How do general practitioners implement decision-making regarding COPD patients with exacerbations? An international focus group study

Mapping the Common Barriers to Optimal COPD Care in High and Middle-Income Countries: Qualitative Perspectives from Clinicians

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a significant global health burden despite being largely preventable and treatable. Despite the availability of guidelines, COPD care remains suboptimal in many settings, including high-income countries (HICs) and upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), with varied approaches to diagnosis and management. This study aimed to identify common and unique barriers to COPD care across six countries (Australia, Spain, Taiwan, Argentina, Mexico, and Russia) to inform global policy initiatives for improved care.

Methods

COPD care pathways were mapped for each country and supplemented with epidemiological, health-economic, and clinical data from a targeted literature review. Semi-structured interviews with 17 respiratory care clinicians were used to further validate the pathways and identify key barriers. Thematic content analysis was used to generate the themes.

Results

Six themes were common in most HICs and UMICs: "Challenges in COPD diagnosis", "Strengthening the role of primary care", "Fragmented healthcare systems and coordination challenges", "Inadequate management of COPD exacerbations", "Limited access to specialized care" and, "Impact of underfinanced and overloaded healthcare systems". One theme, "Insurance coverage and reimbursement challenges", was more relevant for UMICs. HICs and UMICs differ in patient and healthcare provider awareness, primary care involvement, spirometry access, and availability of specialized care. Both face issues with healthcare fragmentation, guideline adherence, and COPD exacerbation management. In addition, UMICs also grapple with resource limitations and healthcare infrastructure challenges.

Conclusion

Many challenges to COPD care are the same in both HICs and UMICs, underscoring the pervasive nature of these issues. While country-specific issues require customized solutions, there are untapped possibilities for implementing global respiratory strategies that support countries to manage COPD effectively. In addition to healthcare system-level initiatives, there is a crucial need for political prioritization of COPD to allocate the essential resources it requires.

A methodological framework allows the identification of personomic markers to consider when designing personalized interventions

OBJECTIVES

To develop a methodological framework to identify and prioritize personomic markers (e.g., psychosocial situation, beliefs…) to consider for personalizing interventions and to test in smoking cessation interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

(1) We identified potential personomic markers considered in protocols of personalized interventions, in reviews of predictors of smoking cessation, and in interviews with general practitioners. (2) Physicians, and patient smokers or former smokers selected the markers they considered most relevant during online paired comparison experiments. Data were analyzed with Bradley Terry Luce models.

RESULTS

Thirty-six personomic markers were identified from research evidence. They were evaluated by 795 physicians (median age: 34, IQR [30-38]; 95% general practitioners) and 793 patients (median age: 54, IQR [42-64], 71.4% former smokers) during 11,963 paired comparisons. Physicians identified patients' motivation for quitting (e.g., Prochaska stages), patients' preferences, and patients' fears and beliefs (e.g., concerns about weight gain) as the most relevant elements to personalize smoking cessation. Patients considered their motivation for quitting, smoking behavior (e.g., smoking at home/at work), and tobacco dependence (e.g., Fagerström Test) as the most relevant elements to consider.

CONCLUSION

We provide a methodological framework to prioritize which personomic markers should be considered when developing smoking cessation interventions.

Physicians' experiences and actions in making complex level-of-care decisions during acute situations within older patients' homes: a critical incident study

BACKGROUND

Complex level-of-care decisions involve uncertainty in which decisions are beneficial for older patients. Knowledge of physicians' decision-making during acute situations in older patients' homes is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to describe physicians' experiences and actions in making complex level-of-care decisions during the assessment of older patients in acute situations within their own homes.

METHODS

Individual interviews and analyses were performed according to the critical incident technique (CIT). In total, 14 physicians from Sweden were included.

RESULTS

In making complex level-of-care decisions, physicians experienced collaborating with and including older patients, significant others and health care professionals to be essential for making individualized decisions regarding the patients' and their significant others' needs. During decision-making, physicians experienced difficulties when doubt or collaborative obstructions occurred. Physicians' actions involved searching for an understanding of older patients' and their significant others' wishes and needs, considering their unique conditions, guiding them, and adjusting care according to their wishes. Actions further involved promoting collaboration and reaching a consensus with all persons involved.

CONCLUSION

Physicians strive to individualize complex level-of-care decisions based on older patients' and their significant others' wishes and needs. Furthermore, individualized decisions depend on successful collaboration and consensus among older patients, their significant others and other health care professionals. Therefore, to facilitate individualized level-of-care decisions, the health care organizations need to support physicians when they are making individualized decisions, provide sufficient resources and promote 24 - 7 collaboration between organizations and health care professionals.

