Managing patients with multimorbidity in primary care

The epidemiology of polypharmacy in older adults: register-based prospective cohort study

Objective

Polypharmacy is the concomitant use of several drugs by a single person, and it increases the risk of adverse drug-related events in older adults. Little is known about the epidemiology of polypharmacy at the population level. We aimed to measure the prevalence and incidence of polypharmacy and to investigate the associated factors.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted using register data with national coverage in Sweden. A total of 1,742,336 individuals aged ≥65 years at baseline (November 1, 2010) were included and followed until death or the end of the study (December 20, 2013).

Results

On average, individuals were exposed to 4.6 (SD =4.0) drugs at baseline. The prevalence of polypharmacy (5+ drugs) was 44.0%, and the prevalence of excessive polypharmacy (10+ drugs) was 11.7%. The incidence rate of polypharmacy among individuals without polypharmacy at baseline was 19.9 per 100 person-years, ranging from 16.8% in individuals aged 65-74 years to 33.2% in those aged ≥95 years (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] =1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-1.56). The incidence rate of excessive polypharmacy was 8.0 per 100 person-years. Older adults using multi-dose dispensing were at significantly higher risk of developing incident polypharmacy compared with those receiving ordinary prescriptions (HR =1.51, 95% CI 1.47-1.55). When adjusting for confounders, living in nursing home was found to be associated with lower risks of incident polypharmacy and incident excessive polypharmacy (HR =0.79 and HR =0.86, p<0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

The prevalence and incidence of polypharmacy are high among older adults in Sweden. Interventions aimed at reducing the prevalence of polypharmacy should also target potential incident polypharmacy users as they are the ones who fuel future polypharmacy.

A Core Outcome Set for Multimorbidity Research (COSmm)

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop a consensus-based set of core outcomes specifically for studies in multimorbidity.

METHODS

We undertook a consensus study following the COS-STAR (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting) guidelines for the design and reporting of core outcome sets. A Delphi panel of experts completed a web-based survey with 2 rounds. Panelists were presented with a range of outcomes that had been identified in previous workshops and a related systematic review. They indicated their level of agreement on whether each outcome should be included in the core set using a 5-point Likert scale, and outcomes reaching a prespecified consensus level were included.

RESULTS

Of 30 individuals invited to be panelists, 26 from 13 countries agreed. All 26 completed both rounds of the survey. The Delphi panel reached consensus on 17 outcomes for inclusion in a core outcome set for multimorbidity (COSmm). The highest-ranked outcomes were health-related quality of life, mental health outcomes, and mortality. Other outcomes were grouped into overarching themes of patient-reported impacts and behaviors (treatment burden, self-rated health, self-management behavior, self-efficacy, adherence); physical activity and function (activities of daily living, physical function, physical activity); consultation related (communication, shared decision making, prioritization); and health systems (health care use, costs, quality of health care).

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus study involved a wide range of international experts who identified a large number of outcomes for multimorbidity intervention studies. Our results suggest that quality of life, mental health outcomes, and mortality should be regarded as essential core outcomes. Researchers should, however, also consider the full range of outcomes when designing studies to capture important domains in multimorbidity depending on individual study aims and interventions.

Effectiveness of a complex intervention on Prioritising Multimedication in Multimorbidity (PRIMUM) in primary care: results of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Investigate the effectiveness of a complex intervention aimed at improving the appropriateness of medication in older patients with multimorbidity in general practice.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with general practice as unit of randomisation.

SETTING

72 general practices in Hesse, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

505 randomly sampled, cognitively intact patients (≥60 years, ≥3 chronic conditions under pharmacological treatment, ≥5 long-term drug prescriptions with systemic effects); 465 patients and 71 practices completed the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention group (IG): The healthcare assistant conducted a checklist-based interview with patients on medication-related problems and reconciled their medications. Assisted by a computerised decision support system, the general practitioner optimised medication, discussed it with patients and adjusted it accordingly. The control group (CG) continued with usual care.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was a modified Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI, excluding item 10 on cost-effectiveness), assessed in blinded medication reviews and calculated as the difference between baseline and after 6 months; secondary outcomes after 6 and 9 months' follow-up: quality of life, functioning, medication adherence, and so on.

RESULTS

At baseline, a high proportion of patients had appropriate to mildly inappropriate prescriptions (MAI 0-5 points: n=350 patients). Randomisation revealed balanced groups (IG: 36 practices/252 patients; CG: 36/253). Intervention had no significant effect on primary outcome: mean MAI sum scores decreased by 0.3 points in IG and 0.8 points in CG, resulting in a non-significant adjusted mean difference of 0.7 (95% CI -0.2 to 1.6) points in favour of CG. Secondary outcomes showed non-significant changes (quality of life slightly improved in IG but continued to decline in CG) or remained stable (functioning, medication adherence).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention had no significant effects. Many patients already received appropriate prescriptions and enjoyed good quality of life and functional status. We can therefore conclude that in our study, there was not enough scope for improvement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN99526053. NCT01171339; Results.

Cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence and predictors of statin utilisation in Ireland with a focus on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence of statin utilisation by people aged over 50 years in Ireland and the factors associated with the likelihood of using a statin, focusing particularly on those using statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional analysis of cardiovascular risk and sociodemographic factors associated with statin utilisation from wave 1 of The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing. A hierarchy of indications for statin utilisation, consisting of eight mutually exclusive levels of CVD-related diagnoses, was created. Participants were assigned one level of indication. The prevalence of statin utilisation was calculated. The likelihood that an individual was using a statin was estimated using a multivariable logistic regression model, controlling for cardiovascular risk and sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

In this nationally representative sample (n=5618) of community-dwelling participants aged 50 years and over, 1715 (30.5%) were taking statins. Of these, 65.0% (57.3% of men and 72.7% of women) were doing so for the primary prevention of CVD. Thus, almost two-thirds of those taking statins did so for primary prevention and there was a notable difference between women and men in this regard. We also found that statin utilisation was highest among those with a prior history of CVD and was significantly associated with age (compared with the base category 50-64 years; 65-74 years OR 1.38 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.65); 75+ OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.69)), living with a spouse or partner (compared with the base category living alone; OR 1.35 (95% CI 1.10 to 1.65)), polypharmacy (OR 1.74 (95% CI 1.39 to 2.19)) and frequency of general practitioner visits (compared with the base category 0 visits per year; 1-2 visits OR 2.46 (95% CI 1.80 to 3.35); 3-4 visits OR 3.24 (95% CI 2.34 to 4.47); 5-6 visits OR 2.98 (95% CI 2.08 to 4.26); 7+ visits OR 2.51 (95% CI 1.73 to 3.63)), even after controlling for clinical need. There was no association between using statins and gender, education, income, social class, health insurance status, location or Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) risk in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Statin utilisation among those with no history of CVD accounted for almost two-thirds of all statin use, in part reflecting the high proportion of the population with no history of CVD, although utilisation rates were highest among those with a history of CVD.

Multimorbidity and out-of-pocket expenditure on medicines: a systematic review

Background

Multimorbidity, the presence of two or more non-communicable diseases (NCD), is a costly and complex challenge for health systems globally. Patients with NCDs incur high levels of out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE), often on medicines, but the literature on the association between OOPE on medicines and multimorbidity has not been examined systematically.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted via searching medical and economics databases including Ovid Medline, EMBASE, EconLit, Cochrane Library and the WHO Global Health Library from year 2000 to 2016. Study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. PROSPERO: CRD42016053538.

