ABC-tool reinvented: development of a disease-specific 'Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC)-tool' for multiple chronic conditions

Trends in Multiple Chronic Conditions Among US Adults, By Life Stage, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2013-2023

Introduction

Chronic conditions are costly and major causes of death and disability. Addressing conditions earlier in adulthood can slow disease progression and improve well-being across the lifespan. We estimated, by life stage, 10-year trends among US adults in the prevalence of 1 or more chronic conditions, multiple chronic conditions (MCC; ≥2 conditions), and 12 selected chronic conditions.

Methods

We analyzed data from the 2013-2023 (odd years) Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (N = 2,673,529). We estimated the prevalence of 1 or more conditions, MCC, and each of 12 conditions, by life stage: young (18-34 y), midlife (35-64 y), and older (≥65 y) adults. We used polynomial contrasts to analyze 10-year trends.

Results

In 2023, 76.4% (representing 194 million) of US adults reported 1 or more chronic conditions, including 59.5%, 78.4%, and 93.0% of young, midlife, and older adults, respectively. Moreover, 51.4% (representing 130 million) of US adults reported MCC, including 27.1%, 52.7%, and 78.8% of young, midlife, and older adults, respectively. Among young adults, from 2013 to 2023, prevalence increased significantly from 52.5% to 59.5% for 1 or more conditions and from 21.8% to 27.1% for MCC.

Conclusion

Approximately 6 in 10 young, 8 in 10 midlife, and 9 in 10 older US adults report 1 or more chronic conditions. Trends in conditions worsened among young adults during 2013-2023. Recognizing the burden of chronic disease throughout life stages, especially earlier in life, practitioners and partners may consider prevention and management approaches critical for addressing costs, care, and health outcomes. Practitioners may also consider tailoring these approaches to unique roles, transitions, and challenges in different life stages.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions tool in Dutch primary care: a context analysis

OBJECTIVES

The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool is developed to facilitate a personalised approach to care through assessment and visualisation of a patient's experienced burden of disease, and integrating this in the conversation based on shared decision-making and individualised care plans. An indispensable step in the implementation process is an understanding of the context. The aim of this study is to perform a context analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the ABCC tool by healthcare providers (HCPs) in Dutch primary care.

DESIGN

A qualitative context analysis was performed among HCPs prior to using the ABCC tool. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to map contextual influences through semistructured interviews. A deductive coding process and content analysis was applied to identify barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the ABCC tool.

PARTICIPANTS

HCPs who participated as interventionists in an effectiveness study were recruited for this study.

RESULTS

17 HCPs (16 practice nurses and 1 general practitioner) participated. Data saturation was reached at the 11th interview. HCPs expected several major barriers to the implementation of the ABCC tool:too many different digital environments, high complexity in access, lack of time, no integration of the ABCC tool in guidelines and care standards, and patients not willing to adopt an active role in their care process. The major facilitators for implementation were a clear perception of the ABCC tool's benefits, high compatibility with and relative advantage over current practices and being part of a progressive work culture that stimulates innovation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight in the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of an intervention in the patient-HCP conversation. Barriers were present in complexity, available resources, patient needs and resources, and external policies and incentives while facilitators were present in knowledge and beliefs, implementation climate and culture. These barriers and facilitators provide opportunities for the selection and tailoring of implementation strategies for the ABCC tool.

Effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC)-tool in patients with asthma, COPD, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and heart failure: A pragmatic clustered quasi-experimental study in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC)-tool was developed to optimise chronic care.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the ABCC-tool in patients with COPD, asthma, type 2 diabetes, and/or heart failure in primary care in the Netherlands.

METHODS

The study had a pragmatic, clustered, two-armed, quasi-experimental design. The intervention group (41 general practices; 176 patients) used the ABCC-tool during routine consultations and the control group (14 general practices; 61 patients) received usual care. The primary outcome was a change in perceived quality of care (PACIC; Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care) after 18 months. Secondary outcomes included change in the PACIC after 6 and 12 months, and in quality of life (EQ-5D-5L; EuroQol-5D-5L), capability well-being (ICECAP-A; ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults), and patients' activation (PAM; Patient Activation Measure) after 6, 12, and 18 months for the total group and conditions separately.