Patient involvement in the encounter between general practice and patients with a chronic disease. Results of a scoping review focusing on type 2 diabetes and obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Research has shown improved health outcomes when patients are involved in managing their health conditions and when their individual needs are considered.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to map the existing research regarding chronic disease patients' involvement in their encounters with general practice, with a specific focus on patients with Type 2 diabetes (TD2) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients.

METHODS

Studies of any design, date, and language were included. A systematic search was conducted using the following databases: Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Scopus, and EMBASE from August until October 2020 and renewed September 2021. Data were systematically charted by the following study characteristics: bibliographic aims; study aims; setting; area of interest; results; conclusion.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included; they conducted qualitative methods, surveys or mixed methods. From the patients' perspectives, the importance of being more involved in treatment discussions during consultations as well as a friendly environment, was underscored. A good relationship and relational continuity make it easier for patients to be more involved in treatment decisions. From the general practitioner (GP) perspectives, they mentioned their high workload, long-standing relationships, knowledge about the patients and prepared patients as factors influencing their ability to involve patients in treatment discussions.

CONCLUSION

A good GP-patient relationship was considered an important aspect to providing and facilitating for involvement of patients with COPD or TD2. Scoping review registration: https://osf.io/ynqt2.

Shared decision-making in general practice from a patient perspective. A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess patient involvement in terms of shared decision-making in general practice from the perspectives of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or type 2 diabetes (T2DM) (or both).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey using the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) ranging from 0 to 5 (best).

SETTING AND SUBJECTS

Patients diagnosed with either T2DM and/or COPD were asked to focus on their most recent consultation in general practice concerning their T2DM or lung disease. Responders were approached through the Danish Diabetes Association and Danish Lung Association.

RESULTS

The sample included 468 responders. Mean scores for the total sample were between 3.3 and 4.2. The overall mean score for all items was 3.7. The highest overall mean score was for patients with T2DM, whereas the lowest overall mean score was for patients having both T2DM and COPD. Furthermore, we observed a slightly lower overall mean score for women compared to men and for those younger than 65 years compared to those aged 65 years or older.

CONCLUSION

Overall, patients are involved in shared decision-making in general practice Minor nuances were found because patients with COPD were less involved in shared decision-making compared to patients with T2DM. Similarly, younger patients and women were less involved than older patients and men.

Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one other long-term condition: a mixed methods review

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic respiratory condition characterised by shortness of breath, cough and recurrent exacerbations. People with COPD often live with one or more co-existing long-term health conditions (comorbidities). People with more severe COPD often have a higher number of comorbidities, putting them at greater risk of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any single intervention for COPD adapted or tailored to their comorbidity(s) compared to any other intervention for people with COPD and one or more common comorbidities (quantitative data, RCTs) in terms of the following outcomes: Quality of life, exacerbations, functional status, all-cause and respiratory-related hospital admissions, mortality, pain, and depression and anxiety. To assess the effectiveness of an adapted or tailored single COPD intervention (simple or complex) that is aimed at changing the management of people with COPD and one or more common comorbidities (quantitative data, RCTs) compared to usual care in terms of the following outcomes: Quality of life, exacerbations, functional status, all-cause and respiratory-related hospital admissions, mortality, pain, and depression and anxiety. To identify emerging themes that describe the views and experiences of patients, carers and healthcare professionals when receiving or providing care to manage multimorbidities (qualitative data).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases including the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL, to identify relevant randomised and qualitative studies. We also searched trial registries and conducted citation searches. The latest search was conducted in January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) compared a) any single intervention for COPD adapted or tailored to their comorbidity(s) compared to any other intervention, or b) any adapted or tailored single COPD intervention (simple or complex) that is aimed at changing the management of people with COPD and one or more comorbidities, compared to usual care. We included qualitative studies or mixed-methods studies to identify themes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for analysis of the RCTs. We used Cochrane's risk of bias tool for the RCTs and the CASP checklist for the qualitative studies. We planned to use the Mixed Methods Appraisal tool (MMAT) to assess the risk of bias in mixed-methods studies, but we found none. We used GRADE and CERQual to assess the quality of the quantitative and qualitative evidence respectively. The primary outcome measures for this review were quality of life and exacerbations.