Findings

14 articles met inclusion criteria. Findings indicated that multimorbidity was associated with higher OOPE on medicines. When number of NCDs increased from 0 to 1, 2 and ≥3, annual OOPE on medicines increased by an average of 2.7 times, 5.2 times and 10.1 times, respectively. When number of NCDs increased from 0 to 1, 2, ≥2 and ≥3, individuals spent a median of 0.36% (IQR 0.15%–0.51%), 1.15% (IQR 0.62%–1.64%), 1.41% (IQR 0.86%–2.15%), 2.42% (IQR 2.05%–2.64%) and 2.63% (IQR 1.56%–4.13%) of mean annual household net adjusted disposable income per capita, respectively, on annual OOPE on medicines. More multimorbidities were associated with higher OOPE on medicines as a proportion of total healthcare expenditures by patients. Some evidence suggested that the elderly and low-income groups were most vulnerable to higher OOPE on medicines. With the same number of NCDs, certain combinations of NCDs yielded higher medicine OOPE. Non-adherence to medicines was a coping strategy for OOPE on medicines.

Conclusion

Multimorbidity of NCDs is increasingly costly to healthcare systems and OOPE on medicines can severely compromise financial protection and universal health coverage. It is crucial to recognise the need for better equity and financial protection, and policymakers should consider health system financial options, cost sharing policies and service patterns for those with NCD multimorbidities.

Improving adherence to multiple medications in older people in primary care: Selecting intervention components to address patient-reported barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence is vital to ensuring optimal patient outcomes, particularly amongst multimorbid older people prescribed multiple medications. Interventions targeting adherence often lack a theoretical underpinning and this may impact on effectiveness. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) of behaviour can aid intervention development by systematically identifying key determinants of medication adherence.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to (i) identify determinants (barriers, facilitators) of adherence to multiple medications from older people's perspectives; (ii) identify key domains to target for behaviour change; and (iii) map key domains to intervention components [behaviour change techniques (BCTs)] that could be delivered in an intervention by community pharmacists.

METHOD

Focus groups were conducted with older people (>65 years) receiving ≥4 medications. Questions explored the 12 domains of the TDF (eg "Knowledge," "Emotion"). Data were analysed using the framework method and content analysis. Identification of key domains and mapping to intervention components (BCTs) followed established methods.

RESULTS

Seven focus groups were convened (50 participants). A wide range of determinants were identified as barriers (eg forgetfulness, prioritization of medications) and facilitators (eg social support, personalized routines) of adherence to multiple medications. Eight domains were identified as key targets for behaviour change (eg "Social influences," "Memory, attention and decision processes," "Motivation and goals") and mapped to 11 intervention components (BCTs) to include in an intervention [eg "Social support or encouragement (general)," "Self-monitoring of the behaviour," "Goal-setting (behaviour)"].

CONCLUSION

This study used a theoretical underpinning to identify potential intervention components (BCTs). Future work will incorporate the selected BCTs into an intervention that will undergo feasibility testing in community pharmacies.

Development and validation of an instrument for measuring the burden of medicine on functioning and well-being: the Medication-Related Burden Quality of Life (MRB-QoL) tool

OBJECTIVE

Medication-related burden (MRB) is a negative experience with medicine, which may impact on psychological, social, physical and financial well-being of an individual. This study describes the development and initial validation of an instrument specifically designed to measure MRB on functioning and well-being-the Medication-Related Burden Quality of Life (MRB-QoL) tool.

METHODS

An initial pool of 76-items for MRB-QoL was generated. The link to MRB-QoL survey was sent to a sample of consumers living with at least one chronic medical condition and taking ≥3 prescription medicines on a regular basis. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to determine the underlining factor structure. Internal consistency (Cronbach's α) and construct validity were examined. The latter was examined through correlation with Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI), Drug Burden Index (DBI) and Charlson's Comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS

367 consumers completed the survey (51.2% male). EFA resulted in a 31-item, five-factor solution explaining 72% of the total variance. The five subscales were labelled as 'Routine and Regimen Complexity' (11 items), 'Psychological Burden' (six items), 'Functional and Role Limitation' (seven items), 'Therapeutic Relationship' (three items) and 'Social Burden' (four items). All subscales showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.87 to 0.95). Discriminant validity of MRB-QoL was demonstrated via its correlations with MRCI (Spearman's r -0.16 to 0.08), DBI (r 0.12 to 0.28) and CCI (r -0.23 to -0.15). Correlation between DBI and 'Functional and Role Limitation' subscale (r 0.36) indicated some evidence of convergent validity. Patients with polypharmacy, multiple morbidity and DBI >0 had higher median scores of MRB-QoL providing evidence for known group validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The MRB-QoL V.1 has good construct validity and internal consistency. The MRB-QoL may be a useful humanistic measure for evaluating the impact of pharmaceutical care interventions on patients' quality of life. Future research is warranted to further examine additional psychometric properties of MRB-QoL V.1 and its utility in patient care.

Mapping of global scientific research in comorbidity and multimorbidity: A cross-sectional analysis

BACKGROUND

The management of comorbidity and multimorbidity poses major challenges to health services around the world. Analysis of scientific research in comorbidity and multimorbidity is limited in the biomedical literature. This study aimed to map global scientific research in comorbidity and multimorbidity to understand the maturity and growth of the area during the past decades.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This was a cross-sectional analysis of the Web of Science. Searches were run from inception until November 8, 2016. We included research articles or reviews with no restrictions by language or publication date. Data abstraction was done by one researcher. A process of standardization was conducted by two researchers to unify different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription, and/or indexing errors. All potential discrepancies were resolved via discussion. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of papers, citations, signatures, most prolific authors, countries, journals and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words were presented. During the period 1970-2016, 85994 papers (64.0% in 2010-2016) were published in 3500 journals. There was wide diversity in the specialty of the journals, with psychiatry (16558 papers; 19.3%), surgery (9570 papers; 11.1%), clinical neurology (9275 papers; 10.8%), and general and internal medicine (7622 papers; 8.9%) the most common. PLOS One (1223 papers; 1.4%), the Journal of Affective Disorders (1154 papers; 1.3%), the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (727 papers; 0.8%), the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (634 papers; 0.7%) and Obesity Surgery (588 papers; 0.7%) published the largest number of papers. 168 countries were involved in the production of papers. The global productivity ranking was headed by the United States (37624 papers), followed by the United Kingdom (7355 papers), Germany (6899 papers) and Canada (5706 papers). Twenty authors who published 100 or more papers were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Harvard Medical School, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, National Taiwan Normal University and China Medical University. The 50 most cited papers ("citation classics" with at least 1000 citations) were published in 20 journals, led by JAMA Psychiatry (11 papers) and JAMA (10 papers). The most cited papers provided contributions focusing on methodological aspects (e.g. Charlson Comorbidity Index, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, APACHE prognostic system), but also important studies on chronic diseases (e.g. epidemiology of mental disorders and its correlates by the U.S. National Comorbidity Survey, Fried's frailty phenotype or the management of obesity).

CONCLUSIONS

Ours is the first analysis of global scientific research in comorbidity and multimorbidity. Scientific production in the field is increasing worldwide with research leadership of Western countries, most notably, the United States.

General practice and patients’ views of the social networks of patients with multimorbidity

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION For patients with multimorbidity to live well, they need the support of not only health professionals but family, friends and organisations. These social networks provide support, potentially enabling the formation of a Community of Clinical Practice approach to multimorbidity care. AIM This study aimed to explore general practice knowledge of the social networks of patients with multimorbidity. METHODS Social network maps were completed by both patients and general practice. The social network maps of 22 patients with multimorbidity were compared with corresponding social network maps completed by general practice staff. RESULTS In 60% (13/22) of the patients, general practice staff held a high or moderate knowledge of individual patients’ social networks. Information on social networks was recalled from staff memory and not systematically recorded in patients’ electronic health records. DISCUSSION Social network information is not routinely collected, recorded or used by general practice to understand the support available to patients with multimorbidity. General practice could take an active role in coordinating social network supporters for certain patient groups with complex multimorbidity. For these groups, there is value in systematically recording and regularly updating their social network information for general practice to use as part of a coordinated Community of Clinical Practice.