RESULTS

We observed a significant difference in the PACIC after 6, 12, and 18 months (18 months: 0.388 points; 95%CI: 0.089-0.687; p = 0.011) for the total group and after 6 and 12 months for type 2 diabetes. After 18 months, we observed a significant difference in the PAM for the total group but not at 6 and 12 months, and not for type 2 diabetes. All significant effects were in favour of the intervention group. No significant differences were found for the EQ-5D-5L and the ICECAP-A.

CONCLUSION

Use of the ABCC-tool has a positive effect on perceived quality of care and patients' activation, which makes the tool ready for use in clinical practice. Healthcare providers (e.g. general practitioners and practice nurses) can use the tool to provide person-centred care.Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04127383).

Expanding the ABCC-tool for osteoarthritis: Development and content validation

Objective

Osteoarthritis (OA) care should be more person-centered based on physical, emotional and social aspects, instead of the current stepped-care approach solely based on physical symptoms, according to OA patients. By developing a novel module for OA in the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Condition (ABCC)-tool, a tool based on these three aspects, experienced quality of OA care and shared-decision making are expected to improve.

Design

The development of the novel OA module involved a triangular iterative process, interviewing OA patients and healthcare professionals in the field of OA, an expert panel and a literature search to identify the needs to improve OA care. Patients provided feedback on the first version of the OA module, leading to a second version. This second version was used to evaluate content validity. OA patients and healthcare professionals in the field of OA were asked to evaluate relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility, based on the COSMIN methodology. For healthcare professionals, the item-content validity index (I-CVI) was calculated.

Results

The module includes questions about pain, kinesiophobia and joint stiffness. For all three questions, 94% of the patients found these questions important for patients with OA. The I-CVI scores of the healthcare professionals ranged from 1.0 (pain, kinesiophobia) to 0.75 (joint stiffness).

Conclusion

A novel, condition-specific OA module is developed for the ABCC-tool, as a supplement to the generic questions. The module includes three questions, to measure OA specific complaints. This novel module is intended to make the ABCC-tool more elaborate and useable for a larger population.

Process evaluation of the implementation of the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool in Dutch primary care - lessons from a qualitative implementation study

BACKGROUND

The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC-)tool is developed to facilitate a personalized approach to care in the patient-healthcare provider (HCP) conversation based on shared decision-making and individualized care plans. An effectiveness study highlighted its effect on the perceived quality of care and patient activation. Successful implementation of novel interventions necessitates an understanding of the user's actual application, user experiences and an evaluation of implementation outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the ABCC-tool by HCPs in Dutch primary care.

METHODS

This study is the process evaluation of a larger type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial. Semi-structured interviews with HCPs, who were interventionists in the hybrid trial, were held at three and twelve months after they started using the ABCC-tool. The Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate implementation outcomes. The Implementation domain was further strengthened with an evaluation of implementation fidelity using Carroll's framework. Inductive coding and thematic analysis were applied to identify relevant participant experiences and implementation outcomes within the RE-AIM framework.

RESULTS

Seventeen HCPs (1 general practitioner, 16 practice nurses) participated in the study, representing 39% of potentially eligible participants. Most HCPs applied the tool after finishing their own routines instead of how it is intended to be used, namely from the beginning of the consultation. HCPs reached 2-6 patients. The ABCC-tool was initially adopted, but twelve HCPs stopped using the tool due to COVID-19 related cancellation of consultations. High fidelity was found for applying the questionnaire and visualization. Low fidelity was present for applying shared decision-making, formulating care goals and monitoring progress. HCPs indicated that maintaning the ABCC-tool depended on accompanying training and implementation support.

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs applied the ABCC-tool critically different from intended, potentially diminishing its benefits and ease of use. This evaluation stresses the need for a tailored implementation plan that includes more detailed training and guidance on how and when to use the ABCC-tool.

Measuring burden of disease in both asthma and COPD by merging the ACQ and CCQ: less is more?

