Priority setting in general practice: health priorities of older patients differ from treatment priorities of their physicians

Medical care priorities of community-dwelling older adults according to three dimensions of quality of life: Quality of daily living, satisfaction and happiness from birth to death, and human vitality

AIM

Although the maintenance and improvement of quality of life (QoL) through holistic care are important in geriatric medical care, care priorities might differ depending on three essential aspects of QoL: the quality of daily living, satisfaction and happiness from birth to death, and human vitality, which are "Seikatsu," "Jinsei," "Seimei" in Japanese, respectively. We aimed to clarify these priorities in terms of medical care and examined how the definitions of QoL affected these priorities' rankings.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study involved community-dwelling older adults aged ≥65 years living in Kashiwa City, Chiba Prefecture, Japan. The number of participants was 1550 (mean age, 76.1 ± 5.8 years; 699 women [45.1%]). A self-administered questionnaire distributed in advance was used to rank 12 items sought in medical care. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups and sent the corresponding questionnaire, which differed only in the definition of QoL.

RESULTS

The top priorities for medical care were "effective treatment of illness," "improvement of physical function," and "maintaining a high level of activity." When QoL was defined as "the quality of daily living, satisfaction and happiness from birth to death, and human vitality," participants were significantly more likely to rank QoL improvement as one of the top three items (adjusted odds ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.05).

CONCLUSIONS

As a medical care priority, older adults desire improvement of multidimensional elements of life, including human vitality. Health care providers should consider this when making medical care decisions. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 493-498.

Using a priority setting exercise to identify priorities for guidelines on newborn and child health in South Africa, Malawi, and Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Sub-Saharan Africa is the region with the highest under-five mortality rate globally. Child healthcare decisions should be based on rigorously developed evidence-informed guidelines. The Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project is enhancing capacity to use global research to develop locally relevant guidelines for newborn and child health in South Africa (SA), Malawi, and Nigeria. The first step in this process was to identify national priorities for newborn and child health guideline development, and this paper describes our approach.

METHODS

We followed a good practice method for priority setting, including stakeholder engagement, online priority setting surveys and consensus meetings, conducted separately in South Africa, Malawi and Nigeria. We established national Steering Groups (SG), comprising 10-13 members representing government, academia, and other stakeholders, identified through existing contacts and references, who helped prioritise initial topics identified by research teams and oversaw the process. Various stakeholders were consulted via online surveys to rate the importance of topics, with results informing consensus meetings with SGs where final priority topics were agreed.

RESULTS

Based on survey results, nine, 10 and 11 topics were identified in SA, Malawi, and Nigeria respectively, which informed consensus meetings. Through voting and discussion within meetings, and further engagement after the meetings, the top three priority topics were identified in each country. In SA, the topics concerned anemia prevention in infants and young children and post-discharge support for caregivers of preterm and LBW babies. In Malawi, they focused on enteral nutrition in critically ill children, diagnosis of childhood cancers in the community, and caring for neonates. In Nigeria, the topics focused on identifying pre-eclampsia in the community, hand hygiene compliance to prevent infections, and enteral nutrition for LBW and preterm infants.

CONCLUSIONS

Through dynamic and iterative stakeholder engagement, we identified three priority topics for guideline development on newborn and child health in SA, Malawi and Nigeria. Topics were specific to contexts, with no overlap, which highlights the importance of contextualised priority setting as well as of the relationships with key decisionmakers who help define the priorities.

"My Life Isn't Defined by Substance Use": Recovery Perspectives Among Young Adults with Substance Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

While substance use disorder remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality for young adults, low rates of treatment engagement and retention persist. One explanation is that substance use disorder treatment approaches do not match young adults' expectations for recovery. While the concept of recovery has been explored among adult populations, less is known about how young adults think about recovery.

OBJECTIVE

To describe perspectives of recovery among young adults with substance use disorder.

DESIGN

Qualitative, in-depth interviews exploring young adults' definitions of recovery.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty English-speaking young adults (7 women; 21-29 years old) diagnosed with substance use disorder recruited from an urban safety net hospital in Massachusetts.

APPROACH

Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. An iterative categorization analytic approach was used to identify and interpret themes.

KEY RESULTS

Four themes related to recovery were identified. First, young adults described recovery as a way to grow up and live a normal life not defined by the substance use. A second theme was recovery had to include multiple components, such as mental health treatment, to be successful. Third, young adults described recovery as a self-motivated process, and it was important that young adults had agency in recovery decision-making. Fourth, recovery was described as a lifelong pursuit that required vigilance and commitment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this qualitative study of young adults with substance use disorder, participants identified themes that have implications for treatment models. Participants recognized recovery as a complex and individually motivated process that includes multiple components such as mental health treatment and re-engagement in regular daily activities. Models of care for young adults should consider incorporating these treatment elements to improve engagement and retention.

Goal-oriented care for patients with chronic conditions or multimorbidity in primary care: A scoping review and concept analysis

BACKGROUND

The healthcare system is faced by an ageing population, increase in chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Multimorbid patients are faced with multiple parallel care processes leading to a risk of fragmented care. These problems relate to the disease-oriented paradigm. In this paradigm the treatment goals can be in contrast with what patients value. The concept of goal-oriented care is proposed as an alternative way of providing care as meeting patients' goals could have potential benefits. Though, there is a need to translate this concept into tangible knowledge so providers can better understand and use the concept in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to address this need by means of a concept analysis.