Physical activity interventions are delivered consistently across hospitalized older adults but multimorbidity is associated with poorer rehabilitation outcomes: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Older adults live with multimorbidity including frailty and cognitive impairment often requiring hospitalization. While physical activity interventions (PAIs) are a normal rehabilitative treatment, their clinical effect in hospitalized older adults is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To observe PAI dosing characteristics and determine their impact on clinical performance parameters.

DESIGN

A single-site prospective observational cohort study in an older persons' unit.

SUBJECTS

Seventy-five older persons' unit patients ≥65 years.

INTERVENTION

PAI; therapeutic contact between physiotherapy clinician and patient.

MEASUREMENTS

Parameters included changes in activities-of-daily-living (Barthel Index), handgrip strength, balance confidence, and gait velocity, measured between admission and discharge (episode). Dosing characteristics were PAI temporal initiation, frequency, and duration. Frailty/cognition status was dichotomized independently per participant yielding 4 subgroups: frail/nonfrail and cognitively-impaired/cognitively-unimpaired.

RESULTS

Median (interquartile range) PAI initiation occurred after 2 days (1-4), frequency was 0.4 PAIs per day (0.3-0.5), and PAI duration per episode was 3.75 hours (1.8-7.2). All clinical parameters improved significantly across episodes: grip strength median (interquartile range) change, 2.0 kg (0.0-2.3) (P < .01); Barthel Index, 5 (3-8) (P < .01); gait velocity, 0.06 m.∙s^-1 (0.06-0.16) (P < .01); and balance confidence, -3 (-6 to -1) (P < .01). Physical activity intervention dosing remained consistent within subgroups. While several moderate to large associations between amount of PAIs and change in clinical parameters were observed, most were within unimpaired subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

PAI dosing is consistent. However, while clinical changes during hospital episodes are positive, more favourable responses to PAIs occur if patients are nonfrail/cognitively-unimpaired. Therefore, to deliver a personalized rehabilitation approach, adaptation of PAI dose based on patient presentation is desirable.

A three-goal model for patients with multimorbidity: A qualitative approach

Background

To meet the challenge of multimorbidity in decision making, a switch from a disease‐oriented to a goal‐oriented approach could be beneficial for patients and clinicians. More insight about the concept and the implementation of this approach in clinical practice is needed.

Objective

This study aimed to develop conceptual descriptions of goal‐oriented care by examining the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and clinical geriatricians (CGs), and how the concept relates to collaborative communication and shared decision making with elderly patients with multimorbidity.

Method

Qualitative interviews with GPs and CGs were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

Clinicians distinguished disease‐ or symptom‐specific goals, functional goals and a new type of goals, which we labelled as fundamental goals. “Fundamental goals” are goals specifying patient's priorities in life, related to their values and core relationships. These fundamental goals can be considered implicitly or explicitly in decision making or can be ignored. Reasons to explicate goals are the potential mismatch between medical standards and patient preferences and the need to know individual patient values in case of multimorbidity, including the management in acute situations.

Conclusion

Based on the perspectives of clinicians, we expanded the concept of goal‐oriented care by identifying a three‐level goal hierarchy. This model could facilitate collaborative goal‐setting for patients with multiple long‐term conditions in clinical practice. Future research is needed to refine and validate this model and to provide specific guidance for medical training and practice.

Collaborative action for person-centred coordinated care (P3C): an approach to support the development of a comprehensive system-wide solution to fragmented care

Background

Fragmented care results in poor outcomes for individuals with complexity of need. Person-centred coordinated care (P3C) is perceived to be a potential solution, but an absence of accessible evidence and the lack of a scalable ‘blue print’ mean that services are ‘experimenting’ with new models of care with little guidance and support. This paper presents an approach to the implementation of P3C using collaborative action, providing examples of early developments across this programme of work, the core aim of which is to accelerate the spread and adoption of P3C in United Kingdom primary care settings.

Methods

Two centrally funded United Kingdom organisations (South West Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care and South West Academic Health Science Network) are leading this initiative to narrow the gap between research and practice in this urgent area of improvement through a programme of service change, evaluation and research. Multi-stakeholder engagement and co-design are core to the approach. A whole system measurement framework combines outcomes of importance to patients, practitioners and health organisations. Iterative and multi-level feedback helps to shape service change while collecting practice-based data to generate implementation knowledge for the delivery of P3C. The role of the research team is proving vital to support informed change and challenge organisational practice. The bidirectional flow of knowledge and evidence relies on the transitional positioning of researchers and research organisations.

Results

Extensive engagement and embedded researchers have led to strong collaborations across the region. Practice is beginning to show signs of change and data flow and exchange is taking place. However, working in this way is not without its challenges; progress has been slow in the development of a linked data set to allow us to assess impact innovations from a cost perspective. Trust is vital, takes time to establish and is dependent on the exchange of services and interactions. If collaborative action can foster P3C it will require sustained commitment from both research and practice. This approach is a radical departure from how policy, research and practice traditionally work, but one that we argue is now necessary to deal with the most complex health and social problems.

The Foundations Framework for Developing and Reporting New Models of Care for Multimorbidity

PURPOSE

Multimorbidity challenges health systems globally. New models of care are urgently needed to better manage patients with multimorbidity; however, there is no agreed framework for designing and reporting models of care for multimorbidity and their evaluation.

METHODS

Based on findings from a literature search to identify models of care for multimorbidity, we developed a framework to describe these models. We illustrate the application of the framework by identifying the focus and gaps in current models of care, and by describing the evolution of models over time.

RESULTS

Our framework describes each model in terms of its theoretical basis and target population (the foundations of the model) and of the elements of care implemented to deliver the model. We categorized elements of care into 3 types: (1) clinical focus, (2) organization of care, (3) support for model delivery. Application of the framework identified a limited use of theory in model design and a strong focus on some patient groups (elderly, high users) more than others (younger patients, deprived populations). We found changes in elements with time, with a decrease in models implementing home care and an increase in models offering extended appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

By encouragin greater clarity about the underpinning theory and target population, and by categorizing the wide range of potentially important elements of an intervention to improve care for patients with multimorbidity, the framework may be useful in designing and reporting models of care and help advance the currently limited evidence base.

Prevalence of multimorbidity in Germany: impact of age and educational level in a cross-sectional study on 19,294 adults

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity is one of the most important and challenging aspects in public health. Multimorbid people are associated with more hospital admissions, a large number of drug prescriptions and higher risks of mortality. As there is evidence that multimorbidity varies with age and socioeconomic disparity, the main objective aimed at determining age-specific prevalence rates as well as exploring educational differences relating to multimorbidity in Germany.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis is based on the national telephone health interview survey "German Health Update" (GEDA2012) conducted between March 2012 and March 2013 with nearly 20,000 adults. GEDA2012 provides information on 17 self-reported health conditions along with sociodemographic characteristics. Multimorbidity was defined as the occurrence of two or more chronic conditions in one individual at the same time. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to examine multimorbidity according to age and education, which was defined by the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997).

RESULTS

Overall, 39.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 38.7%-40.6%) of the 19,294 participants were multimorbid and the proportion of adults with multimorbidity increased substantially with age: nearly half (49.2%, 95% CI 46.9%-51.5%) of the adults aged 50-59 years had already two or more chronic health conditions. Prevalence rates of multimorbidity differed considerably between the levels of education. Low-level educated adults aged 40-49 years were more likely to be multimorbid with a prevalence rate of 47.4% (95% CI 44.2%-50.5%) matching those of highly educated men and women aged about ten years older.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that both, age and education are associated with a higher risk of being multimorbid in Germany. Hence, special emphasis in the development of new approaches in national public health and prevention programs on multimorbidity should be given to low-level educated people aged <65 years.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing and its association with health outcomes in middle-aged people: a prospective cohort study in Ireland

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in a cohort of community-dwelling middle-aged people and assess the relationship between PIP and emergency department (ED) visits, general practitioner (GP) visits and quality of life (QoL).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA), a nationally representative cohort study of ageing.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 45-64 years recruited to TILDA who were eligible for the means-tested General Medical Services scheme and followed up after 2 years.