Symptoms of asthma and COPD often overlap, and both diseases can co-exist in one patient. The asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) and clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ) were developed to assess disease burden in respectively asthma or COPD. This study explores the possibility of creating a new questionnaire to assess disease burden in all obstructive lung diseases by integrating and reducing questions of the ACQ and CCQ. Data of patients with asthma, COPD and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) were collected from a primary and secondary care center. Patients completed ACQ and CCQ on the same day. Linear regression tested correlations. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used for item reduction. The secondary cohort with asthma and COPD patients was used for initial question selection (development cohort). These results were reproduced in the primary care cohort and secondary cohort of patients with ACO. The development cohort comprised 252 patients with asthma and 96 with COPD. Correlation between ACQ and CCQ in asthma was R = 0.82, and in COPD R = 0.83. PCA determined a selection of 9 questions. Reproduction in primary care data (asthma n = 1110, COPD n = 1041, ACO = 355) and secondary care data of ACO patients (n = 53) resulted in similar correlations and PCA-derived selection of questions. In conclusion, PCA determined a selection of nine questions of the ACQ and CCQ: working title 'the Obstructive Lung Disease Questionnaire'. These results suggest that this pragmatic set of questions might be sufficient to assess disease burden in obstructive lung disease in both primary as secondary care.

Recommendations for Improving Chronic Care in Times of a Pandemic Based on Patient Experiences

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound and pervasive impact on the health of chronic care patients and disrupted care systems worldwide. Our research aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on chronic care provision and provide recommendations for improving care provision, based on patient experiences.

DESIGN

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were held among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart failure.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Using stratified sampling, 23 patients with COPD, heart failure, or both were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews. In the summer of 2021, online interviews were conducted.

METHODS

An iterative process was adopted to analyze the data. Going back and forth through the data and our analytical structure, we first coded the data, and subsequently developed categories, themes, and aggregate dimensions. The data were synthesized in a data structure and a data table, which were analyzed using an interpretative approach.

RESULTS

We found 3 dimensions through which care might be improved: (1) proactive and adaptive health care organization and use of innovative technologies, (2) assistance in maintaining patient resilience and coping strategies, and (3) health care built on outreaching and person-centered care enabling identification of individual patient needs. Experiences of impaired accessibility to care, altered and unmet care demands and patient needs, and the negative impact of national containment strategies on patient resilience support the need for improvement in these dimensions.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The in-depth insight gained on the impact of the pandemic on chronic care provision was used to propose recommendations for improving care, supported by not only the what and how but also the why developments require additional efforts made by policymakers and change agents, augmented by structural use and development of innovations. Health care organizations should be enabled to rapidly respond to changing internal and external environments, develop and implement innovations, and match care to patient needs.

A cluster-randomized study to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool in South Tyrolean primary care for patients with COPD, asthma, type 2 diabetes, and heart failure: the ABCC South Tyrol study

BACKGROUND

Chronic diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, type 2 diabetes, and heart failure, often coexist and contribute to a significant burden on individuals and health systems. The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool, already in routine clinical use in the Netherlands, aims to comprehensively assess and visualize disease burden, stimulate self-management, and encourage shared decision-making. This study aims to validate the German and Italian versions of the ABCC tool and evaluate its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in the South Tyrolean Primary Care setting.

METHODS

This is a cluster-randomized study involving approximately 400 patients with COPD, asthma, type 2 diabetes, and heart failure who received care from the South Tyrolean General Practices. Initially, the ABCC tool will be translated into German and Italian and validated. Subsequently, half of the participants will use the validated ABCC tool for patient-reported outcome measurement assessments, while the other half will receive usual care. The primary outcome measure is the change in the patients' perception of the quality of care after 18 months. The secondary outcomes included changes in quality of life, self-management behavior, and healthcare utilization. The missing data will be managed using multiple imputations. Additionally, a cost-effectiveness analysis that considers the direct medical costs reimbursed by the National Health Service will be conducted.

DISCUSSION

This study provides insights into the application, validation, and efficacy of the ABCC tool in the South Tyrolean healthcare context. The tool's potential to enhance person-centered care, improve the quality of life, and possibly reduce healthcare costs could greatly contribute to sustainable healthcare. The challenges of implementation, such as software integration and the use of an EU data platform, will provide lessons for future international patient care data management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN13531607. Registered on August 23, 2023.

360° Diagnostic Tool to Personalize Lifestyle Advice in Primary Care for People With Type 2 Diabetes: Development and Usability Study

BACKGROUND

Various multifaceted factors need to be addressed to improve the health and quality of life of people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Therefore, we developed a web-based decision support tool that comprises a more holistic diagnosis (including 4 domains: body, thinking and feeling, behavior, and environment) and personalized advice. This 360° diagnostic tool enables people with T2D and health care professionals at the general practice to obtain an overview of the most important T2D-related issues and, subsequently, determine the most suitable intervention for the person with T2D.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe the systematic and iterative development and evaluation of the web-based 360° diagnostic tool.

