult to integrate within routine clinical services. Our well-powered trial delivered a theoretically designed intervention with good fidelity. The respiratory-experienced facilitators were trained to deliver a low-intensity cognitive-behavioural approach intervention, but high-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy might have been more effective. Our broad inclusion criteria specified objectively assessed anxiety and/or depression, but participants were likely to favour talking therapies. Randomisation was concealed and blinding of outcome assessment was breached in only 15 participants.

Conclusions

The tailored cognitive-behavioural approach intervention delivered with fidelity by trained respiratory healthcare professionals to people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. Alternative approaches that are integrated with routine long-term condition care are needed to address the unmet, complex clinical and psychosocial needs of this group of patients.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN59537391.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/146/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 1. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Effectiveness of nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions in primary health care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This review aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions in primary health care.

METHODS

The following Chinese and English databases were searched for relevant articles: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), from the establishment of the databases until the last updating search 1 April 2022. Two researchers screened the studies independently and extracted the data. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies were included in this review. It was found that nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions significantly shortened patients' length of stay in hospital (standardized mean differences [SMD] = -1.28, 95%CI: -2.03 to -0.54; P<0.001) and decreased incidences of complications (RR = 0.24, 95%CI:0.10 to 0.54; P = 0.0006) compared to the control group, and lowered patients' anxiety levels (SMD = -1.21, 95%CI: -1.99 to -0.44; P<0.01) and depression levels (SMD = -1.85, 95%CI: -3.42 to -0.28; P<0.0001). Furthermore, the results of subgroup analysis indicated that nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions had significant effects on patients' self-management ability (SMD = 4.45, 95%CI:2.45 to 6.44; P<0.0001) and quality of life (SMD = 1.01, 95%CI: 0.63 to 1.40; P<0.0001) compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions had strong effects in primary health care, contributing to shorten patients' length of stay in hospital, decrease incidences of complications and reduce the levels of anxiety and depression. Moreover, nurse-led multidisciplinary interventions also improved patients' self-management ability and quality of life.

Effectiveness of self-management interventions for long-term conditions in people experiencing socio-economic deprivation in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-term conditions (LTCs) are prevalent in socio-economically deprived populations. Self-management interventions can improve health outcomes, but socio-economically deprived groups have lower participation in them, with potentially lower effectiveness. This review explored whether self-management interventions delivered to people experiencing socio-economic deprivation improve outcomes.

METHODS

We searched databases up to November 2022 for randomized trials. We screened, extracted data and assessed the quality of these studies using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2). We narratively synthesized all studies and performed a meta-analysis on eligible articles. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE for articles included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The 51 studies included in this review had mixed findings. For the diabetes meta-analysis, there was a statistically significant pooled reduction in haemoglobin A1c (-0.29%). We had moderate certainty in the evidence. Thirty-eight of the study interventions had specific tailoring for socio-economically deprived populations, including adaptions for low literacy and financial incentives. Each intervention had an average of four self-management components.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-management interventions for socio-economically deprived populations show promise, though more evidence is needed. Our review suggests that the number of self-management components may not be important. With the increasing emphasis on self-management, to avoid exacerbating health inequalities, interventions should include tailoring for socio-economically deprived individuals.

The lived experience of Omani adolescents and young adults with mental illness: A qualitative study

There is currently limited knowledge about the firsthand experiences of adolescents and young adults with mental health problems and the meanings they ascribe to these experiences, particularly within Arab countries. This study, therefore, aimed to explore the lived experience of Omani adolescents and young adults with a mental health problem. A sample of 15 participants aged 13-22 diagnosed with a range of mental health problems took part in the study. A qualitative interview guide consisting of open-ended questions was used to allow participants to speak in-depth about their experiences. Using the thematic analysis approach to uncover patterns in the data, three major themes emerged: "living in darkness", "perilous journey" and "uncertain future". Results show that the progress of adolescents and young adults with mental health problems is characterized by several challenges; the most significant of which is having insufficient knowledge about their illness, leading to unnecessary delays in their treatment. These findings shed light on the breadth and depth of the experience of adolescents and young adults with mental health problems and lay the groundwork for further examinations. Implications lie in the development of approaches for preventing or mitigating difficulties faced by adolescents and young adults with mental health problems.

Feasibility and outcomes of using DIALOG+ in primary care to improve quality of life and mental distress of patients with long-term physical conditions: an exploratory non-controlled study in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda

INTRODUCTION

The management of long-term physical conditions is a challenge worldwide, absorbing a majority resources despite the importance of acute care. The management of these conditions is done largely in primary care and so interventions to improve primary care could have an enormous impact. However, very little data exist on how to do this. Mental distress is frequently comorbid with long term physical conditions, and can impact on health behaviour and adherence, leading to poorer outcomes. DIALOG+ is a low-cost, patient-centred and solution-focused intervention, which is used in routine patient-clinician meetings and has been shown to improve outcomes in mental health care. The question arises as to whether it could also be used in primary care to improve the quality of life and mental health of patients with long-term physical conditions. This is particularly important for low- and middle-income countries with limited health care resources.

METHODS

An exploratory non-controlled multi-site trial was conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, and Uganda. Feasibility was determined by recruitment, retention, and session completion. Patient outcomes (quality of life, anxiety and depression symptoms, objective social situation) were assessed at baseline and after three approximately monthly DIALOG+ sessions.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients were enrolled in the study, 25 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 32 in Colombia, and 60 in Uganda. In each country, more than 75% of anticipated participants were recruited, with retention rates over 90% and completion of the intervention exceeding 92%. Patients had significantly higher quality of life and fewer anxiety and depression symptoms at post-intervention follow-up, with moderate to large effect sizes. There were no significant improvements in objective social situation.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this exploratory trial suggest that DIALOG+ is feasible in primary care settings for patients with long-term physical conditions and may substantially improve patient outcomes. Future research may test implementation and effectiveness of DIALOG+ in randomized controlled trials in wider primary care settings in low- and middle-income countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

All studies were registered prospectively within the ISRCTN Registry. ISRCTN17003451, 02/12/2020 (Bosnia and Herzegovina), ISRCTN14018729, 01/12/2020 (Colombia) and ISRCTN50335796, 02/12/2020 (Uganda).

Health inequalities, multimorbidity and primary care in Scotland

Scotland has an ageing population and the widest health inequalities in Western Europe. Multiple health conditions develop ∼10-15 years earlier in deprived areas than in affluent areas. General practice is central to the effective and safe management of such complex multiple health conditions, but the inverse care law has permeated deprived communities ('Deep End' general practices) for the past 50 years. A new, radical, Scottish GP contract was introduced in April 2018, which has a vision to improve quality of care through cluster working and expansion of the multidisciplinary team (MDT), enabling GPs to deliver 'expert generalism' to patients with complex needs. It states a specific intention to address health inequalities and also to support the integration of health and social care. Here, we discuss recent evidence for whether the ambition of the new GP contract, to reduce health inequalities, is being achieved.

Racial differences in healthcare expenditures for prevalent multimorbidity combinations in the USA: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to model total charges for the most prevalent multimorbidity combinations in the USA and assess model accuracy across Asian/Pacific Islander, African American, Biracial, Caucasian, Hispanic, and Native American populations.

METHODS

We used Cerner HealthFacts data from 2016 to 2017 to model the cost of previously identified prevalent multimorbidity combinations among 38 major diagnostic categories for cohorts stratified by age (45-64 and 65 +). Examples of prevalent multimorbidity combinations include lipedema with hypertension or hypertension with diabetes. We applied generalized linear models (GLM) with gamma distribution and log link function to total charges for all cohorts and assessed model accuracy using residual analysis. In addition to 38 major diagnostic categories, our adjusted model incorporated demographic, BMI, hospital, and census division information.