EXPOSURE

PIP was determined in the 12 months preceding baseline and follow-up TILDA data collection by applying the PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People's Treatments (PROMPT) criteria to participants' medication dispensing data.

OUTCOME MEASURES

At follow-up, the reported rates of ED and GP visits over 12 months (primary outcome) and the CASP-R12 (Control Autonomy Self-realisation Pleasure) measure of QoL (secondary outcome).

ANALYSIS

Multivariate negative binomial (rates) and linear regression (CASP-R12) models controlling for potential confounders.

RESULTS

At 2-year follow-up (n=808), PIP was detected in 42.9% by the PROMPT criteria. An ED visit was reported by 18.7% and 94.4% visited a GP (median 4 visits, IQR 2-6). Exposure to ≥2 PROMPT criteria was associated with higher rates of healthcare utilisation and lower QoL in unadjusted regression. However, in multivariate analysis, the associations between PIP and rates of ED visits (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.58), and GP visits (IRR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.28), and CASP-R12 score (adjusted β coefficient 0.35, 95% CI -0.93 to 1.64) were not statistically significant. Numbers of medicines and comorbidities were associated with higher healthcare utilisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Although PIP was prevalent in this study population, there was no evidence of a relationship with ED and GP visits and QoL. Further research should evaluate whether the PROMPT criteria are related to these and other adverse outcomes in the general middle-aged population.

The potential clinical benefits of medicines optimisation through comprehensive geriatric assessment, carried out by secondary care geriatricians, in a general practice care setting in North Staffordshire, UK: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility and potential clinical benefits of medicines optimisation through comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) of frail patients with multiple conditions, by secondary care geriatricians in a general practice care setting.

METHODS

Seven general practitioner (GP) practices in one region of Stoke-on-Trent volunteered to take part. GPs selected patients (n=186) who were local permanent residents, at least 65 years old and on eight or more medications per day. Patients were sent a written invitation outlining the assessment purpose/format. Prior to patient assessments, primary care staff prepared packs detailing patient medical history, recent consultations, current medications, recent laboratory tests and social circumstances. One hour was allocated for the CGA per patient, with one of three geriatricians, to enable sufficient time to explore all relevant aspects. Assessment comprised a full history, thorough clinical examination, assessment of balance and mobility, mental function and information on home environment and support arrangements. After consultation, geriatricians made recommendations regarding further assessments, investigations or medication changes. Geriatricians entered their main findings and recommendations onto a standard template.

RESULTS

In total, 687 recommendations for changes in patients' medication regimens were made for 169 (91%) patients. In 17 (9%) patients there was no recommendation to alter medications. This resulted in an average of four alterations in medication per patient. The predominant changes to medications were to stop medications (34%) or to reduce the dosage (24%). Starting a new medication represented 18% of all the medication changes. Adherence rates to geriatrician medication recommendations were 72% at 6 months and 65% at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

CGA of older patients with complex needs, by geriatricians in a general practice care setting, is feasible. Our study demonstrated constructive collaboration between GPs and geriatricians from secondary care, suggesting further studies and clinical trials are feasible and have scope to yield beneficial outcomes.

Nursing care needs and services utilised by home-dwelling elderly with complex health problems: observational study

Background

In Norway, as in many Western countries, a shift from institutional care to home care is taking place. Our knowledge is limited regarding which needs for nursing interventions patients being cared for in their home have, and how they are met. We aimed at assessing aspects of health and function in a representative sample of the most vulnerable home-dwelling elderly, to identify their needs for nursing interventions and how these needs were met.

Methods

In this observational study we included patients aged 75+ living in their own homes in Oslo, who received daily home care, had three or more chronic diagnoses, received daily medication, and had been hospitalized during the last year. Focused attention and cognitive processing speed were assessed with the Trail Making Test A (TMT-A), handgrip strength was used as a measure of sarcopenia, mobility was assessed with the “Timed Up-and-Go” test, and independence in primary activities of daily living by the Barthel Index. Diagnoses and medication were collected from electronic medical records. For each diagnosis, medication and functional impairment, a consensus group defined which nursing service that the particular condition necessitated. We then assessed whether these needs were fulfilled for each participant.

Results

Of 150 eligible patients, 83 were included (mean age 87 years, 25% men). They had on average 6 diagnoses and used 9 daily medications. Of the 83 patients, 61 (75%) had grip strength indicating sarcopenia, 27 (33%) impaired mobility, and 69 (83%) an impaired TMT-A score. Median amount of home nursing per week was 3.6 h (interquartile range 2.6 to 23.4). Fulfilment of pre-specified needs was >60% for skin and wound care in patients with skin diseases, observation of blood glucose in patients taking antidiabetic drugs, and in supporting food intake in patients with eating difficulties. Most other needs as defined by the consensus group were fulfilled in <10% of the patients.

Conclusions

We identified a very frail group of home-dwelling patients. For this group, resources for home nursing should probably be used in a more flexible and pro-active way to aim for preserving functional status, minimize symptom burden, and prevent avoidable hospitalisations.

Latent class analysis of multimorbidity patterns and associated outcomes in Spanish older adults: a prospective cohort study

Background

This study sought to identify multimorbidity patterns and determine the association between these latent classes with several outcomes, including health, functioning, disability, quality of life and use of services, at baseline and after 3 years of follow-up.

Methods

We analyzed data from a representative Spanish cohort of 3541 non-institutionalized people aged 50 years old and over. Measures were taken at baseline and after 3 years of follow-up. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was conducted using eleven common chronic conditions. Generalized linear models were conducted to determine the adjusted association of multimorbidity latent classes with several outcomes.

Results

63.8% of participants were assigned to the “healthy” class, with minimum disease, 30% were classified under the “metabolic/stroke” class and 6% were assigned to the “cardiorespiratory/mental/arthritis” class. Significant cross-sectional associations were found between membership of both multimorbidity classes and poorer memory, quality of life, greater burden and more use of services. After 3 years of follow-up, the “metabolic/stroke” class was a significant predictor of lower levels of verbal fluency while the two multimorbidity classes predicted poor quality of life, problems in independent living, higher risk of hospitalization and greater use of health services.

Conclusions

Common chronic conditions in older people cluster together in broad categories. These broad clusters are qualitatively distinct and are important predictors of several health and functioning outcomes. Future studies are needed to understand underlying mechanisms and common risk factors for patterns of multimorbidity and to propose more effective treatments.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0586-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence, Correlates, and Time Trends of Multiple Chronic Conditions Among Israeli Adults: Estimates From the Israeli National Health Interview Survey, 2014-2015

INTRODUCTION

Chronic diseases constitute a major public health challenge. The prevalence of multiple chronic conditions (MCC) has increased. The objective of our study was to describe the prevalence, correlates, and time trends of MCC in the Israeli population and among the nation's 2 main population groups (Jewish and Arab).

METHODS

To describe the prevalence of correlates of MCC, we used data from the 2014-2015 Israeli National Health Interview Survey-III (INHIS-III). MCC was defined as having 2 or more of the following 10 self-reported physician-diagnosed chronic conditions: asthma, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, dyslipidemia, heart attack, hypertension, migraine, osteoporosis, or thyroid disease. For trend analysis, we used data from INHIS-I (2003-2004) and INHIS-II (2007-2010). Logistic regression was used for multivariate analysis. Estimates were weighted to the 2014 Israeli population. P for trend was calculated by using the Cochran-Armitage test for proportions.