METHODS

We defined the requirements for the web-based 360° diagnostic tool based on previously developed tools, a literature review, and inputs from a multidisciplinary team of experts. As part of the conceptualization, we defined 3 requirements: diagnostics; feedback; and advice, consultation, and follow-up. Next, we developed and designed the content for each of these requirements. We evaluated the diagnostic part of the tool (ie, measurement instruments and visualization) with a qualitative design, in a usability study with a think-aloud strategy and interview questions, among 8 people with T2D at a Dutch general practice.

RESULTS

For each of the 4 domains, specific parameters and underlying elements were selected, and measurement instruments (including clinical data and questionnaires) were chosen. Cutoff values were defined to identify high-, middle-, and low-ranking scores, and decision rules were developed and implemented using R scripts and algorithms. A traffic light color visual design was created (profile wheel) to provide an overview of the scores per domain. We mapped the interventions that could be added to the tool and developed a protocol designed as a card deck with motivational interview steps. Furthermore, the usability study showed that people with T2D perceived the tool as easy to use, useful, easy to understand, and insightful.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary evaluation of the 360° diagnostic tool by experts, health care professionals, and people with T2D showed that the tool was considered relevant, clear, and practical. The iterative process provided insights into the areas of improvement, which were implemented. The strengths, shortcomings, future use, and challenges are also discussed.

Understanding the healthcare providers' perspective for bringing the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool to practice: a protocol for an implementation study

INTRODUCTION

The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool is developed and validated to support and facilitate a personalised approach to care for people with chronic conditions. The benefit of using the ABCC-tool greatly depends on how it is implemented. To enable a deeper understanding of when, how and by whom the ABCC-tool is used, this study protocol describes the design of an implementation study in which the context, experiences and implementation process of the ABCC-tool by primary care healthcare providers (HCPs) in the Netherlands will be investigated.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol describes an implementation study alongside an effectiveness trial, in which the ABCC-tool is evaluated in general practices. The implementation strategy of the tool in the trial confines to providing written information and an instruction video explaining the technical use of the ABCC-tool. The outcomes include a description of: (1) the barriers and facilitators of HCPs for implementation of the ABCC-tool, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and (2) the implementation outcomes guided by the Reach-Effect-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework Carroll's fidelity framework. All outcomes will be gathered through individual semistructured interviews throughout 12 months of use. Interviews will be audiorecorded and transcribed. Transcripts will be analysed using content analysis for identifying barriers and facilitators (based on CFIR) and thematic analyses of HCPs' experiences (based on the RE-AIM and the fidelity frameworks).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The presented study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Zuyderland Hospital, Heerlen (METCZ20180131). Written informed consent is mandatory prior to participation in the study. The results from the study in this protocol will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations.

A Digital Lifestyle Coach (E-Supporter 1.0) to Support People With Type 2 Diabetes: Participatory Development Study

BACKGROUND

A healthy lifestyle, including regular physical activity and a healthy diet, is becoming increasingly important in the treatment of chronic diseases. eHealth interventions that incorporate behavior change techniques (BCTs) and dynamic tailoring strategies could effectively support a healthy lifestyle. E-Supporter 1.0 is an eCoach designed to support physical activity and a healthy diet in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

OBJECTIVE

This paper aimed to describe the systematic development of E-Supporter 1.0.

METHODS

Our systematic design process consisted of 3 phases. The definition phase included the selection of the target group and formulation of intervention objectives, and the identification of behavioral determinants based on which BCTs were selected to apply in the intervention. In the development phase, intervention content was developed by specifying tailoring variables, intervention options, and decision rules. In the last phase, E-Supporter 1.0 integrated in the Diameter app was evaluated using a usability test in 9 people with T2D to assess intervention usage and acceptability.

RESULTS

The main intervention objectives were to stimulate light to moderate-vigorous physical activities or adherence to the Dutch dietary guidelines in people with T2D. The selection of behavioral determinants was informed by the health action process approach and theories explaining behavior maintenance. BCTs were included to address relevant behavioral determinants (eg, action control, self-efficacy, and coping planning). Development of the intervention resulted in 3 types of intervention options, consisting of motivational messages, behavioral feedback, and tailor-made supportive exercises. On the basis of IF-THEN rules, intervention options could be tailored to, among others, type of behavioral goal and (barriers to) goal achievement. Data on these variables could be collected using app data, activity tracker data, and daily ecological momentary assessments. Usability testing revealed that user experiences were predominantly positive, despite some problems in the fixed delivery of content.

