Effects of goal-oriented care for adults with multimorbidity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

An umbrella review of the literature on the effectiveness of goal setting interventions in improving health outcomes in chronic conditions

PURPOSE

To identify the contexts in which goal setting has been used in chronic disease management interventions and to estimate the magnitude of its effect on improvement of health outcomes.

METHODS

The strength of evidence and extent of potential bias in the published systematic reviews of goal setting interventions in chronic conditions were summarized using AMSTAR2 quality appraisal tool, number of participants, 95% prediction intervals, and between-study heterogeneity. Components of goal setting interventions were also extracted.

RESULTS

Nine publications and 35 meta-analysis models were identified, investigating 25 health outcomes. Of the 35 meta-analyses, none found strong evidence and three provided some suggestive evidence on symptom reduction and perceived well-being. There was weak evidence for effects on eight health outcomes (HbA1c, self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, distress, medication adherence, health-related quality of life and physical activity), with the rest classified as non-significant. Half of the meta-analyses had high level of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Goal setting by itself affects outcomes of chronic diseases only to a small degree. This is not unexpected finding as changing outcomes in chronic diseases requires a complex and individualized approach. Implementing goal setting in a standardized way in the management of chronic conditions would seem to be a way forward.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe link between goal setting and health outcomes seems to be weak.Some levels of positive behavioural change could be of benefits to patients as seen by improved self-efficacy, patients' satisfaction and overall quality of life.Systematic and consistent application of personalized goal-oriented interventions considering patient's readiness to change could better predict improved outcomes.Incorporation of various goal setting components while actively engaging patient and/or their care givers in the process could appraise how goal setting could help with challenges in faced by people living with chronic conditions in different areas.

The effects of community interventions on unplanned healthcare use in patients with multimorbidity: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the impact of community-based interventions for multimorbid patients on unplanned healthcare use. The prevalence of multimorbidity (co-existence of multiple chronic conditions) is rapidly increasing and affects one-third of the global population. Patients with multimorbidity have complex healthcare needs and greater unplanned healthcare usage. Community-based interventions allow for continued care of patients outside hospitals, but few studies have explored the effects of these interventions on unplanned healthcare usage.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Cochrane Library online databases were searched. Studies were screened and underwent risk of bias assessment. Data were synthesised using narrative synthesis.

SETTING

Community-based interventions.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with multimorbidity.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Unplanned healthcare usage.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including a total of 6148 participants, were included. All included studies came from high-income settings and had elderly populations. All studies measured emergency department attendances as their primary outcome. Risk of bias was generally low. Most community interventions were multifaceted with emphasis on education, self-monitoring of symptoms and regular follow-ups. Four studies looked at improved care coordination, advance care planning and palliative care. All 13 studies found a decrease in emergency department visits post-intervention with risk reduction ranging from 0 (95% confidencec interval [CI]: -0.37 to 0.37) to 0.735 (95% CI: 0.688-0.785).

CONCLUSIONS

Community-based interventions have potential to reduce emergency department visits in patients with multimorbidity. Identification of specific successful components of interventions was challenging given the overlaps between interventions. Policymakers should recognise the importance of community interventions and aim to integrate aspects of these into existing healthcare structures. Future research should investigate the impact of such interventions with broader participant characteristics.

Effectiveness of holistic assessment-based interventions for adults with multiple long-term conditions and frailty: an umbrella review of systematic reviews

Holistic assessment-based interventions (HABIs) are effective in older people admitted to hospital, but it is unclear whether similar interventions are effective in adults with multiple long-term conditions or frailty in the community. We conducted an umbrella review to comprehensively evaluate the literature on HABIs for adults (aged ≥18 years) with multiple long-term conditions, and frailty. We searched eight databases for systematic reviews reporting on experimental or quasi-experimental studies. Of 9803 titles screened, we identified 29 eligible reviews (14 with meta-analysis) reporting on 14 types of HABIs. The evidence for the effectiveness of HABIs was largely inconsistent across different types of interventions, settings, and outcomes. We found evidence of no benefit from hospital HABIs on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and emergency department re-attendance, and evidence of no benefit from community HABIs on overall health-care utilisation rates, emergency department attendance, nursing home admissions, and mortality. The best evidence of effectiveness was for hospital comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) on nursing home admissions, keeping patients alive and in their own homes. There was some evidence of benefit from community CGA on hospital admissions, and from CGA spanning community and hospital settings on HRQoL. Patient-centred medical homes had beneficial effects on HRQoL, mental health, self-management, and hospital admissions.

Competences of internal medicine specialists for the management of patients with multimorbidity. EFIM multimorbidity working group position paper

Patients with multimorbidity increasingly impact healthcare systems, both in primary care and in hospitals. This is particularly true in Internal Medicine. This population associates with higher mortality rates, polypharmacy, hospital readmissions, post-discharge syndrome, anxiety, depression, accelerated age-related functional decline, and development of geriatric syndromes, amongst others. Internists and Hospitalists, in one of their roles as Generalists, are increasingly asked to attend to these patients, both in their own Departments as well as in surgical areas. The management of polypathology and multimorbidity, however, is often complex, and requires specific clinical skills and corresponding experience. In addition, patients' needs, health-care environment, and routines have changed, so emerging and re-emerging specific competences and approaches are required to offer the best coordinated, continuous, and comprehensive integrated care to these populations, to achieve optimal health outcomes and satisfaction of patients, their relatives, and staff. This position paper proposes a set of emerging and re-emerging competences for internal medicine specialists, which are needed to optimally address multimorbidity now and in the future.