RESULTS

In 2014-2015, the prevalence of MCC was 27.3% (95% confidence interval, 25.7%-28.8%). In multivariate analysis, MCC was associated with older age, female sex, a monthly household income of USD$3,000 or less, current and past smoking, and overweight or obesity. After adjusting for age, sex, income, smoking status, and body mass index, differences in MCC between Jewish and Arab populations disappeared. Dyslipidemia and hypertension were the most prevalent dyad among both men and women. Dyslipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes were the most prevalent triad among both men and women. The age-adjusted prevalence of MCC increased by 6.7% between 2003-2004 and 2014-2015.

CONCLUSION

With the increase in the prevalence of MCC, a comprehensive approach is needed to reduce the burden of chronic conditions. Of special concern are the groups most prone to MCC.

A cancer geography paradox? Poorer cancer outcomes with longer travelling times to healthcare facilities despite prompter diagnosis and treatment: a data-linkage study

BACKGROUND

Rurality and distance from cancer treatment centres have been shown to negatively impact cancer outcomes, but the mechanisms remain obscure.

METHODS

We analysed the impact of travel time to key healthcare facilities and mainland/island residency on the cancer diagnostic pathway (treatment within 62 days of referral, and within 31 days of diagnosis) and 1-year mortality using a data-linkage study with 12 339 patients.

RESULTS

After controlling for important confounders, mainland patients with more than 60 min of travelling time to their cancer treatment centre ((OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.25-1.61) and island dwellers (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09-1.59) were more likely to commence cancer treatment within 62 days of general practitioner (GP) referral and within 31 days of their cancer diagnosis compared with those living within 15 min. Island-dweller patients were more likely to have their diagnosis and treatment started on the same or next day (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.31-2.25). Increased travelling time to a cancer treatment centre was associated with increased mortality to 1 year (30-59 min (HR 1.21; 95% CI 1.05-1.41), >60 min (HR 1.18; 95% CI 1.03-1.36), island dweller (HR 1.17; 95% CI 0.97-1.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Island dwelling and greater mainland travel burden was associated with more rapid cancer diagnosis and treatment following GP referral even after adjustment for advanced disease; however, these patients also experienced a survival disadvantage compared with those living nearer. Cancer services may need to be better configured to suit the different needs of dispersed populations.

Variations in achievement of evidence-based, high-impact quality indicators in general practice: An observational study

BACKGROUND

There are widely recognised variations in the delivery and outcomes of healthcare but an incomplete understanding of their causes. There is a growing interest in using routinely collected 'big data' in the evaluation of healthcare. We developed a set of evidence-based 'high impact' quality indicators (QIs) for primary care and examined variations in achievement of these indicators using routinely collected data in the United Kingdom (UK).

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected, electronic primary care data from a sample of general practices in West Yorkshire, UK (n = 89). The QIs covered aspects of care (including processes and intermediate clinical outcomes) in relation to diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and 'risky' prescribing combinations. Regression models explored the impact of practice and patient characteristics. Clustering within practice was accounted for by including a random intercept for practice.

RESULTS

Median practice achievement of the QIs ranged from 43.2% (diabetes control) to 72.2% (blood pressure control in CKD). Considerable between-practice variation existed for all indicators: the difference between the highest and lowest performing practices was 26.3 percentage points for risky prescribing and 100 percentage points for anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Odds ratios associated with the random effects for practices emphasised this; there was a greater than ten-fold difference in the likelihood of achieving the hypertension indicator between the lowest and highest performing practices. Patient characteristics, in particular age, gender and comorbidity, were consistently but modestly associated with indicator achievement. Statistically significant practice characteristics were identified less frequently in adjusted models.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite various policy and improvement initiatives, there are enduring inappropriate variations in the delivery of evidence-based care. Much of this variation is not explained by routinely collected patient or practice variables, and is likely to be attributable to differences in clinical and organisational behaviour.

Co-morbidity and polypharmacy in Parkinson's disease: insights from a large Scottish primary care database

Background

Parkinson’s disease is complicated by comorbidity and polypharmacy, but the extent and patterns of these are unclear. We describe comorbidity and polypharmacy in patients with and without Parkinson’s disease across 31 other physical, and seven mental health conditions.

Methods

We analysed primary health-care data on 510,502 adults aged 55 and over. We generated standardised prevalence rates by age-groups, gender, and neighbourhood deprivation, then calculated age, sex and deprivation adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for those with PD compared to those without, for the prevalence, and number of conditions.

Results

Two thousand six hundred forty (0.5%) had Parkinson’s disease, of whom only 7.4% had no other conditions compared with 22.9% of controls (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.43, 95% 0.38–0.49). The Parkinson’s group had more conditions, with the biggest difference found for seven or more conditions (PD 12.1% vs. controls 3.9%; aOR 2.08 95% CI 1.84–2.35). 12 of the 31 physical conditions and five of the seven mental health conditions were significantly more prevalent in the PD group. 44.5% with Parkinson’s disease were on five to nine repeat prescriptions compared to 24.5% of controls (aOR 1.40; 95% CI 1.28 to 1.53) and 19.2% on ten or more compared to 6.2% of controls (aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.15).

Conclusions

Parkinson’s disease is associated with substantial physical and mental co-morbidity. Polypharmacy is also a significant issue due to the complex nature of the disease and associated treatments.

Development of a meta-algorithm for guiding primary care encounters for patients with multimorbidity using evidence-based and case-based guideline development methodology

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to develop a comprehensive algorithm (meta-algorithm) for primary care encounters of patients with multimorbidity. We used a novel, case-based and evidence-based procedure to overcome methodological difficulties in guideline development for patients with complex care needs.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic guideline development methodology including systematic evidence retrieval (guideline synopses), expert opinions and informal and formal consensus procedures.

SETTING

Primary care.

INTERVENTION

The meta-algorithm was developed in six steps:1. Designing 10 case vignettes of patients with multimorbidity (common, epidemiologically confirmed disease patterns and/or particularly challenging health care needs) in a multidisciplinary workshop.2. Based on the main diagnoses, a systematic guideline synopsis of evidence-based and consensus-based clinical practice guidelines was prepared. The recommendations were prioritised according to the clinical and psychosocial characteristics of the case vignettes.3. Case vignettes along with the respective guideline recommendations were validated and specifically commented on by an external panel of practicing general practitioners (GPs).4. Guideline recommendations and experts' opinions were summarised as case specific management recommendations (N-of-one guidelines).5. Healthcare preferences of patients with multimorbidity were elicited from a systematic literature review and supplemented with information from qualitative interviews.6. All N-of-one guidelines were analysed using pattern recognition to identify common decision nodes and care elements. These elements were put together to form a generic meta-algorithm.

RESULTS

The resulting meta-algorithm reflects the logic of a GP's encounter of a patient with multimorbidity regarding decision-making situations, communication needs and priorities. It can be filled with the complex problems of individual patients and hereby offer guidance to the practitioner. Contrary to simple, symptom-oriented algorithms, the meta-algorithm illustrates a superordinate process that permanently keeps the entire patient in view.

CONCLUSION

The meta-algorithm represents the back bone of the multimorbidity guideline of the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians. This article presents solely the development phase; the meta-algorithm needs to be piloted before it can be implemented.