RESULTS

The mean ages were 55 (45-64 cohort, N = 333,094) and 75 (65 + cohort, N = 327,260), respectively. We found actual total charges to be highest for African Americans (means $78,544 [45-64], $176,274 [65 +]) and lowest for Hispanics (means $29,597 [45-64], $66,911 [65 +]). African American race was strongly predictive of higher costs (p < 0.05 [45-64]; p < 0.05 [65 +]). Each total charge model had a good fit. With African American as the index race, only Asian/Pacific Islander and Biracial were non-significant in the 45-64 cohort and Biracial in the 65 + cohort. Mean residuals were lowest for Hispanics in both cohorts, highest in African Americans for the 45-64 cohort, and highest in Caucasians for the 65 + cohort. Model accuracy varied substantially by race when multimorbidity grouping was considered. For example, costs were markedly overestimated for 65 + Caucasians with multimorbidity combinations that included heart disease (e.g., hypertension + heart disease and lipidemia + hypertension + heart disease). Additionally, model residuals varied by age/obesity status. For instance, model estimates for Hispanic patients were highly underestimated for most multimorbidity combinations in the 65 + with obesity cohort compared with other age/obesity status groupings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our finding demonstrates the need for more robust models to ensure the healthcare system can better serve all populations. Future cost modeling efforts will likely benefit from factoring in multimorbidity type stratified by race/ethnicity and age/obesity status.

Does the duration of ambulatory consultations affect the quality of healthcare? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The objective is to examine and synthesise the best available experimental evidence about the effect of ambulatory consultation duration on quality of healthcare.

METHODS

We included experimental studies manipulating the length of outpatient clinical encounters between adult patients and clinicians (ie, therapists, pharmacists, nurses, physicians) to determine their effect on quality of care (ie, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, safety, equity, patient-centredness and patient satisfaction).

INFORMATION SOURCES

Using controlled vocabulary and keywords, without restriction by language or year of publication, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus from inception until 15 May 2023.

RISK OF BIAS

Cochrane Risk of Bias instrument.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

11 publications of 10 studies explored the relationship between encounter duration and quality. Most took place in the UK's general practice over two decades ago. Study findings based on very sparse and outdated evidence-which suggested that longer consultations improved indicators of patient-centred care, education about prevention and clinical referrals; and that consultation duration was inconsistently related to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes-warrant low confidence due to limited protections against bias and indirect applicability to current practice.

CONCLUSION

Experimental evidence for a minimal or optimal duration of an outpatient consultation is sparse and outdated. To develop evidence-based policies and practices about encounter length, randomised trials of different consultation lengths-in person and virtually, and with electronic health records-are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

OSF Registration DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/EUDK8.

The SOFIA pilot study: assessing feasibility and fidelity of coordinated care to reduce excess mortality and increase quality of life in patients with severe mental illness in a general practice setting; a cluster-randomised pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and fidelity of implementing and assessing the SOFIA coordinated care program aimed at lowering mortality and increasing quality of life in patients with severe mental illness by improving somatic health care in general practice.

DESIGN

A cluster-randomised, non-blinded controlled pilot trial.

SETTING

General Practice in Denmark.

INTERVENTION

The SOFIA coordinated care program comprised extended structured consultations carried out by the GP, group-based training of GPs and staff, and a handbook with information on signposting patients to relevant municipal, health, and social initiatives.

PATIENTS

Persons aged 18 years or older with a diagnosis of psychotic, bipolar, or severe depressive disorder.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We collected quantitative data on the delivery, recruitment and retention rates of practices and patients, and response rates of questionnaires MMQ and EQ-5D-5 L.

RESULTS

From November 2020 to March 2021, nine practices were enrolled and assigned in a 2:1 ratio to the intervention group (n = 6) or control group (n = 3). Intervention group practices included 64 patients and Control practices included 23. The extended consultations were delivered with a high level of fidelity in the general practices; however, thresholds for collecting outcome measures, and recruitment of practices and patients were not reached.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that delivering the coordinated care program in a fully powered trial in primary care is likely feasible. However, the recruitment methodology requires improvement to ensure sufficient recruitment and minimize selective inclusion.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The date of pilot trial protocol registration was 05/11/2020, and the registration number is NCT04618250.

Association of individual-socioeconomic variation in quality-of-primary care with area-level service organisation: A multilevel analysis using linked data

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Ensuring equitable access to primary care (PC) contributes to reducing differences in health related to people's socioeconomic circumstances. However, there is limited data on system-level factors associated with equitable access to high-quality PC. We examine whether individual-level socioeconomic variation in general practitioner (GP) quality-of-care varies by area-level organisation of PC services.

METHODS

Baseline data (2006-2009) from the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study, involving 267,153 adults in New South Wales, Australia, were linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule claims and death data (to December 2012). Small area-level measures of PC service organisation were GPs per capita, bulk-billing (i.e., no copayment) rates, out-of-pocket costs (OPCs), rates of after-hours and chronic disease care planning/coordination services. Using multilevel logistic regression with cross-level interaction terms we quantified the relationship between area-level PC service characteristics and individual-level socioeconomic variation in need-adjusted quality-of-care (continuity-of-care, long-consultations, and care planning), separately by remoteness.

RESULTS

In major cities, more bulk-billing and chronic disease services and fewer OPCs within areas were associated with an increased odds of continuity-of-care-more so among people of high- than low education (e.g., bulk-billing interaction with university vs. no school certificate 1.006 [1.000, 1.011]). While more bulk-billing, after-hours services and fewer OPCs were associated with long consultations and care planning across all education levels, in regional locations alone, more after-hours services were associated with larger increases in the odds of long consultations among people with low- than high education (0.970 [0.951, 0.989]). Area GP availability was not associated with outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In major cities, PC initiatives at the local level, such as bulk-billing and after-hours access, were not associated with a relative benefit for low- compared with high-education individuals. In regional locations, policies supporting after-hours access may improve access to long consultations, more so for people with low- compared with high-education.

Effectiveness of holistic assessment-based interventions in improving outcomes in adults with multiple long-term conditions and/or frailty: an umbrella review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review will synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of holistic assessment-based interventions in improving health outcomes in adults (aged ≥18) with multiple long-term conditions and/or frailty.

INTRODUCTION

Health systems need effective, evidence-based interventions to improve health outcomes for adults with multiple long-term conditions. Holistic assessment-based interventions are effective in older people admitted to hospital (usually called "comprehensive geriatric assessments" in that context); however, the evidence is inconclusive on whether similar interventions are effective in community settings.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We will include systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of community and/or hospital holistic assessment-based interventions in improving health outcomes for community-dwelling and hospitalized adults aged ≥ 18 with multiple long-term conditions and/or frailty.

METHODS

The review will follow the JBI methodology for umbrella reviews. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, ASSIA, Cochrane Library, and the TRIP Medical Database will be searched to identify reviews published in English from 2010 till the present. This will be followed by a manual search of reference lists of included reviews to identify additional reviews. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts against the selection criteria, followed by screening of full texts. Methodological quality will be assessed using the JBI critical appraisal checklist for systematic reviews and research syntheses and data will be extracted using an adapted and piloted JBI data extraction tool. The summary of findings will be presented in tabular format, with narrative descriptions and visual indications. The citation matrix will be generated and the corrected covered area calculated to analyze the overlap in primary studies across the reviews.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022363217.

Organisation and integrated healthcare approaches for people living with HIV, multimorbidity, or both: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Universal recommendation for antiretroviral drugs and their effectiveness has put forward the challenge of assuring a chronic and continued care approach to PLHIV (People Living with HIV), pressured by aging and multimorbidity. Integrated approaches are emerging which are more responsive to that reality. Studying those approaches, and their relation to the what of delivery arrangements and the how of implementation processes, may support future strategies to attain more effective organizational responses.