MAIN RESULTS

Quantitative studies We included seven studies (1197 participants) in the quantitative analyses, with interventions including telemonitoring, pulmonary rehabilitation, treatment optimisation, water-based exercise training and case management. Interventions were either compared with usual care or with an active comparator (such as land-based exercise training). Duration of trials ranged from 4 to 52 weeks. Mean age of participants ranged from 64 to 72 years and COPD severity ranged from mild to very severe. Trials included either people with COPD and a specific comorbidity (including cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, lung cancer, head or neck cancer, and musculoskeletal conditions), or with one or more comorbidities of any type. Overall, we judged the evidence presented to be of moderate to very low certainty (GRADE), mainly due to the methodological quality of included trials and imprecision of effect estimates. Intervention versus usual care Quality of life as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score may improve with tailored pulmonary rehabilitation compared to usual care at 52 weeks (mean difference (MD) -10.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.66 to -9.04; 1 study, 70 participants; low-certainty evidence). Tailored pulmonary rehabilitation is likely to improve COPD assessment test (CAT) scores compared with usual care at 52 weeks (MD -8.02, 95% CI -9.44 to -6.60; 1 study, 70 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and with a multicomponent telehealth intervention at 52 weeks (MD -6.90, 95% CI -9.56 to -4.24; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence is uncertain about effects of pharmacotherapy optimisation or telemonitoring interventions on CAT improvement compared with usual care. There may be little to no difference in the number of people experiencing exacerbations, or mean exacerbations with case management compared with usual care (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.57; 1 study, 470 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For secondary outcomes, six-minute walk distance (6MWD) may improve with pulmonary rehabilitation, water-based exercise or multicomponent interventions at 38 to 52 weeks (low-certainty evidence). A multicomponent intervention may result in fewer people being admitted to hospital at 17 weeks, although there may be little to no difference in a telemonitoring intervention. There may be little to no difference between intervention and usual care for mortality. Intervention versus active comparator We included one study comparing water-based and land-based exercise (30 participants). We found no evidence for quality of life or exacerbations. There may be little to no difference between water- and land-based exercise for 6MWD (MD 5 metres, 95% CI -22 to 32; 38 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Qualitative studies One nested qualitative study (21 participants) explored perceptions and experiences of people with COPD and long-term conditions, and of researchers and health professionals who were involved in an RCT of telemonitoring equipment. Several themes were identified, including health status, beliefs and concerns, reliability of equipment, self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, factors affecting usefulness and perceived usefulness, attitudes and intention, self-management and changes in healthcare use. We judged the qualitative evidence presented as of very low certainty overall.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Owing to a paucity of eligible trials, as well as diversity in the intervention type, comorbidities and the outcome measures reported, we were unable to provide a robust synthesis of data. Pulmonary rehabilitation or multicomponent interventions may improve quality of life and functional status (6MWD), but the evidence is too limited to draw a robust conclusion. The key take-home message from this review is the lack of data from RCTs on treatments for people living with COPD and comorbidities. Given the variation in number and type of comorbidity(s) an individual may have, and severity of COPD, larger studies reporting individual patient data are required to determine these effects.

Variations in pediatric hospitalization in seven European countries

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of pediatric hospital utilization across seven European countries.

METHODS

Secondary data from WHO's European Hospital Morbidity Database from 2009 to 2012. Cross- country comparison of rates of admissions and bed days per 100 person-years by clinical service. We tabulated counts of admissions and bed days by principal diagnosis and age group for Ireland, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Spain, Germany, and France. ICD 9 or ICD 10 or ISHMT diagnosis codes were allocated to clinical services. Normal newborn admissions were excluded from the analysis. Simple linear regression models, weighted by pediatric population size, were constructed to estimate the relationships between health care utilization and factors that may influence variation in care.

RESULTS

Hospital admission across the seven countries ranged from 9.41 (Spain) to 19.59 (Germany) admissions per 100 person-years. Bed days ranged from a low of 52.50 (Spain) to 135.44 (Germany) per 100 person-years. General pediatrics and neonatology led in clinical volume across all countries. Infectious disease admissions were the third most common. Bed supply and nurse supply were positively associated with health care utilization. Out-of-pocket payment was inversely associated with health care utilization CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of utilization of pediatric inpatient care was observed across seven European countries that have universal coverage. Variation in the provision of effective, supply-sensitive, and preference-sensitive care may explain some of the variations. Our study shows that it is probable that preventable hospital admissions are occurring in the pediatric population.