Clinician agreement and influence of medication-related characteristics on assessment of polypharmacy

It is not known how clinicians assess polypharmacy or the medication‐related characteristics that influence their assessment. The aim of this study was to examine the level of agreement between clinicians when assessing polypharmacy and to identify medication‐related characteristics that influence their assessment. Twenty cases of patients with varying levels of comorbidity and polypharmacy were used to examine clinician assessment of polypharmacy. Medicine‐related factors within the cases included Beers and STOPP Criteria medicines, falls‐risk medicines, drug burden index (DBI) medicines, medicines causing postural hypotension, and pharmacokinetic drug–drug interactions. Clinicians were asked to rate cases on the degree of polypharmacy, likelihood of harm, and potential for the medication list to be simplified. Inter‐rater reliability analysis, correlations, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify medicine factors associated with clinicians' assessment. Eighteen expert clinicians were recruited (69.2% response rate). Strong agreement was observed in clinicians' assessment of polypharmacy (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] = 0.94), likelihood to cause harm (ICC = 0.89), and ability to simplify medication list (ICC = 0.90). Multivariate analyses demonstrated number of medicines (P < 0.0001) and DBI scores (P = 0.047) were significantly associated with assessment of polypharmacy. Medicines associated with harm were significantly associated with the number of medicines (P = 0.01) and Beers criteria medicines (P = 0.003). Ability to simplify the medication regimen was significantly associated with number of medicines (P = 0.03) and medicines from the STOPP criteria (P = 0.018). Among clinicians, strong consensus exists with regard to assessment of polypharmacy, medication harm, and ability to simplify medications. Definitions of polypharmacy need to take into account not only the numbers of medicines but also potential for medicines to cause harm or be inappropriate, and validate them against clinical outcomes.

Shaping innovations in long-term care for stroke survivors with multimorbidity through stakeholder engagement

BACKGROUND

Stroke, like many long-term conditions, tends to be managed in isolation of its associated risk factors and multimorbidity. With increasing access to clinical and research data there is the potential to combine data from a variety of sources to inform interventions to improve healthcare. A 'Learning Health System' (LHS) is an innovative model of care which transforms integrated data into knowledge to improve healthcare. The objective of this study is to develop a process of engaging stakeholders in the use of clinical and research data to co-produce potential solutions, informed by a LHS, to improve long-term care for stroke survivors with multimorbidity.

METHODS

We used a stakeholder engagement study design informed by co-production principles to engage stakeholders, including service users, carers, general practitioners and other health and social care professionals, service managers, commissioners of services, policy makers, third sector representatives and researchers. Over a 10 month period we used a range of methods including stakeholder group meetings, focus groups, nominal group techniques (priority setting and consensus building) and interviews. Qualitative data were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

37 participants took part in the study. The concept of how data might drive intervention development was difficult to convey and understand. The engagement process led to four priority areas for needs for data and information being identified by stakeholders: 1) improving continuity of care; 2) improving management of mental health consequences; 3) better access to health and social care; and 4) targeting multiple risk factors. These priorities informed preliminary design interventions. The final choice of intervention was agreed by consensus, informed by consideration of the gap in evidence and local service provision, and availability of robust data. This shaped a co-produced decision support tool to improve secondary prevention after stroke for further development.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholder engagement to identify data-driven solutions is feasible but requires resources. While a number of potential interventions were identified, the final choice rested not just on stakeholder priorities but also on data availability. Further work is required to evaluate the impact and implementation of data-driven interventions for long-term stroke survivors.

Management of vertebral compression fracture in general practice: BEACH program

Importance

The pain associated with vertebral compression fractures can cause significant loss of function and quality of life for older adults. Despite this, there is little consensus on how best to manage this condition.

Objective

To describe usual care provided by general practitioners (GPs) in Australia for the management of vertebral compression fractures.

Design, setting and participants

Data from the Bettering the Evaluation And Care of Health (BEACH) program collected between April 2005 and March 2015 was used for this study. Each year, a random sample of approximately 1,000 GPs each recorded information on 100 consecutive encounters. We selected those encounters at which vertebral compression fracture was managed. Analyses of management options were limited to encounters with patients aged 50 years or over.

Main outcome(s) and measure(s)

i) patient demographics; ii) diagnoses/problems managed; iii) the management provided for vertebral compression fracture during the encounter. Robust 95% confidence intervals, adjusted for the cluster survey design, were used to assess significant differences between group means.

Results

Vertebral compression fractures were managed in 211 (0.022%; 95% CI: 0.018–0.025) of the 977,300 BEACH encounters recorded April 2005– March 2015. That provides a national annual estimate of 26,000 (95% CI: 22,000–29,000) encounters at which vertebral fractures were managed. At encounters with patients aged 50 years or over (those at higher risk of primary osteoporosis), prescription of analgesics was the most common management action, particularly opioids analgesics (47.1 per 100 vertebral fractures; 95% CI: 38.4–55.7). Prescriptions of paracetamol (8.2; 95% CI: 4–12.4) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (4.1; 95% CI: 1.1–7.1) were less frequent. Non-pharmacological treatment was provided at a rate of 22.4 per 100 vertebral fractures (95% CI: 14.6–30.1). At least one referral (to hospital, specialist, allied health care or other) was given for 12.3 per 100 vertebral fractures (95% CI: 7.8–16.8).

Conclusions and relevance

The prescription of oral opioid analgesics remains the common general practice approach for vertebral compression fractures management, despite the lack of evidence to support this. Clinical trials addressing management of these fractures are urgently needed to improve the quality of care patients receive.

Heart failure and multimorbidity in Australian general practice

Background

Heart failure (HF) is a serious condition that mostly affects older people. Despite the ageing population experiencing an increased prevalence of many chronic conditions, current guidelines focus on isolated management of HF.

Objective

To describe the burden of multimorbidity in patients with HF being managed in general practice in Australia.

Design

Data from the Bettering the Evaluation And Care of Health (BEACH) programme were used to determine (i) the prevalence of HF, (ii) the number of co-existing long-term conditions, and (iii) the most common disease combinations in patients with HF. The study was undertaken over fifteen, 5-week recording periods between November 2012 and March 2016.

Results

The dataset included a total of 25,790 general practitioner (GP) encounters with patients aged ≥45 years, collected by 1,445 GPs. HF had been diagnosed in 1,119 of these patients, a prevalence of 4.34% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.99–4.68) among patients at GP encounters, and 2.08% (95% CI 1.87–2.29) when applied to the general Australian population overall. HF rarely occurred in isolation, with 99.1% of patients having at least one and 53.4% having six or more other chronic illnesses. The most common pair of comorbidities among active patients with HF was hypertension and osteoarthritis (43.4%).

Conclusion

Overall, one in every 20–25 GP encounters with patients aged ≥45 years in Australia is with a patient with HF. Multimorbidity is a typical presentation among this patient group and guidelines for general practice must take this into account.

Frailty, polypharmacy and deprescribing

Multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy present a significant and increasing challenge to patients, carers and healthcare professionals.(1,2) While it is recognised that polypharmacy can be beneficial, there is considerable potential for harm, particularly through drug interactions, adverse drug events and non-adherence.(1) Such harms are amplified in people who are frail and who may require interventions to be tailored to their individual needs rather than strictly following guidance designed to manage single diseases. It is important to develop an approach that allows patients to make informed decisions and prioritise medicines for continuation or discontinuation, in order to maximise benefit and minimise harm.(1)The term 'deprescribing' has been suggested in recognition that the skills utilised in stopping medicines need to be as sophisticated as those used when initiating drug treatment.(3) Key to deprescribing, as with all medical interventions, is the active participation of the patient to ensure that their preferences and choices are taken into account. Particular care is needed when end-of-life considerations apply, so that treatment is optimised and the burden of taking medicines is minimised.(4) Although evidence is sparse, this article provides some practical observations on deprescribing.