METHODS

We reviewed empirical studies on either HIV, multimorbidity, or both. The studies were published between 2011 and 2020, describing integrated approaches, their design, implementation, and evaluation strategy. Quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods were included. Electronic databases reviewed cover PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. A narrative analysis was conducted on each study, and data extraction was accomplished according to the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care taxonomy of health systems interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies, reporting 22 different interventions, were analysed. In general, interventions were grounded and guided by models and frameworks, and focused on specific subpopulations, or priority groups at increased risk of poorer outcomes. Interventions mixed multiple integrated components. Delivery arrangements targeted more frequently clinical integration (n = 13), and care in proximity, community or online-telephone based (n = 15). Interventions reported investments in the role of users, through self-management support (n = 16), and in coordination, through multidisciplinary teams (n = 9) and continuity of care (n = 8). Implementation strategies targeted educational and training activities (n = 12), and less often, mechanisms of iterative improvement (n = 3). At the level of organizational design and governance, interventions mobilised users and communities through representation, at boards and committees, and through consultancy, along different phases of the design process (n = 11).

CONCLUSION

The data advance important lessons and considerations to take steps forward from disease-focused care to integrated care at two critical levels: design and implementation. Multidisciplinary work, continuity of care, and meaningful engagement of users seem crucial to attain care that is comprehensive and more proximal, within or cross organizations, or sectors. Promising practices are advanced at the level of design, implementation, and evaluation, that set integration as a continued process of improvement and value professionals and users' knowledge as assets along those phases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO number CRD42020194117.

Integrated care for older multimorbid heart failure patients: protocol for the ESCAPE randomized trial and cohort study

ESCAPE

Evaluation of a patient-centred biopsychosocial blended collaborative care pathway for the treatment of multimorbid elderly patients.

THERAPEUTIC AREA

Healthcare interventions for the management of older patients with multiple morbidities.

AIMS

Multi-morbidity treatment is an increasing challenge for healthcare systems in ageing societies. This comprehensive cohort study with embedded randomized controlled trial tests an integrated biopsychosocial care model for multimorbid elderly patients.

HYPOTHESIS

A holistic, patient-centred pro-active 9-month intervention based on the blended collaborative care (BCC) approach and enhanced by information and communication technologies can improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disease outcomes as compared with usual care at 9 months.

METHODS

Across six European countries, ESCAPE is recruiting patients with heart failure, mental distress/disorder plus ≥2 medical co-morbidities into an observational cohort study. Within the cohort study, 300 patients will be included in a randomized controlled assessor-blinded two-arm parallel group interventional clinical trial (RCT). In the intervention, trained care managers (CMs) regularly support patients and informal carers in managing their multiple health problems. Supervised by a clinical specialist team, CMs remotely support patients in implementing the treatment plan-customized to the patients' individual needs and preferences-into their daily lives and liaise with patients' healthcare providers. An eHealth platform with an integrated patient registry guides the intervention and helps to empower patients and informal carers. HRQoL measured with the EQ-5D-5L as primary endpoint, and secondary outcomes, that is, medical and patient-reported outcomes, healthcare costs, cost-effectiveness, and informal carer burden, will be assessed at 9 and ≥18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

If proven effective, the ESCAPE BCC intervention can be implemented in routine care for older patients with multiple morbidities across the participating countries and beyond.

Multimorbidity and adverse longitudinal outcomes among patients attending chronic outpatient medical care in Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia

Background

Multimorbidity is becoming more prevalent in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, the evidence base on the burden and its longitudinal outcomes are limited. This study aimed to determine the longitudinal outcomes of patients with multimorbidity among a sample of individuals attending chronic outpatient non communicable diseases (NCDs) care in Bahir Dar, northwest Ethiopia.

Methods

A facility-based longitudinal study was conducted among 1,123 participants aged 40+ attending care for single NCD (n = 491) or multimorbidity (n = 633). Data were collected both at baseline and after 1 year through standardized interviews and record reviews. Data were analyzed using Stata V.16. Descriptive statistics and longitudinal panel data analyzes were run to describe independent variables and identify factors predicting outcomes. Statistical significance was considered at p-value <0.05.

Results

The magnitude of multimorbidity has increased from 54.8% at baseline to 56.8% at 1 year. Four percent (n = 44) of patients were diagnosed with one or more NCDs and those having multimorbidity at baseline were more likely than those without multimorbidity to develop new NCDs. In addition, 106 (9.4%) and 22 (2%) individuals, respectively were hospitalized and died during the follow up period. In this study, about one-third of the participants had higher quality of life (QoL), and those having higher high activation status were more likely to be in the higher versus the combined moderate and lower QoL [AOR1 = 2.35, 95%CI: (1.93, 2.87)] and in the combined higher and moderate versus lower level of QoL [AOR2 = 1.53, 95%CI: (1.25, 1.88)].

Conclusion

Developing new NCDs is a frequent occurrence and the prevalence of multimorbidity is high. Living with multimorbidity was associated with poor progress, hospitalization and mortality. Patients having a higher activation level were more likely than those with low activation to have better QoL. If health systems are to meet the needs of the people with chronic conditions and multimorbidity, it is essential to understand diseases trajectories and of impact of multimorbidity on QoL, and determinants and individual capacities, and to increase their activation levels for better health improve outcomes through education and activation.

Interventions and management on multimorbidity: An overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity poses an immense burden on the healthcare systems globally, whereas the management strategies and guidelines for multimorbidity are poorly established. We aim to synthesize current evidence on interventions and management of multimorbidity.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews). Systematic reviews (SRs) on interventions or management of multimorbidity were included and evaluated. The methodological quality of each SR was assessed by the AMSTAR-2 tool, and the quality of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions was assessed by the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

A total of 30 SRs (464 unique underlying studies) were included, including 20 SRs of interventions and 10 SRs summarizing evidence on management of multimorbidity. Four categories of interventions were identified: patient-level interventions, provider-level interventions, organization-level interventions, and combined interventions (combining the aforementioned two or three- level components). The outcomes were categorized into six types: physical conditions/outcomes, mental conditions/outcomes, psychosocial outcomes/general health, healthcare utilization and costs, patients' behaviors, and care process outcomes. Combined interventions (with patient-level and provider-level components) were more effective in promoting physical conditions/outcomes, while patient-level interventions were more effective in promoting mental conditions/outcomes and psychosocial outcomes/general health. As for healthcare utilization and care process outcomes, organization-level and combined interventions (with organization-level components) were more effective. The challenges in the management of multimorbidity at the patient, provider and organizational levels were also summarized.

CONCLUSION

Combined interventions for multimorbidity at different levels would be favored to promote different types of health outcomes. Challenges exist in the management at the patient, provider, and organization levels. Therefore, a holistic and integrated approach of patient-, provider- and organization- level interventions is required to address the challenges and optimize care of patients with multimorbidity.