CONCLUSIONS

The systematic development approach resulted in a theory-based and dynamically tailored eCoach. Future work should focus on expanding intervention content to other chronic diseases and lifestyle behaviors, enhancing the degree of tailoring and evaluating intervention effects on acceptability, use, and cost-effectiveness.

Samen sterk door persoonsgerichte en digitale zorg

Digitale zorg voor chronische patiënten heeft zich in de huisartsenpraktijk de afgelopen jaren stormachtig ontwikkeld, mede door COVID-19. Past die ontwikkeling wel bij persoonsgerichte zorg? Het NHG-Standpunt E-health voor huisarts en patiënt uit 2015 is positief-kritisch en ook de auteurs van deze beschouwing denken dat het kan. Ze geven nieuwe voorbeelden uit de praktijk die dat bevestigen, maar stippen ook de randvoorwaarden aan: training, toegankelijkheid en verder onderzoek naar de effecten.

Online Tool for the Assessment of the Burden of COVID-19 in Patients: Development Study

Background

The impact of COVID-19 has been felt worldwide, yet we are still unsure about its full impact. One of the gaps in our current knowledge relates to the long-term mental and physical impact of the infection on affected individuals. The COVID-19 pandemic hit the Netherlands at the end of February 2020, resulting in over 900,000 people testing positive for the virus, over 24,000 hospitalizations, and over 13,000 deaths by the end of January 2021. Although many patients recover from the acute phase of the disease, experience with other virus outbreaks has raised concerns regarding possible late sequelae of the infection.

Objective

This study aims to develop an online tool to assess the long-term burden of COVID-19 in patients.

Methods

In this paper, we describe the process of development, assessment, programming, implementation, and use of this new tool: the assessment of burden of COVID-19 (ABCoV) tool. This new tool is based on the well-validated assessment of burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease tool.

Results

As of January 2021, the new ABCoV tool has been used in an online patient platform by more than 2100 self-registered patients and another 400 patients in a hospital setting, resulting in over 2500 patients. These patients have submitted the ABCoV questionnaire 3926 times. Among the self-registered patients who agreed to have their data analyzed (n=1898), the number of females was high (n=1153, 60.7%), many were medically diagnosed with COVID-19 (n=892, 47.0%), and many were relatively young with only 7.4% (n=141) being older than 60 years. Of all patients that actually used the tool (n=1517), almost one-quarter (n=356, 23.5%) used the tool twice, and only a small group (n=76, 5.0%) used the tool 6 times.

Conclusions

This new ABCoV tool has been broadly and repeatedly used, and may provide insight into the perceived burden of disease, provide direction for personalized aftercare for people post COVID-19, and help us to be prepared for possible future recurrences.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool in patients with COPD, asthma, diabetes mellitus type 2 and heart failure: protocol for a pragmatic clustered quasi-experimental study

INTRODUCTION

The number of people that have one or multiple condition(s) with a chronic course is rising, which consequently challenges healthcare systems. Healthcare geared to long-term care should focus on patient-centredness, shared decision making and self-management. The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool was developed to integrate these elements in daily healthcare practice. The ABCC tool assesses and visualises burden of disease(s), helps to make shared decisions and stimulates self-management. The present paper documents a protocol for a quasi-experimental study investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the ABCC tool for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or heart failure.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study has a pragmatic clustered quasi-experimental design and will be conducted in the Netherlands. The intervention will be allocated at the level of general practice. The intervention group (18 general practices, 180 patients) will use the ABCC tool during regular consultations; the control group (18 general practices, 180 patients) will maintain usual care. Outcomes include change in quality of care (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care), quality of life (EuroQol-5D-5L), capability well-being (ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults), patients' activation (Patient Activation Measure) and costs. Follow-up time will be 18 months. Outcomes will be analysed using linear mixed models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Medical Ethics Committee Zuyderland-Zuyd Heerlen, the Netherlands (METCZ20180131). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and will be presented at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04127383).