Cancer and central nervous system disorders: protocol for an umbrella review of systematic reviews and updated meta-analyses of observational studies

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study will be to synthesize the epidemiological evidence and evaluate the validity of the associations between central nervous system disorders and the risk of developing or dying from cancer.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will perform an umbrella review of systematic reviews and conduct updated meta-analyses of observational studies (cohort and case-control) investigating the association between central nervous system disorders and the risk of developing or dying from any cancer or specific types of cancer. Searches involving PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Web of Science will be used to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. In addition, online databases will be checked for observational studies published outside the time frames of previous reviews. Eligible central nervous system disorders will be Alzheimer's disease, anorexia nervosa, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, autism spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, depression, Down's syndrome, epilepsy, Huntington's disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia. The primary outcomes will be cancer incidence and cancer mortality in association with a central nervous system disorder. Secondary outcome measures will be site-specific cancer incidence and mortality, respectively. Two reviewers will independently screen references identified by the literature search, as well as potentially relevant full-text articles. Data will be abstracted, and study quality/risk of bias will be appraised by two reviewers independently. Conflicts at all levels of screening and abstraction will be resolved through discussion. Random-effects meta-analyses of primary observational studies will be conducted where appropriate. Parameters for exploring statistical heterogeneity are pre-specified. The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) criteria and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used for determining the quality of evidence for cancer outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Our study will establish the extent of the epidemiological evidence underlying the associations between central nervous system disorders and cancer and will provide a rigorous and updated synthesis of a range of important site-specific cancer outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016052762.

Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation

Background

Monitoring for potentially hazardous prescribing is increasingly important to improve medication safety. Healthcare information technology can be used to achieve this aim, for example by providing access to prescribing data through surveillance of patients’ electronic health records. The aim of our study was to examine the implementation and adoption of an electronic medicines optimisation system that was intended to facilitate clinical audit in primary care by identifying patients at risk of an adverse drug event. We adopted a sociotechnical approach that focuses on how complex social, organisational and institutional factors may impact upon the use of technology within work settings.

Methods

We undertook a qualitative realist evaluation of the use of an electronic medicines optimisation system in one Clinical Commissioning Group in England. Five semi-structured interviews, four focus groups and one observation were conducted with a range of stakeholders. Consistent with a realist evaluation methodology, the analysis focused on exploring the links between context, mechanism and outcome to explain the ways the intervention might work, for whom and in what circumstances.

Results

Using the electronic medicines optimisation system could lead to a number of improved patient safety outcomes including pre-emptively reviewing patients at risk of adverse drug events. The effective use of the system depended upon engagement with the system, the flow of information between different health professionals centrally placed at the Clinical Commissioning Group and those locally placed at individual general practices, and upon variably adapting work practices to facilitate the use of the system. The use of the system was undermined by perceptions of ownership, lack of access, and lack of knowledge and awareness.

Conclusions

The use of an electronic medicines optimisation system may improve medication safety in primary care settings by identifying those patients at risk of an adverse drug event. To fully realise the potential benefits for medication safety there needs to be better utilisation across primary care and with a wider range of stakeholders. Engaging with all potential stakeholders and users prior to implementation of such systems might allay perceptions that the system is owned centrally and increase knowledge of the potential benefits.

Patient-provider concordance in the perception of illness and disease: a cross-sectional study among multimorbid patients and their general practitioners in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Multiple chronic health conditions are leading to multiple treatment procedures and polypharmacy. Prioritizing treatment according to patients' needs and preferences may be helpful for deprescribing. Thus, for improving health care, it is crucial for general practitioners (GPs) to perceive the chief complaints (CCs) of patients. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the patient-provider concordance of CCs and the secondary aim was to investigate the concordance between CCs and diagnosis, in a sample of Swiss multimorbid patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis based on a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) among 46 GPs, recruited between March 2015 to July 2016, and 334 multimorbid patients (≥60 years taking ≥5 drugs for at least 6 months) in Northern Switzerland was performed. CCs listed by GPs and by patients (n=128) were classified according to the International Classification of Primary Care, version 2 (ICPC-2) coding system on chapter and component level and defined as concordant if ICPC-2 codes of patients and GPs were identical. Concordance was classified into full, moderate or low, depending on the ranking of patients' CCs on GPs' list. As secondary outcome, we compared patients' CCs to GPs' diagnosis. Statistics included descriptive measures and a multivariate regression analysis of factors that are modifying concordance.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 76.9 (SD 8.1) years, where 38% were male, taking 7.9 (SD 2.6) drugs on the long term. The most frequent complaint was pain. Concordance of the CC was given in 101/128 (78.9%) on the ICPC-2 chapter level, whereby 86/128 (67.2%) showed full, 8/128 (6.3%) moderate and 7/128 (5.5%) low concordance; 27/128 (21.1%) were discordant. Concordance between CCs and diagnosis was 53.6%. Concordance increased with the intensity of the CC rated by patients (OR 1.48, CI 1.13-1.94, P<0.001). The younger age and higher intake of drugs were significantly associated with an increased concordance between CCs and diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

A majority of GPs perceive the CCs of the multimorbid patients correctly, but there is room for improvement.

Disenrollment from general practitioners among chronic patients: a register-based longitudinal study of Norwegian claims data

Background

Norwegian general practitioners (GPs) consult on a variety of conditions with a mix of patient types. Patients with chronic diseases benefit from appropriate continuity of care and generally visit their GPs more often than the average patient. Our aim was to study disenrollment patterns among patients with chronic diseases in Norway, because such patterns could indicate otherwise unobserved GP quality. For instance, higher quality GPs could have both a greater share of patients with chronic diseases and lower disenrollment rates.

Methods

Data on 384,947 chronic patients and 3,974 GPs for the years 2009–2011 were obtained from national registers, including patient and GP characteristics, disenrollment data, and patient list composition. The birth cohorts from 1940 and 1970 (146,906 patients) were included for comparison. Patient and GP characteristics, comorbidity, and patient list composition were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Patients’ voluntary disenrollment was analyzed using logistic regression models.

Results

The GPs’ proportion of patients with a given chronic disease varied more than expected when the allocation was purely random. The proportions of patients with different chronic diseases were positively correlated, partly due to comorbidity. Patients tended to have lower disenrollment rates from GPs who had higher shares of patients with the same chronic disease. Disenrollment rates were generally lower from GPs with higher shares of patients with arthritis or depression, and higher from GPs who had higher shares of patients with diabetes type 1 and schizophrenia. This was the same in the comparison group.

Conclusion

Patients with a chronic disease appeared to prefer GPs who have higher shares of patients with the same disease. High shares of patients with some diseases were also negatively associated with disenrollment for all patient groups, while other diseases were positively associated. These findings may reflect the GPs’ general quality, but could alternatively result from the GPs’ specialization in particular diseases. The supportive findings for the comparison group make it more plausible that high shares of chronic patients could indicate GP quality.

Are care plans suitable for the management of multiple conditions?

BACKGROUND

Care plans have been part of the primary care landscape in Australia for almost two decades. With an increasing number of patients presenting with multiple chronic conditions, it is timely to consider whether care plans meet the needs of patients and clinicians.

OBJECTIVES

To review and benchmark existing care plan templates that include recommendations for comorbid conditions, against four key criteria: (i) patient preferences, (ii) setting priorities, (iii) identifying conflicts and synergies between conditions, and (iv) setting dates for reviewing the care plan.

DESIGN

Document analysis of Australian care plan templates published from 2006 to 2014 that incorporated recommendations for managing comorbid conditions in primary care.

RESULTS

Sixteen templates were reviewed. All of the care plan templates addressed patient preference, but this was not done comprehensively. Only three templates included setting priorities. None assisted in identifying conflicts and synergies between conditions. Fifteen templates included setting a date for reviewing the care plan.

CONCLUSIONS

Care plans are a well-used tool in primary care practice, but their current format perpetuates a single-disease approach to care, which works contrary to their intended purpose. Restructuring care plans to incorporate shared decision-making and attention to patient preferences may assist in shifting the focus back to the patient and their care needs.