Economic evaluations of interventional opportunities for the management of mental-physical multimorbidity: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Economic evaluations of interventions for people with mental-physical multimorbidity, including a depressive disorder, are sparse. This study examines whether such interventions in adults are cost-effective.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science and NHS EED databases were searched until 5 March 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies involving people aged ≥18 with two or more chronic conditions (one being a depressive disorder). Economic evaluation studies that compared costs and outcomes of interventions were included, and those that assessed only costs or effects were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias in included studies using recommended checklists. A narrative analysis of the characteristics and results by type of intervention and levels of healthcare provision was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies, all undertaken in high-income countries, met inclusion criteria. Four intervention types were reported: collaborative care, self-management, telephone-based and antidepressant treatment. Most (14 of 19) interventions were implemented at the organisational level and were potentially cost-effective, particularly, the collaborative care for people with depressive disorder and diabetes, comorbid major depression and cancer and depression and multiple long-term conditions. Cost-effectiveness ranged from £206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for collaborative care programmes for older adults with diabetes and depression at primary care clinics (USA) to £79 723 per QALY for combining collaborative care with improved opportunistic screening for adults with depressive disorder and diabetes (England). Conclusions on cost-effectiveness were constrained by methodological aspects of the included studies: choice of perspectives, time horizon and costing methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of interventions to manage multimorbidity with a depressive disorder are non-existent in low-income and middle-income countries. The design and reporting of future economic evaluations must improve to provide robust conclusions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022302036.

Half a century of the inverse care law: A comparison of general practitioner job satisfaction and patient satisfaction in deprived and affluent areas of Scotland

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The 'inverse care law', first described in 1971, results from a mismatch of healthcare need and healthcare supply in deprived areas. GPs in such areas struggle to cope with the high levels of demand resulting in shorter consultations and poorer patient outcomes. We compare recent national GP and patient satisfaction data to investigate the ongoing existence of this disparity in Scotland.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Secondary analysis of cross-sectional national surveys (2017/2018) on upper and lower deprivation quintiles. GP measures; job satisfaction, job stressors, positive and negative job attributes. Patient measures; percentage positive responses per practice on survey questions on access and consultation quality. GPs in high deprivation areas reported lower job satisfaction and positive job attributes, and higher job stressors and negative job attributes compared with GPs in low deprivation areas. Patients living in high deprivation areas reported lower satisfaction with access and consultation quality than patients in low deprivation areas. These differences in GP and patient satisfaction persisted after adjusting for confounding variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower GP work satisfaction in deprived areas was mirrored by lower patient satisfaction. These findings add to the evidence that the inverse care law persists in Scotland, over 50 years after it was first described.

The association between social care expenditure and multiple-long term conditions: A population-based area-level analysis

Background

Multiple long-term health conditions (MLTCs) are common and increasing among older people, yet there is limited understanding of their prevalence and association with social care expenditure.

Aim

To estimate the prevalence of MTLCs and association with English social care expenditure.

Methods

Our study population included those aged ≥ 65 who died in England in the year 2018 with any of the following long-term conditions recorded on their death certificate: diabetes; cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) including hypertension; dementia; stroke; respiratory; and chronic kidney diseases (CKDs). Prevalence was based on the proportion of death reported for older people with MTLCs (≥ 2) in each of the 152 English Local Authorities (LAs). Ordinary least square regression (OLS) was used to assess the relationship between prevalence of MTLCs and adult social care expenditure, adjusting for LA characteristics.

Results

Of the 409551 deaths reported, 19.9% (n = 81395) had ≥ 2 MTLCs, of which the combination of CVDs-diabetes was the most prevalent. Hospitals were the leading place of death for those with MTLCs. Results from the OLS regression model showed that an increased prevalence of MLTCs is associated with higher LA social care expenditure. A percentage point increase in prevalence of MLTCs is associated with an increase of about £8.13 in per capita LA social care expenditure.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that the increased prevalence of MTLCs is associated with increased LA social care expenditure. It is important for future studies to further explore the mechanisms or link between LA social care expenditure and the prevalence of MTLCs.

Effect of a multimorbidity intervention on health care utilization and costs in Ontario: randomized controlled trial and propensity-matched analyses

BACKGROUND

Patients with multimorbidity require coordinated and patient-centred care. Telemedicine IMPACT Plus provides such care for complex patients in Toronto, Ontario. We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing health care utilization and costs at 1-year postintervention for an intervention group and 2 control groups (RCT and propensity matched).

METHODS

Data for 82 RCT intervention and 74 RCT control participants were linked with health administrative data. We created a second control group using health administrative data-derived propensity scores to match (1:5) intervention participants with comparators. We evaluated 5 outcomes: acute hospital admissions, emergency department visits, costs of all insured health care, 30-day hospital readmissions and 7-day family physician follow-up after hospital discharge using generalized linear models for RCT controls and generalized estimating equations for propensity-matched controls.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between intervention participants and either control group. For hospital admissions, emergency department visits, costs and readmissions, the relative differences ranged from 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-2.60) to 1.67 (95% CI 0.82-3.38) with intervention costs at about Can$20 000, RCT controls costs at around Can$15 000 and propensity controls costs at around Can$17 000. There was a higher rate of follow-up with a family physician for the intervention participants compared with the RCT controls (53.13 v. 21.43 per 100 hospital discharges; relative difference 2.48 [95% CI 0.98-6.29]) and propensity-matched controls (49.94 v. 28.21 per 100 hospital discharges; relative difference 1.81 [95% CI 0.99-3.30]).

INTERPRETATION

Despite a complex patient-centred intervention, there was no significant improvement in health care utilization or cost. Future research requires larger sample sizes and should include outcomes important to patients and the health care system, and longer follow-up periods.

ONTARIO

ClinicalTrials.gov : 104191.

Defining and measuring multimorbidity in primary care in Singapore: Results of an online Delphi study

Multimorbidity, common in the primary care setting, has diverse implications for both the patient and the healthcare system. However, there is no consensus on the definition of multimorbidity globally. Thus, we aimed to conduct a Delphi study to gain consensus on the definition of multimorbidity, the list and number of chronic conditions used for defining multimorbidity in the Singapore primary care setting. Our Delphi study comprised three rounds of online voting from purposively sampled family physicians in public and private settings. Delphi round 1 included open-ended questions for idea generation. The subsequent two rounds used questions with pre-selected options. Consensus was achieved based on a pre-defined criteria following an iterative process. The response rates for the three rounds were 61.7% (37/60), 86.5% (32/37) and 93.8% (30/32), respectively. Among 40 panellists who responded, 46.0% were 31-40 years old, 64.9% were male and 73.0% were from the public primary healthcare setting. Based on the findings of rounds 1, 2 and 3, consensus on the definition of a chronic condition, multimorbidity and finalised list of chronic conditions were achieved. For a condition to be chronic, it should last for six months or more, be recurrent or persistent, impact patients across multiple domains and require long-term management. The consensus-derived definition of multimorbidity is the presence of three or more chronic conditions from a finalised list of 23 chronic conditions. We anticipate that our findings will inform multimorbidity conceptualisation at the national level, standardise multimorbidity measurement in primary care and facilitate resource allocation for patients with multimorbidity.

Understanding the processes behind the decisions – GPs and complex multimorbidity decision making

Complex multimorbidity, defined either as three or more chronic conditions affecting three or more different body systems or by the patients General Practitioner (GPs), is associated with various adverse outcomes. Understanding how GPs reach decisions for this complex group of patients is currently under-researched, with potential implications for health systems and service delivery. Schuttner and colleagues, through a qualitative approach, reported that internal factors of individuals (decisions tailored to patients; Primary Care Physician (PCP) consultation style; care planning towards an agreed goal of care), external factors within the environment or context of encounter (patient access to healthcare; organizational structures acting as barriers), and relationship-based factors (collaborative care planning; decisions within a dynamic patient clinician relationship) all influence care planning decisions. There are other important findings which have broader relevance to the literature such as the ongoing separation of physical and mental health which persist even within integrated care systems, GPs continue to prioritize continuity of care and that organizational barriers are reported as factors in clinician decision-making for patients. More broadly, the work has proved valuable in extending previously reported findings surrounding care coordination, and limitation of current guidelines for patients with complex multimorbidity. Work-load in general practice is increasing due to an ageing population, increasing prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy, and transfer of clinical activities from secondary to primary care. The future for GPs is more complexity in the clinic room, understanding how GPs make decisions and how this can be supported is crucial for the sustainability for general practice.

