Patient-centered care: what is the best measuring stick?

Validity of the Chinese multimorbidity-weighted index in measuring disease burden using health check-ups data in primary care

BACKGROUND

As multimorbidity becomes common that imposes a considerable burden to patients, but the extent to which widely-used multimorbidity indexes can be applied to quantify disease burden using primary care data in China is not clear. We applied the Chinese Multimorbidity-Weighted Index (CMWI) to health check-ups data routinely collected among older adults by primary care, to examine its validity in measuring multimorbidity associated risks of disability and mortality in annual follow-ups.

METHODS

The study utilized data from annual health check-ups of older adults, which included information on individual age, sex, and 14 health conditions at primary care in a district of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. The risk of CMWI for mortality was analysed in a total sample of 45,009 persons 65 years and older between 2014 and 2020 (average 2.70-year follow-up), and the risk for disability was in a subsample of 18,320 older adults free of physical impairment in 2019 and followed-up in 2020. Risk of death and disability were assessed with Cox proportional hazard regression and binary logistic regression, respectively, with both models adjusted for age and sex variables. The model fit was assessed by the Akaike information criterion (AIC), and C-statistic or the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

One unit increase in baseline-CMWI (Median= 1.70, IQR: 1.30-3.00) was associated with higher risk in subsequent disability (OR = 1.12, 95%CI = 1.05,1.20) and mortality (OR = 1.18, 95%CI = 1.14, 1.22). Participants in the top tertile of CMWI had 99% and 152% increased risks of disability and mortality than their counterparts in the bottom tertile. Model fit was satisfied with adequate AUC (0.84) or C-statistic (0.76) for both outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

CMWI, calculated based on primary care's routine health check-ups data, provides valid estimates of disability and mortality risks in older adults. This validated tool can be used to quantity and monitor older patients' health risks in primary care.

Health Care User Perspectives on Constructing, Contextualizing, and Co-Producing "Quality of Care"

Most of the research on health care user "quality of care" perspectives seeks discrete and measurable indicators to advance quality improvement (QI) goals. This lacks sufficiently grounded query about the meaning of "quality of care" for health users, and how context influences their ideas and experiences. We studied this between 2010 and 2011, repeatedly interviewing and shadowing 45 individuals in three of New York's hospital-based outpatient HIV care settings during routine visits. We found participants using common terminology, but across the cohort meaning varied and employed personal narratives. Participants conveyed the impact of historic and current experiences of stigma and discrimination on limiting access to care, and showed its destabilizing effects on quality constructs. Participants also felt they contributed to their health care settings' delivery of quality care. From our findings, we discuss the applicability and implications of "co-production" to conceptualize health care as jointly delivered by typical "givers" and "receivers" of care.

Impact of multi-morbidity on quality of healthcare and its implications for health policy, research and clinical practice. A scoping review

The simultaneous presence of multiple conditions in one patient (multi-morbidity) is a key challenge facing healthcare systems globally. It potentially threatens the coordination, continuity and safety of care. In this paper, we report the results of a scoping review examining the impact of multi-morbidity on the quality of healthcare. We used its results as a basis for a discussion of the challenges that research in this area is currently facing. In addition, we discuss its implications for health policy and clinical practice. The review identified 37 studies focussing on multi-morbidity but using conceptually different approaches. Studies focusing on 'comorbidity' (i.e. the 'index disease' approach) suggested that quality may be enhanced in the presence of synergistic conditions, and impaired by antagonistic or neutral conditions. Studies on 'multi-morbidity' (i.e. multiplicity of problems) and 'morbidity burden' (i.e. the total severity of conditions) suggested that increasing number of conditions and severity may be associated with better quality of healthcare when measured by process or intermediate outcome indicators, but with worse quality when patient-centred measures are used. However, issues related to the conceptualization and measurement of multi-morbidity (inconsistent across studies) and of healthcare quality (restricted to evaluations for each separate condition without incorporating considerations about multi-morbidity itself and its implications for management) compromised the generalizability of these observations. Until these issues are addressed and robust evidence becomes available, clinicians should apply minimally invasive and patient-centred medicine when delivering care for clinically complex patients. Health systems should focus on enhancing primary care centred coordination and continuity of care.

Communication and medication refill adherence: the Diabetes Study of Northern California

BACKGROUND

Poor medication refill adherence contributes to poor cardiometabolic control and diabetes outcomes. Studies linking communication between patients and health care providers to adherence often use self-reported adherence and have not explored differences across communication domains or therapeutic indications.