General practitioner strategies for managing patients with multimorbidity: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative research

Background

General practitioners (GPs) increasingly manage patients with multimorbidity but report challenges in doing so. Patients describe poor experiences with health care systems that treat each of their health conditions separately, resulting in fragmented, uncoordinated care. For GPs to provide the patient-centred, coordinated care patients need and want, research agendas and health system structures and policies will need to adapt to address this epidemiologic transition. This systematic review seeks to understand if and how multimorbidity impacts on the work of GPs, the strategies they employ to manage challenges, and what they believe still needs addressing to ensure quality patient care.

Methods

Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies reporting GP experiences of managing patients with multimorbidity. The search included nine major databases, grey literature sources, Google and Google Scholar, a hand search of Journal of Comorbidity, and the reference lists of included studies.

Results

Thirty-three studies from fourteen countries were included. Three major challenges were identified: practising without supportive evidence; working within a fragmented health care system whose policies and structures remain organised around single condition care and specialisation; and the clinical uncertainty associated with multimorbidity complexity and general practitioner perceptions of decisional risk. GPs revealed three approaches to mitigating these challenges: prioritising patient-centredness and relational continuity; relying on knowledge of patient preferences and unique circumstances to individualise care; and structuring the consultation to create a sense of time and minimise patient risk.

Conclusions

GPs described an ongoing tension between applying single condition guidelines to patients with multimorbidity as security against uncertainty or penalty, and potentially causing patients harm. Above all, they chose to prioritise their long-term relationships for the numerous gains this brought such as mutual trust, deeper insight into a patient’s unique circumstances, and useable knowledge of each individual’s capacity for the work of illness and goals for life. GPs described a need for better multimorbidity management guidance. Perhaps more than this, they require policies and models of practice that provide remunerated time and space for nurturing trustful therapeutic partnerships.

Opportunities to reduce antibiotic prescribing for patients with COPD in primary care: a cohort study using electronic health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)

BACKGROUND

In primary care there is uncertainty about which patients with acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) benefit from antibiotics.

OBJECTIVES

To identify which types of COPD patients get the most antibiotics in primary care to support targeted antibiotic stewardship.

METHODS

Observational study of COPD patients using a large English primary care database with 12 month follow-up. We estimated the incidence of and risk factors for antibiotic prescribing relative to the number of AECOPD during follow-up, considering COPD severity, smoking, obesity and comorbidity.

RESULTS

From 157 practices, 19594 patients were diagnosed with COPD, representing 2.6% of patients and 11.5% of all prescribed antibiotics. Eight hundred and thirty-three (4.5%) patients with severe COPD and frequent AECOPD were prescribed six to nine prescriptions per year and accounted for 13.0% of antibiotics. Individuals with mild to moderate COPD and zero or one AECOPD received one to three prescriptions per year but accounted for 42.5% of all prescriptions. In addition to COPD severity, asthma, chronic heart disease, diabetes, heart failure and influenza vaccination were independently associated with increased antibiotic use.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe COPD have the highest rates of antibiotic prescribing but most antibiotics are prescribed for patients with mild to moderate COPD. Antibiotic stewardship should focus on the dual goals of safely reducing the volume of prescribing in patients with mild to moderate COPD, and optimizing prescribing in patients with severe disease who are at significant risk of drug resistance.

General practitioners' attitudes and decision making regarding admission for older adults with infection: a UK qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

The world has an ageing population. Infection is common in older adults; serious infection has a high mortality rate and is associated with unplanned admissions. In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) must identify which older patients require admission to hospital and provide appropriate care and support for those staying at home.

OBJECTIVES

To explore attitudes of UK GPs towards referring older patients with suspected infection to hospital, how they weigh up the decision to admit against the alternatives and how alternatives to admission could be made more effective.Methods. Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. GPs were purposively sampled from across the UK to achieve maximum variation in terms of GP role, experience and practice population. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed using a modified framework approach.

RESULTS

GPs' key influences on decision making were grouped into patient, GP and system factors. Patient factors included clinical factors, social factors and shared decision making. GP factors included gut instinct, risk management and acknowledging an associated personal emotional burden. System factors involved weighing up the pressure on secondary care beds against increasing GP workload. GPs described that finding an alternative to admission could be more time consuming, complex to arrange or were restricted by lack of capacity.

CONCLUSION

GPs need to be empowered to make safe decisions about place of care for older adults with suspected infection. This may mean developing strategies to support decision making as well as improving the ease of access to, and capacity of, any alternatives to admission.