Using self-determination theory in research and evaluation in primary care

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity (the co-existence of two or more long-term conditions within an individual) is a complex management challenge, with a very limited evidence base. Theories can help in the design and operationalization of complex interventions.

OBJECTIVE

This article proposes self-determination theory (SDT) as a candidate theory for the development and evaluation of interventions in multimorbidity.

METHODS

We provide an overview of SDT, its use in research to date, and its potential utility in complex interventions for patients with multimorbidity based on the new MRC framework.

RESULTS

SDT-based interventions have mainly focused on health behaviour change in the primary prevention of disease, with limited use in primary care and chronic conditions management. However, SDT may be a useful candidate theory in informing complex intervention development and evaluation, both in randomized controlled trials and in evaluations of 'natural experiments'. We illustrate how it could be used multimorbidity interventions in primary care by drawing on the example of CARE Plus (a primary care-based complex intervention for patients with multimorbidity in deprived areas of Scotland).

CONCLUSIONS

SDT may have utility in both the design and evaluation of complex interventions for multimorbidity. Further research is required to establish its usefulness, and limitations, compared with other candidate theories.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Our funded research programme, of which this paper is an early output, has a newly embedded patient and public involvement group of four members with lived experience of long-term conditions and/or of being informal carers. They read and commented on the draft manuscript and made useful suggestions on the text. They will be fully involved at all stages in the rest of the programme of research.

Cost-effectiveness of an occupational therapy-led self-management support programme for multimorbidity in primary care

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity is a major public health concern. Complex interventions, incorporating individualized care plans, may be appropriate for patients with multimorbidity given their individualized and variable needs. There is a dearth of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of complex multimorbidity interventions.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the cost-effectiveness of a 6-week occupational therapy-led self-management support programme (OPTIMAL) for adults with multimorbidity.

METHODS

Economic evaluation, from a healthcare perspective, was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of 149 adults with multimorbidity. Intervention was the OPTIMAL programme with a comparison of usual primary care. Incremental costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and expected cost-effectiveness were estimated at 6 months and uncertainty was explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

The intervention was associated with a mean improvement in QALYs gained of 0.031 per patient (P-value: 0.063; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: -0.002 to 0.063) and a mean reduction in total costs of €2,548 (P-value: 0.114; 95% CIs: -5,606 to 509) per patient. At cost-effectiveness threshold values of €20,000 and €45,000 per QALY, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was estimated to be 0.951 and 0.958, respectively. The results remained consistent across all subgroups examined.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the limited evidence base on the cost-effectiveness of complex interventions for multimorbidity, and highlights the potential for the OPTIMAL programme to be cost-effective. Further studies are warranted to explore the clinical and cost-effectiveness of complex interventions for the multimorbidity patient population, and for subgroups within it.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial number: ISRCTN67235963.

Economic Evaluations of Mindfulness-Based Interventions: a Systematic Review

Objectives

This study includes a systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and cost–benefit analyses (CBAs) of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs).

Methods

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, JSTOR, and CINAHL for studies published between January 1985 and September 2021, including an original cost-related evaluation of an MBI. A qualitative assessment of bias was performed using the Drummond checklist.

Results

Twenty-eight mindfulness-based intervention studies (18 CEAs and 10 CBAs) were included in this review. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) was less costly and more effective when compared with the usual care of cognitive behavioral therapy among patients with chronic lower back pain, fibromyalgia, and breast cancer. MBSR among patients with various physical/mental conditions was associated with reductions in healthcare costs. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) was also less costly and more effective than the comparison group among patients with depression, medically unexplained symptoms, and multiple sclerosis. MBCT’s cost-effectiveness advantage was also identified among breast cancer patients with persistent pain, non-depressed adults with a history of major depressive disorder episodes, adults diagnosed with ADHD, and all cancer patients. From a societal perspective, the cost-saving property of mindfulness training was evident when used as the treatment of aggressive behaviors among persons with intellectual/developmental disabilities in mental health facilities.

Conclusions

Based on this review, more standardized MBI protocols such as MBSR and MBCT compare favorably with usual care in terms of health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Other MBIs may result in cost savings from both healthcare and societal perspectives among high-risk patient populations.

Integrated self-management support provided by primary care nurses to persons with chronic diseases and common mental disorders: a scoping review

AIM

To map integrated and non-integrated self-management support interventions provided by primary care nurses to persons with chronic diseases and common mental disorders and describe their characteristics.

DESIGN

A scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

In April 2020, we conducted searches in several databases (Academic Research Complete, AMED, CINAHL, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Emcare, HealthSTAR, Proquest Central) using self-management support, nurse, primary care and their related terms. Of the resulting 4241 articles, 30 were included into the analysis.

REVIEW METHODS

We used the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care to identify integrated self-management interventions and to analyze the data and the PRISMS taxonomy for the description of interventions. Study selection and data synthesis were performed by the team. Self-management support interventions were considered integrated if they were consistent with the Rainbow model's definition of clinical integration and person-focused care.

RESULTS

The 30 selected articles related to 10 self-management support interventions. Among these, five interventions were considered integrated. The delivery of the interventions showed variability. Strategies used were education, problem-solving therapies, action planning, and goal setting. Integrated self-management support intervention characteristics were nurse-person relationship, engagement, and biopsychosocial approach. A framework for integrated self-management was proposed. The main characteristics of the non-integrated self-management support were disease-specific approach, protocol-driven, and lack of adaptability.

CONCLUSION

Our review synthesizes integrated and non-integrated self-management support interventions and their characteristics. We propose recommendations to improve its clinical integration. However, further theoretical clarification and qualitative research are needed.

IMPLICATION FOR NURSING

Self-management support is an important activity for primary care nurses and persons with chronic diseases and common mental disorders, who are increasingly present in primary care, and require an integrated approach.

IMPACT

This review addresses the paucity of details surrounding integrated self-management support for persons with chronic diseases and common mental disorders and provides a framework to better describe its characteristics. The findings could be used to design future research and improve the clinical integration of this activity by nurses.

The lived experience of severe mental illness and long-term conditions: a qualitative exploration of service user, carer, and healthcare professional perspectives on self-managing co-existing mental and physical conditions

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental illness (SMI), such as schizophrenia, have higher rates of physical long-term conditions (LTCs), poorer health outcomes, and shorter life expectancy compared with the general population. Previous research exploring SMI and diabetes highlights that people with SMI experience barriers to self-management, a key component of care in long-term conditions; however, this has not been investigated in the context of other LTCs. The aim of this study was to explore the lived experience of co-existing SMI and LTCs for service users, carers, and healthcare professionals.

METHODS

A qualitative study with people with SMI and LTCs, their carers, and healthcare professionals, using semi-structured interviews, focused observations, and focus groups across the UK. Forty-one interviews and five focus groups were conducted between December 2018 and April 2019. Transcripts were coded by two authors and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified, 1) the precarious nature of living with SMI, 2) the circularity of life with SMI and LTCs, and 3) the constellation of support for self-management. People with co-existing SMI and LTCs often experience substantial difficulties with self-management of their health due to the competing demands of their psychiatric symptoms and treatment, social circumstances, and access to support. Multiple long-term conditions add to the burden of self-management. Social support, alongside person-centred professional care, is a key facilitator for managing health. An integrated approach to both mental and physical healthcare was suggested to meet service user and carer needs.

CONCLUSION

The demands of living with SMI present a substantial barrier to self-management for multiple co-existing LTCs. It is important that people with SMI can access person-centred, tailored support for their LTCs that takes into consideration individual circumstances and priorities.