METHODS

To investigate associations between patient communication ratings and cardiometabolic medication refill adherence, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 9377 patients in the Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE), a race-stratified, random sample of Kaiser Permanente survey respondents. Eligible participants received 1 or more oral hypoglycemic, lipid-lowering, or antihypertensive medication in the 12 months preceding the survey. Communication was measured with a 4-item Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey (CAHPS) score and 4 items from the Trust in Physicians and Interpersonal Processes of Care instruments. Poor adherence was classified as greater than a 20% continuous medication gap for ongoing medication therapies. Using modified least squares regression, we calculated differences in poor adherence prevalence for a 10-point decrease in CAHPS score and compared higher vs lower communication ratings on other items, adjusting for necessary sociodemographic and medical confounders derived from a directed acyclic graph.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 30% had poor cardiometabolic medication refill adherence. For each 10-point decrease in CAHPS score, the adjusted prevalence of poor adherence increased by 0.9% (P=.01). Compared with patients offering higher ratings, patients who gave health care providers lower ratings for involving patients in decisions, understanding patients' problems with treatment, and eliciting confidence and trust were more likely to have poor adherence, with absolute differences of 4% (P=.04), 5% (P=.02), and 6% (P=.03), respectively. Associations between communication and adherence were somewhat larger for hypoglycemic medications than for other medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor communication ratings were independently associated with objectively measured inadequate cardiometabolic medication refill adherence, particularly for oral hypoglycemic medications. Future studies should investigate whether improving communication skills among clinicians with poorer patient communication ratings could improve their patients' cardiometabolic medication refill adherence and outcomes.

Preferences for active and aggressive intervention among patients with advanced cancer

Background

Intrinsic to "Patient-Centered Care" is being respectful and responsive to individual patient preferences, expressed needs, and personal values. Establishing a patient's preferences for active and aggressive intervention is imperative and foundational to the development of advance care planning. With the increasing awareness and acceptance of palliative philosophies of care, patients with advanced cancer are increasingly transitioning from active and aggressive medical management (AAMM) to conservative palliative management (CPM).

Methods

A cross-sectional study based on a prospective and sequential case series of patients referred to a regional palliative medicine consultative program was assembled between May 1, 2005 and June 30, 2006. Patients and/or their substitute decision makers (SDM) completed a questionnaire, at baseline, that assessed their preferences for AAMM en route to their eventual deaths. Seven common interventions constituting AAMM were surveyed: cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) & mechanical ventilation (MV), chemotherapy, antibiotics, anticoagulants, blood transfusions, feeding tubes, and artificial hydration. Multivariable analyses were conducted on the seven interventions individually as well as on the composite score that summed preferences for the seven interventions.

Results

380 patients with advanced cancer agreed to participate in the study. A trend to desire a mostly conservative palliative approach was noted as 42% of patients desired one or fewer interventions. At baseline, most patients and their SDM's were relatively secure about decisions pertaining to the seven interventions as the rates of being "undecided" ranged from a high of 23.4% for chemotherapy to a low of 3.9% for feeding tubes. Multivariable modeling showed that more AAMM was preferred by younger patients (P < 0.0001), non-Caucasians (P = 0.042), patients with higher baseline Palliative Performance Scale scores (P = 0.0002) and where a SDM was involved in the decision process (p = 0.027). Non-statistically significant trends to prefer more AAMM was observed with male gender (p = 0.077) and higher levels of the Charlson Comorbidity index (p = 0.059). There was no association between treatment preferences and cancer class.

Conclusions

Although the majority of patients with advanced cancer in this study expressed preferences for CPM, younger age, higher baseline PPSv2, and involvement of SDMs in the decision process were significantly associated with preferences for AAMM.

Sociodemographic determinants for oral health risk profiles

The present study aimed to explore the association between caries risk profiles and different sociodemographic factors . The study sample (n = 104) was randomly selected within an urban population in Flanders, Belgium. Caries risk was assessed by anamnesis, clinical examination, salivary tests, and a questionnaire. Age, gender, and socio-economic status were extracted from social insurance data files. Social indicators were “occupational status,” “being entitled to the increased allowance for health care interventions” and having access to the “Maximum Bill” (MAF), initiatives undertaken to protect deprived families. In the bivariate analysis there were significant differences in risk profiles between occupational groups (P < .001), between entitled and non-entitled individuals to the increased allowance (P = .02), and between access or no-access to the MAF (P < .01). The multiple logistic model showed a significantly higher chance of being in the low risk group for individuals with no-access to the MAF compared to those with access (OR:14.33–95% C.I. 2.14–95.84).