Challenges and strategies for general practitioners diagnosing serious infections in older adults: a UK qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Serious infections in older people are associated with unplanned hospital admissions and high mortality. Recognising the presence of a serious infection and making an accurate diagnosis are important challenges for General Practice. This study aimed to explore the issues UK GPs face when diagnosing serious infections in older patients.

METHODS

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. 28 GPs from 27 practices were purposively sampled from across the UK to achieve maximum variation in terms of GP role, experience and practice population. Interviews began by asking participants to describe recent or memorable cases where they had assessed older patients with suspected serious infections. Additional questions from the topic guide were used to explore the challenges further. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed using a modified framework approach.

RESULTS

Diagnosing serious infection in older adults was perceived to be challenging by participating GPs and the diagnosis was often uncertain. Contributing factors included patient complexity, atypical presentations, as well as a lack of knowledge of patients due to a loss in continuity. Diagnostic challenges were present at each stage of the patient assessment. Scoring systems were mainly used as communication tools. Investigations were sometimes used to resolve diagnostic uncertainty, but availability and speed of result limited their practical use. Clear safety-net plans shared with patients and their families helped GPs manage ongoing uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic challenges are present throughout the assessment of an older adult with a serious infection in primary care. Supporting GPs to provide continuity of care may improve the recognition and developing point of care testing for use in community settings may reduce diagnostic uncertainty.

Impact of CAre-related Regret Upon Sleep (ICARUS) cohort study: protocol of a 3-year multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of novice healthcare professionals

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare professionals are particularly at risk of developing numerous physical and psychological health problems. The experiences of emotional burden associated with providing healthcare, notably care-related regret, have been associated with these health problems, but only using cross-sectional data so far. Evidence of a causal impact of regret has not been assessed. The Impact of CAre-related Regret Upon Sleep (ICARUS) study is the first prospective and international cohort study established to examine how newly practising healthcare professionals adapt to their challenging job by assessing the impact of care-related regret on sleep and job quitting.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

The ICARUS cohort study will include newly practising healthcare professionals working in acute care hospitals and clinics recruited between May 2017 and November 2019. Data collection, which will begin as soon as the participant starts working with patients, will consist of a 1-year weekly assessment using a secure web survey. Follow-up data will be collected at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after the end of the first year. We will collect detailed information on the experience of care-related regret (ie, highest regret intensity, accumulation of regrets and coping strategies related to regrets), sleep problems and job quitting. Moreover, quality of life, health status and burnout will be assessed during the follow-up. Several confounders factors, including sociodemographic characteristics, personality, night shifts and work environment characteristics, will be assessed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Geneva Canton, Switzerland (CCER2016-02041), the Ethics Committee of London South Bank University (HSCSEP/17/06) and the University Research Ethics Committee of Bedfordshire (UREC106). Other study centres deemed local ethical approval unnecessary since the main ethics committee (Geneva) had already accepted the project. Results will be published in relevant scientific journals and be disseminated in international conferences. Fully anonymised data and questionnaires will be freely accessible to everyone (scientists and general public).

Approaches to drug therapy for COPD in Russia: a proposed therapeutic algorithm

Until recently, there have been few clinical algorithms for the management of patients with COPD. Current evidence-based clinical management guidelines can appear to be complex, and they lack clear step-by-step instructions. For these reasons, we chose to create a simple and practical clinical algorithm for the management of patients with COPD, which would be applicable to real-world clinical practice, and which was based on clinical symptoms and spirometric parameters that would take into account the pathophysiological heterogeneity of COPD. This optimized algorithm has two main fields, one for nonspecialist treatment by primary care and general physicians and the other for treatment by specialized pulmonologists. Patients with COPD are treated with long-acting bronchodilators and short-acting drugs on a demand basis. If the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) is ≥50% of predicted and symptoms are mild, treatment with a single long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting beta-agonist is proposed. When FEV₁ is <50% of predicted and/or the COPD assessment test score is ≥10, the use of combined bronchodilators is advised. If there is no response to treatment after three months, referral to a pulmonary specialist is recommended for pathophysiological endotyping: 1) eosinophilic endotype with peripheral blood or sputum eosinophilia >3%; 2) neutrophilic endotype with peripheral blood neutrophilia >60% or green sputum; or 3) pauci-granulocytic endotype. It is hoped that this simple, optimized, step-by-step algorithm will help to individualize the treatment of COPD in real-world clinical practice. This algorithm has yet to be evaluated prospectively or by comparison with other COPD management algorithms, including its effects on patient treatment outcomes. However, it is hoped that this algorithm may be useful in daily clinical practice for physicians treating patients with COPD in Russia.