Multimorbidity

Multimorbidity (two or more coexisting conditions in an individual) is a growing global challenge with substantial effects on individuals, carers and society. Multimorbidity occurs a decade earlier in socioeconomically deprived communities and is associated with premature death, poorer function and quality of life and increased health-care utilization. Mechanisms underlying the development of multimorbidity are complex, interrelated and multilevel, but are related to ageing and underlying biological mechanisms and broader determinants of health such as socioeconomic deprivation. Little is known about prevention of multimorbidity, but focusing on psychosocial and behavioural factors, particularly population level interventions and structural changes, is likely to be beneficial. Most clinical practice guidelines and health-care training and delivery focus on single diseases, leading to care that is sometimes inadequate and potentially harmful. Multimorbidity requires person-centred care, prioritizing what matters most to the individual and the individual's carers, ensuring care that is effectively coordinated and minimally disruptive, and aligns with the patient's values. Interventions are likely to be complex and multifaceted. Although an increasing number of studies have examined multimorbidity interventions, there is still limited evidence to support any approach. Greater investment in multimorbidity research and training along with reconfiguration of health care supporting the management of multimorbidity is urgently needed.

Advancing multimorbidity management in primary care: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity, defined as the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions in the same individual, is becoming a crucial health issue in primary care. Patients with multimorbidity utilize health care at a higher rate and have higher mortality rates and poorer quality of life compared to patients with single diseases.

AIMS

To explore evidence on how to advance multimorbidity management, with a focus on primary care. Primary care is where a large number of patients with multimorbidity are managed and is considered to be a gatekeeper in many health systems.

METHODS

A narrative review was conducted using four major electronic databases consisting of PubMed, Cochrane, World Health Organization database, and Google scholar. In the first round of reviews, priority was given to review papers summarizing the current issues and challenges in the management of multimorbidity. Thematic analysis using an inductive approach was used to build a framework on how to advance management. The second round of review focused on original articles providing evidence within the primary care context.

RESULTS

The review found that advancing multimorbidity management in primary care requires a health system approach and a patient-centered approach. The health systems approach includes three major areas: (i) improves access to care, (ii) promotes generalism, and (iii) provides a decision support system. For the patient-centered approach, four key aspects are essential for multimorbidity management: (i) promoting doctor-patient relationship, (ii) prioritizing health problems and sharing decision-making, (iii) supporting self-management, and (iv) integrating care.Advancement of multimorbidity management in primary care requires integrating concepts of multimorbidity management guidelines with concepts of patient-centered and chronic care models. This simple integration provides an overarching framework for advancing the health care system, connecting the processes of individualized care plans, and integrating care with other providers, family members, and the community.

Organisational models in primary health care to manage chronic conditions: A scoping review

Chronic diseases are increasing incessantly, and more efforts are needed in order to develop effective organisational models in primary health care, which may address the challenges posed by the consequent multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to assess and map methods, interventions and outcomes investigated over the last decade regarding the effectiveness of chronic care organisational models in primary care settings. We conducted a scoping review including systematic reviews, clinical trials, and observational studies, published from 2010 to 2020, that evaluated the effectiveness of organisational models for chronic conditions in primary care settings, including home care, community, and general practice. We included 67 international studies out of the 6,540 retrieved studies. The prevalent study design was the observational design (25 studies, 37.3%), and 62 studies (92.5%) were conducted on the adult population. Four main models emerged, called complex integrated care models. These included models grounded on the Chronic Care Model framework and similar, case or care management, and models centred on involvement of pharmacists or community health workers. Across the organisational models, self-management support and multidisciplinary teams were the most common components. Clinical outcomes have been investigated the most, while caregiver outcomes have been detected in the minority of cases. Almost one-third of the included studies reported only significant effects in the outcomes. No sufficient data were available to determine the most effective models of care. However, more complex models seem to lead to better outcomes. In conclusion, in the development of more comprehensive organisational models to manage chronic conditions in primary health care, more efforts are needed on the paediatric population, on the inclusion of caregiver outcomes in the effectiveness evaluation of organisational models and on the involvement of social community resources. As regarding the studies investigating organisational models, more detailed descriptions should be provided with regard to interventions, and the training, roles and responsibilities of health and lay figures in delivering care.

Assessing the feasibility, acceptability and accessibility of a peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of people who experience homelessness with problem substance use: the SHARPS study

BACKGROUND

For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that the development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing.

METHODS

The study used mixed methods to assess the feasibility, acceptability and accessibility of a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning, for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use. Four Peer Navigators were employed to support individuals (n = 68 total, intervention participants). They were based in outreach services and hostels in Scotland and England. Qualitative interviews were conducted with intervention participants, Peer Navigators and staff in services, and observations were conducted in all settings. Quantitative outcomes relating to participants' substance use, physical and mental health, and quality of the Peer Navigator relationship, were measured via a 'holistic health check' with six questionnaires completed at two time-points.

RESULTS

The intervention was found to be acceptable to, and feasible and accessible for, participants, Peer Navigators, and service staff. Participants reported improvements to service engagement, and feeling more equipped to access services independently. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling trusting, authentic, and meaningful relationships to be developed. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the 'fit' of the intervention within some settings. Among participants there were reductions in drug use and risky injecting practices. There were increases in the number of participants receiving opioid substitution therapy. Overall, the intervention was positively received, with collective recognition that the intervention was unique and highly valuable. While most of the measures chosen for the holistic health check were found to be suitable for this population, they should be streamlined to avoid duplication and participant burden.

CONCLUSIONS

The study established that a peer-delivered, relational harm reduction intervention is acceptable to, and feasible and accessible for, people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use. While the study was not outcomes-focused, participants did experience a range of positive outcomes. A full randomised controlled trial is now required to assess intervention effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study registered with ISRCTN: 15900054.

A peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of homeless people with problem substance use: the SHARPS feasibility mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-delivered intervention, through 'Peer Navigators', to support people who are homeless with problem substance use to address a range of health and social issues.

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were to design and implement a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, and to conduct a concurrent process evaluation to inform a future randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods feasibility study with concurrent process evaluation was conducted, involving qualitative interviews [staff interviews (one time point), n = 12; Peer Navigator interviews (three or four time points), n = 15; intervention participant interviews: first time point, n = 24, and second time point, n = 10], observations and quantitative outcome measures.

SETTING

The intervention was delivered in three outreach services for people who are homeless in Scotland, and three Salvation Army hostels in England; there were two standard care settings: an outreach service in Scotland and a hostel in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use (n = 68) (intervention).

INTERVENTION

This was a peer-delivered, relational intervention drawing on principles of psychologically informed environments, with Peer Navigators providing practical and emotional support.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes relating to participants' substance use, participants' physical and mental health needs, and the quality of Peer Navigator relationships were measured via a 'holistic health check', with six questionnaires completed at two time points: a specially created sociodemographic, health and housing status questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items plus the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; the Maudsley Addiction Profile; the Substance Use Recovery Evaluator; the RAND Corporation Short Form survey-36 items; and the Consultation and Relational Empathy Measure.

RESULTS

The Supporting Harm Reduction through Peer Support (SHARPS) study was found to be acceptable to, and feasible for, intervention participants, staff and Peer Navigators. Among participants, there was reduced drug use and an increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid substitution therapy. There were reductions in risky injecting practice and risky sexual behaviour. Participants reported improvements to service engagement and felt more equipped to access services on their own. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling the development of trusting, authentic and meaningful relationships. The relationship with the Peer Navigator was measured as excellent at baseline and follow-up. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the 'fit' of the intervention within some settings and will inform future studies.