Predicting mortality from change-over-time in the Charlson Comorbidity Index: A retrospective cohort study in a data-intensive UK health system

Multimorbidity is common among older people and presents a major challenge to health systems worldwide. Metrics of multimorbidity are, however, crude: focusing on measuring comorbid conditions at single time-points rather than reflecting the longitudinal and additive nature of chronic conditions. In this paper, we explore longitudinal comorbidity metrics and their value in predicting mortality.Using linked primary and secondary care data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study on adults in Salford, UK from 2005 to 2014 (n = 287,459). We measured multimorbidity with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and quantified its changes in various time windows. We used survival models to assess the relationship between CCI changes and mortality, controlling for gender, age, baseline CCI, and time-dependent CCI. Goodness-of-fit was assessed with the Akaike Information Criterion and discrimination with the c-statistic.Overall, 15.9% patients experienced a change in CCI after 10 years, with a mortality rate of 19.8%. The model that included gender and time-dependent age, CCI, and CCI change across consecutive time windows had the best fit to the data but equivalent discrimination to the other time-dependent models. The absolute CCI score gave a constant hazard ratio (HR) of around 1.3 per unit increase, while CCI change afforded greater prognostic impact, particularly when it occurred in shorter time windows (maximum HR value for the 3-month time window, with 1.63 and 95% confidence interval 1.59-1.66).Change over time in comorbidity is an important but overlooked predictor of mortality, which should be considered in research and care quality management.

Exclusion of patients with concomitant chronic conditions in ongoing randomised controlled trials targeting 10 common chronic conditions and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: a systematic review of registration details

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess registration details of ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) targeting 10 common chronic conditions and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov and to determine the prevalence of (1) trial records excluding patients with concomitant chronic condition(s) and (2) those specifically targeting patients with concomitant chronic conditions.

DESIGN

Systematic review of trial registration records.

DATA SOURCES

ClinicalTrials.gov register.

STUDY SELECTION

All ongoing RCTs registered from 1 January 2014 to 31 January 2015 that assessed an intervention targeting adults with coronary heart disease (CHD), hypertension, heart failure, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, painful condition, depression and dementia with a target sample size ≥100.

DATA EXTRACTION

From the trial registration records, 2 researchers independently recorded the trial characteristics and the number of exclusion criteria and determined whether patients with concomitant chronic conditions were excluded or specifically targeted.

RESULTS

Among 319 ongoing RCTs, despite the high prevalence of the concomitant chronic conditions, patients with these conditions were excluded in 251 trials (79%). For example, although 91% of patients with CHD had a concomitant chronic condition, 69% of trials targeting such patients excluded patients with concomitant chronic condition(s). When considering the co-occurrence of 2 chronic conditions, 31% of patients with chronic pain also had depression, but 58% of the trials targeting patients with chronic pain excluded patients with depression. Only 37 trials (12%) assessed interventions specifically targeting patients with concomitant chronic conditions; 31 (84%) excluded patients with concomitant chronic condition(s).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite widespread multimorbidity, more than three-quarters of ongoing trials assessing interventions for patients with chronic conditions excluded patients with concomitant chronic conditions.

Comparison of count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of 2 or more chronic medical conditions in an individual, is associated with poorer health outcomes. Several multimorbidity measures exist, and the challenge is to decide which to use preferentially in predicting health outcomes. The study objective was to compare the performance of 5 count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency hospital admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults attending primary care.

SETTING

15 general practices (GPs) in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

n=862, ≥70 years, community-dwellers followed-up for 2 years (2010-2012). Exposure at baseline: Five multimorbidity measures (disease counts, selected conditions counts, Charlson comorbidity index, RxRisk-V, medication counts) calculated using GP medical record and linked national pharmacy claims data.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

(1) Emergency admission and ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) admission (GP medical record) and (2) functional decline (postal questionnaire).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics and measure discrimination (c-statistic, 95% CIs), adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Median age was 77 years and 53% were women. Prevalent rates ranged from 37% to 91% depending on which measure was used to define multimorbidity. All measures demonstrated poor discrimination for the outcome of emergency admission (c-statistic range: 0.62, 0.65), ACS admission (c-statistic range: 0.63, 0.68) and functional decline (c-statistic range: 0.55, 0.61). Medication-based measures were equivalent to diagnosis-based measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of measure may have a significant impact on prevalent rates. Five multimorbidity measures demonstrated poor discrimination in predicting emergency admission and functional decline, with medication-based measures equivalent to diagnosis-based measures. Consideration of multimorbidity in isolation is insufficient for predicting these outcomes in community settings.

Managing multimorbidity in primary care in patients with chronic respiratory conditions

The term multimorbidity is usually defined as the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions within an individual, whereas the term comorbidity traditionally describes patients with an index condition and one or more additional conditions. Multimorbidity of chronic conditions markedly worsens outcomes in patients, increases treatment burden and increases health service costs. Although patients with chronic respiratory disease often have physical comorbidities, they also commonly experience psychological problems such as depression and anxiety. Multimorbidity is associated with increased health-care utilisation and specifically with an increased number of prescription drugs in individuals with multiple chronic conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine Education Section case study involves a patient in a primary care consultation presenting several common diseases prevalent in people of this age. The patient takes nine different drugs at this moment, one or more pills for each condition, which amounts to polypharmacy. The problems related with polypharmacy recommend that a routine medication review by primary care physicians be performed to reduce the risk of adverse effects of polypharmacy among those with multiple chronic conditions. The primary care physician has the challenging role of integrating all of the clinical problems affecting the patient and reviewing all medicaments (including over-the-counter medications) taken by the patient at any point in time, and has the has the key to prevent the unwanted consequences of polypharmacy. Multimorbid chronic disease management can be achieved with the use of care planning, unified disease templates, use of information technology with appointment reminders and with the help of the wider primary care and community teams.

Discordance Between Drug Adherence as Reported by Patients and Drug Importance as Assessed by Physicians

PURPOSE

Among patients on long-term medical therapy, we compared (1) patient and physician assessments of drug adherence and of drug importance and (2) drug adherence reported by patients with drug importance as assessed by their physicians.

METHODS

We recruited to the study patients receiving at least 1 long-term drug treatment from both hospital and ambulatory settings in France. We compared drug adherence reported by patients and drug importance assessed by physicians using Spearman correlation coefficients. Reasons for nonadherence were collected with open-ended questions and classified as intentional or unintentional.

RESULTS

Between April and August 2014, we recruited 128 patients taking 498 drugs. Patients and physicians showed only weak agreement in their assessments of drug adherence (r = -0.25; 95% CI, -0.37 to -0.11) and drug importance (r = 0.07; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.13). We did not find any correlation between physician-assessed drug importance and patient-reported drug adherence (r = -0.04; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.06). In all, 94 (18.9%) of the drugs that physicians considered important were not correctly taken by patients. Patients intentionally did not adhere to 26 (48.1%) of the drugs for which they reported reasons for nonadherence.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial discordance between patient and physician evaluations of drug adherence and drug importance. Nearly 20% of drugs considered important by physicians were not correctly taken by patients. These findings highlight the need for better patient-physician collaboration in drug treatment.

Training doctors to manage patients with multimorbidity: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients with multimorbidity (two or more chronic conditions) are now the norm in clinical practice, and place an increasing burden on the healthcare system. Management of these patients is challenging, and requires doctors who are skilled in the complexity of multiple chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the literature to ascertain whether there are education and training formats which have been used to train postgraduate medical doctors in the management of patients with multimorbidity in primary and/or secondary care, and which have been shown to improve knowledge, skills, attitudes, and/or patient outcomes.

METHODS

Overall, 75,110 citations were screened, of which 65 full-text articles were then independently assessed for eligibility by two reviewers, and two studies met the inclusion criteria for the review.

RESULTS

The two included studies implemented and evaluated multimorbidity workshops, and highlight the need for further research addressing the learning needs of doctors tasked with managing patients with multimorbidity in their daily practice.

CONCLUSION

While much has been published about the challenges presented to medical staff by patients with multimorbidity, published research regarding education of doctors to manage these problems is lacking. Further research is required to determine whether there is a need for, or benefit from, specific training for doctors to manage patients with multimorbidity. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004010.