LIMITATIONS

Some participants did not complete the outcome measures, or did not complete both sets, meaning that we do not have baseline and/or follow-up data for all. The standard care data sample sizes make comparison between settings limited.

CONCLUSIONS

A randomised controlled trial is recommended to assess the effectiveness of the Peer Navigator intervention.

FUTURE WORK

A definitive cluster randomised controlled trial should particularly consider setting selection, outcomes and quantitative data collection instruments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15900054.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Dementia care and the role of guideline adherence in primary care: cross-sectional findings from the DemTab study

Background

General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the care of people with dementia (PwD). However, the role of the German Dementia Guideline in primary care remains unclear. The main objective of the present study was to examine the role of guideline-based dementia care in general practices.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis of data obtained from the DemTab study was conducted. Descriptive analyses of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics for GPs (N = 28) and PwD (N = 91) were conducted. Adherence to the German Dementia Guideline of GPs was measured at the level of PwD. Linear Mixed Models were used to analyze the associations between adherence to the German Dementia Guideline and GP factors at individual (age, years of experience as a GP, frequency of utilization of guideline, perceived usefulness of guideline) and structural (type of practice, total number of patients seen by a participating GP, and total number of PwD seen by a participating GP) levels as well as between adherence to the German Dementia Guideline and PwD’s quality of life.

Results

Self-reported overall adherence of GPs was on average 71% (SD = 19.4, range: 25–100). Adherence to specific recommendations varied widely (from 19.2 to 95.3%) and the majority of GPs (79.1%) reported the guideline as only partially or somewhat helpful. Further, we found lower adherence to be significantly associated with higher numbers of patients (γ10 = − 5.58, CI = − 10.97, − 0.19, p = .04). No association between adherence to the guideline and PwD’s quality of life was found (γ10 = −.86, CI = − 4.18, 2.47, p = .61).

Conclusion

The present study examined the role of adherence to the German Dementia Guideline recommendations in primary care. Overall, GPs reported high levels of adherence. However, major differences across guideline recommendations were found. Findings highlight the importance of guidelines for the provision of care. Dementia guidelines for GPs need to be better tailored and addressed. Further, structural changes such as more time for PwD may contribute to a sustainable change of dementia care in primary care.

Trial registration

The DemTab trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry (Trial registration number: ISRCTN15854413). Registered 01 April 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02650-8.

Exploring the utility of self-determination theory in complex interventions in multimorbidity: A qualitative analysis of patient experiences of the CARE Plus intervention

OBJECTIVES

CARE Plus is a primary-care-based complex intervention for patients with multimorbidity living in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. This study explores patients' experience of the intervention and whether self-determination theory is useful to understand reported impacts.

METHOD

Thematic analysis of semistructured interviews of 14 participants conducted during a randomised controlled trial of CARE Plus. Improvement in wellbeing in daily lives following CARE Plus was estimated from participants' accounts of their experiences of the intervention.

FINDINGS

Participants valued the CARE Plus consultations irrespective of perceived improvements. Six participants reported changes in wellbeing that improved daily life, three reported slight improvement (not impacting daily life) and five no improvement. Evidence of satisfaction of the three major self-determination theory psychological needs - relatedness, competence and autonomy - was prominent in the accounts of those experiencing improved wellbeing in daily life; this group also spoke in ways congruent with more self-determined motivational regulation. These changes were not evident in those with little or no improvement in wellbeing.

DISCUSSION

This study suggests self-determination theory has utility in understanding the impact of CARE Plus on patients and may be a useful theory to inform development of future interventions to improve outcomes for patients with multimorbidity.

Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community setting: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity, defined as the co-existence of two or more chronic conditions, presents significant challenges to patients, healthcare providers and health systems. Despite this, there is ongoing uncertainty about the most effective ways to manage patients with multimorbidity. This review updated and narrowed the focus of a previous Cochrane review and aimed to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve outcomes in people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings, compared to usual care.

METHODS

We searched eight databases and two trials registers up to 9 September 2019. Two review authors independently screened potentially eligible titles and selected studies, extracted data, evaluated study quality and judged the certainty of the evidence (GRADE). Interventions were grouped by their predominant focus into care-coordination/self-management support, self-management support and medicines management. Main outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental health. Meta-analyses were conducted, where possible, but the synthesis was predominantly narrative.

RESULTS

We included 16 RCTs with 4753 participants, the majority being older adults with at least three conditions. There were eight care-coordination/self-management support studies, four self-management support studies and four medicines management studies. There was little or no evidence of an effect on primary outcomes of HRQoL (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07, I2 = 39%) and mental health or on secondary outcomes with a small number of studies reporting that care coordination may improve patient experience of care and self-management support may improve patient health behaviours. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was graded as low due to significant variation in study participants and interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There are remaining uncertainties about the effectiveness of interventions for people with multimorbidity, despite the growing number of RCTs conducted in this area. Our findings suggest that future research should consider patient experience of care, optimising medicines management and targeted patient health behaviours such as exercise.

Experiences of healthcare for mothers of children with ongoing illness, living in deprived neighbourhoods health and place

PURPOSE

While the association between socioeconomic deprivation and children's poor health is clear, the complex pathways linking socioeconomic deprivation with access to care and health inequalities are less well understood. This analysis sought to understand the root cause of these inequalities by exploring how mothers living in deprived neighborhoods support their sick children, and their experiences with primary care.

METHODS

Interview transcripts from eight mothers, living in socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods, were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

RESULTS

Participants described their experiences in three distinct themes. Each theme highlights the importance of the mother's agency, voice, and power in supporting their child's health, and the crucial role played by the health system in addressing, maintaining, or reinforcing health inequalities. Participants used several strategies to address these health inequalities, which included fighting against the health system, using past experiences to explain health needs, and support from friends and family.

CONCLUSION

Although the health system is an essential resource to support families, encounters with primary care may fail to address health inequalities and may therefore exacerbate existing health inequalities for families living in deprived neighborhoods, irrespective of health system financing and ability to pay.

Multimorbidity of chronic non-communicable diseases: burden, care provision and outcomes over time among patients attending chronic outpatient medical care in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia-a mixed methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Multimorbidity refers to the presence of two or more chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in a given individual. It is associated with premature mortality, lower quality of life (QoL) and greater use of healthcare resources. The burden of multimorbidity could be huge in the low and middle-income countries (LMICs), including Ethiopia. However, there is limited evidence on the magnitude of multimorbidity, associated risk factors and its effect on QoL and functionality. In addition, the evidence base on the way health systems are organised to manage patients with multimorbidity is sparse. The knowledge gleaned from this study could have a timely and significant impact on the prevention, management and survival of patients with NCD multimorbidity in Ethiopia and in LMICs at large.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study has three phases: (1) a cross-sectional quantitative study to determine the magnitude of NCD multimorbidity and its effect on QoL and functionality, (2) a qualitative study to explore organisation of care for patients with multimorbidity, and (3) a longitudinal quantitative study to investigate disease progression and patient outcomes over time. A total of 1440 patients (≥40 years) on chronic care follow-up will be enrolled from different facilities for the quantitative studies. The quantitative data will be collected from multiple sources using the KoBo Toolbox software and analysed by STATA V.16. Multiple case study designs will be employed to collect the qualitative data. The qualitative data will be coded and analysed by Open Code software thematically.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical clearance has been obtained from the College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bahir Dar University (protocol number 003/2021). Subjects who provide written consent will be recruited in the study. Confidentiality of data will be strictly maintained. Findings will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.

The SOFIA pilot trial: a cluster-randomized trial of coordinated, co-produced care to reduce mortality and improve quality of life in people with severe mental illness in the general practice setting

Background

People with severe mental illness (SMI) have an increased risk of premature mortality, predominantly due to somatic health conditions. Evidence indicates that primary and tertiary prevention and improved treatment of somatic conditions in patients with SMI could reduce this excess mortality. This paper reports a protocol designed to evaluate the feasibility of a coordinated co-produced care program (SOFIA model, a Danish acronym for Severe Mental Illness and Physical Health in General Practice) in the general practice setting to reduce mortality and improve quality of life in patients with severe mental illness.

Methods

The SOFIA pilot trial is designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial targeting general practices in two regions in Denmark. We aim to include 12 practices, each of which is instructed to recruit up to 15 community-dwelling patients aged 18 and older with SMI. Practices will be randomized by a computer in a ratio of 2:1 to deliver a coordinated care program or usual care during a 6-month study period. A randomized algorithm is used to perform randomization. The coordinated care program includes educational training of general practitioners and their clinical staff educational training of general practitioners and their clinical staff, which covers clinical and diagnostic management and focus on patient-centered care of this patient group, after which general practitioners will provide a prolonged consultation focusing on individual needs and preferences of the patient with SMI and a follow-up plan if indicated. The outcomes will be parameters of the feasibility of the intervention and trial methods and will be assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. Assessments of the outcome parameters will be administered at baseline, throughout, and at end of the study period.

Discussion

If necessary the intervention will be revised based on results from this study. If delivery of the intervention, either in its current form or after revision, is considered feasible, a future, definitive trial to determine the effectiveness of the intervention in reducing mortality and improving quality of life in patients with SMI can take place. Successful implementation of the intervention would imply preliminary promise for addressing health inequities in patients with SMI.

Trial registration

The trial was registered in Clinical Trials as of November 5, 2020, with registration number NCT04618250.

Protocol version: January 22, 2021; original version

Zusammenhänge zwischen Empathie, therapeutischer Haltung und Wirkeffizienz

Empathisch sein heißt, fühlen und verstehen können, was andere fühlen. Vermuten zu können, was das Gegenüber fühlt, denkt und wünscht, beruht auf der Fähigkeit, eigene Gefühle und Gedanken als getrennt von jenen anderer wahrnehmen und regulieren zu können. Definierte Therapieerfolge mit adäquatem Aufwand erreichen zu können, verlangt ein Fokussieren auf Wesentliches und Wichtiges. Die Empathie ist im Bereich der Psychotherapie jener Faktor, für den für sich genommen die höchste Effektstärke nachgewiesen werden konnte. Empathietraining ermöglicht eine bessere soziale Performance. Im Falle von Defiziten in sozialer Kompetenz ist störungsunabhängig ein besonders hoher Leidensdruck nachweisbar.

Patient-centred innovation for multimorbidity care: a mixed-methods, randomised trial and qualitative study of the patients' experience

Background

Patient-centred interventions to help patients with multimorbidity have had mixed results.

Aim

To assess the effectiveness of a provider-created, patient-centred, multi-provider case conference with follow-up, and understand under what circumstances it worked, and did not work.

Design and setting

Mixed-methods design with a pragmatic randomised trial and qualitative study, involving nine urban primary care sites in Ontario, Canada.

Method

Patients aged 18–80 years with ≥3 chronic conditions were referred to the Telemedicine IMPACT Plus intervention; a nurse and patient planned a multi-provider case conference during which a care plan could be created. The patients were randomised into an intervention or control group. Two subgroup analyses and a fidelity assessment were conducted, with the primary outcomes at 4 months being self-management and self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were mental and physical health status, quality of life, and health behaviours. A thematic analysis explored the patients’ experiences of the intervention.

Results

A total of 86 patients in the intervention group and 77 in the control group showed no differences, except that the intervention improved mental health status in the subgroup with an annual income of ≥C$50 000 (β-coefficient 11.003, P = 0.006). More providers and follow-up hours were associated with poorer outcomes. Five themes were identified in the qualitative study: valuing the team, patients feeling supported, receiving a follow-up plan, being offered new and helpful additions to their treatment regimen, and experiencing positive outcomes.

Conclusion

Overall, the intervention showed improvements only for patients who had an annual income of ≥C$50 000, implying a need to address the costs of intervention components not covered by existing health policies. Findings suggest a need to optimise team composition by revising the number and type of providers according to patient preferences and to enhance the hours of nurse follow-up to better support the patient in carrying out the case conference’s recommendations.

"Standing on common ground" - a qualitative study of self-management support for patients with multimorbidity in primary health care

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity, the co-existence of two or more chronic conditions in an individual, is present in most patients over 65 years. Primary health care (PHC) is uniquely positioned to provide the holistic and continual care recommended for this group of patients, including support for self-management. The aim of this study was to explore professionals', patients', and family caregivers' perspectives on how PHC professionals should support self-management in patients with multimorbidity. This study also includes experiences of using telemedicine to support self-management.

METHODS

A mixed qualitative method was used to explore regular self-management support and telemedicine as a tool to support self-management. A total of 42 participants (20 physicians, 3 registered nurses, 12 patients, and 7 family caregivers) were interviewed using focus group interviews (PHC professionals), pair interviews (patients and family caregivers), and individual interviews (registered nurses, patients, and family caregivers). The study was performed in urban areas in central Sweden and rural areas in southern Sweden between April 2018 and October 2019. Data were analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

The main theme that emerged was "Standing on common ground enables individualized support." To achieve such support, professionals needed to understand their own views on who bears the primary responsibility for patients' self-management, as well as patients' self-management abilities, needs, and perspectives. Personal continuity and trustful relationships facilitated this understanding. The findings also indicated that professionals should be accessible for patients with multimorbidity, function as knowledge translators (help patients understand their symptoms and how the symptoms correlated with diseases), and coordinate between levels of care. Telemedicine supported continual monitoring and facilitated patient access to PHC professionals.

CONCLUSION

Through personal continuity and patient-centered consultations, professionals could collaborate with patients to individualize self-management support. For some patients, this means that PHC professionals are in control and monitor symptoms. For others, PHC professionals play a less controlling role, empowering patients' self-management. Development and improvement of eHealth tools for patients with multimorbidity should focus on improving the ability to set mutual goals, strengthening patients' inner motivation, and including multiple caregivers to enhance information-sharing and care coordination.

A complex intervention for multimorbidity in primary care: A feasibility study

Aim

To assess the feasibility of a patient-centered complex intervention for multimorbidity (CIM) based on general practice in collaboration with community health-care centers and outpatient clinics.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, diagnoses of two or more of three chronic conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic heart conditions), and a hospital contact during the previous year. The CIM included extended consultations and nurse care manager support in general practice and intensified cross-sectorial collaboration. Elements included a structured care plan based on patients' care goals, coordination of services, and, if appropriate, shifting outpatient clinic visits to general practice, medication review, referral to rehabilitation, and home care. The acceptability dimension of feasibility was assessed with validated questionnaires, observations, and focus groups.

Results

Forty-eight patients were included (mean age 72.2 (standard deviation (SD) 9.5, range 52-89); 23 (48%) were men. Thirty-seven patients had two diseases; most commonly COPD and cardiovascular disease (46%), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular disease (23%), and COPD and diabetes (15%). Eleven (23%) patients had all three conditions. Focus group interviews with patients with multimorbidity identified three main themes: (1) lack of care coordination existed across health-care sectors before the CIM, (2) extended consultations provided better care coordination, and (3) patients want to be involved in planning their treatment and care. In focus groups, health-care professionals discussed two main themes: (1) patient-centered care and (2) culture and organizational change. Completion rates for questionnaires were 98% (47/48).

Conclusions

Patients and health-care professionals found the CIM acceptable.