METHOD

This concept analysis using the method of Walker and Avant is based on a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, CINAHL, OTSeeker and Web of Science. The method provides eight iterative steps: select a concept, determine purpose, determine defining attributes, identify model case, identify additional case, identify antecedents and consequences and define empirical referents.

RESULTS

The analysis of 37 articles revealed that goal-oriented care is a dynamic and iterative process of three stages: goal-elicitation, goal-setting, and goal-evaluation. The process is underpinned by the patient's context and values. Provider and patient preparedness are required to provide goal-oriented care. Goal-oriented care has the potential to improve patients' experiences and providers' well-being, to reduce costs, and improve the overall population health. The challenge is to identify empirical referents to evaluate the process of goal-oriented care.

CONCLUSION

A common understanding of goal-oriented care is presented. Further research should focus on how and what goals are set by the patient, how this knowledge could be translated into a tangible workflow and should support the development of a strategy to evaluate the goal-oriented process of care.

Research priority setting in obesity: a systematic review

AIM

Obesity research priority setting, if conducted to a high standard, can help promote policy-relevant and efficient research. Therefore, there is a need to identify existing research priority setting studies conducted in the topic area of obesity and to determine the extent to which they followed good practice principles for research priority setting.

METHOD

Studies examining research priority setting in obesity were identified through searching the MEDLINE, PBSC, CINAHL, PsycINFO databases and the grey literature. The nine common themes of good practice in research priority setting were used as a methodological framework to evaluate the processes of the included studies. These were context, use of a comprehensive approach, inclusiveness, information gathering, planning for implementation, criteria, methods for deciding on priorities, evaluation and transparency.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles reporting research prioritisation exercises conducted in different areas of obesity research were included. All studies reported engaging with various stakeholders such as policy makers, researchers and healthcare professionals. Public involvement was included in six studies. Methods of research prioritisation commonly included both Delphi and nominal group techniques and surveys. None of the 13 studies fulfilled all nine of the good practice criteria for research priority setting, with the most common limitations including not using a comprehensive approach and lack of inclusivity and evaluating on their processes.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for research priority setting studies in obesity to involve the public and to evaluate their exercises to ensure they are of high quality.

[Prioritization by patients of a series of common components in the standard comprehensive geriatric assessment in Primary Care]

OBJECTIVE

To know the prioritization by people aged ≥70 of a series of common components in the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in primary care (PC), according to the influence on health.

METHOD

Cross-sectional descriptive study through questionnaire to 109 people, have been excluded those at the end of life or with cognitive, sensory or mental/psychiatric impairment that made collaboration difficult. The main variable was a selection of 23 items of the physical/clinical, functional, mental and social/family, common components on a CGA in PC. Others: age, sex, VIDA questionnaire of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), number of medications, and Charlson comorbidity index.

RESULTS

Median age 78 years, 75 percentile of 84; 64.2% women. Four people (3.7%) had altered VIDA questionnaire (<32 points). Median of 5 chronic medications, and 98 (90%) comorbidity absence considering Charlson index. Without statistically significant differences contrasting gender with age, result in VIDA, nor number of chronic medications. The best scored items according to centralization statistics were smoking and memory, and considering the best score (4-5 out of 5) of the Likert scale: proper medication (93.6% of the people surveyed, 95% CI: 87.3-96.8), mouth/teeth condition (92.7%, 95% CI: 86.2-96.2), mood (91.7%, 95% CI: 85.1-95.6), and capacity for ADL (91.7%, 95% CI:85.1-95.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking, memory, proper medication, mouth/teeth condition, mood and ADL were considered as the most influential in health by patients. Because of the important of patient participation in the content of the CGA and the scarcity of these kind of studies, new studies that deepen this issue become relevant.

How Do Treatment Priorities Differ Between Patients in HIV Care and Their Providers? A Mixed-Methods Study

Evidence suggests priorities differ between patients in HIV care and their providers regarding topics most important to address in care. At five U.S. sites, we asked patients and providers to prioritize 25 potential topic areas to address during routine visits, and invited patients to discuss selection rationale. Patients (n = 206) and providers (n = 17) showed high discordance in rank order priorities (X² (24, 223) = 71.12; p < 0.0001). Patients ranked social domains such as HIV stigma highly; a higher proportion of providers prioritized substance use domains. HIV stigma was a higher priority for patients in care fewer than 6 years (Fisher's exact p = 0.0062), nonwhite patients (Fisher's exact p = 0.0114), and younger patients (Fisher's exact p = 0.0281). Patients' priorities differed between men and women (X² (24, 188) = 52.89; p < 0.0001), white race vs. other races (X² (24, 206) = 48.32; p = 0.0023), and Latinos vs. non-Latinos (X² (24, 206) = 48.65; p = 0.0021). Interviews (n = 79) revealed perceived impact of social context on health and health behaviors.

Methods to Assess Patient Preferences in Old Age Pharmacotherapy - A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify methods used to assess medication preferences in older adults and evaluate their advantages and disadvantages with respect to their applicability to the context of multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO) were searched. Eligible studies elicited individual treatment or outcome preferences in a context that involved long-term pharmacological treatment options. We included studies with a study population aged ≥ 65 years and/or with a mean or median age of ≥ 75 years. Qualitative studies, studies assessing preferences for only two different treatments, and studies targeting preferences for life-sustaining treatments were excluded. The identified preference measurement methods were evaluated based on four criteria (time budget, cognitive demand, variety of pharmacological aspects, and link with treatment strategies) judged to be relevant for the elicitation of patient preferences in polypharmacy.

RESULTS

Sixty articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis. Fifty-five different instruments to assess patient preferences, based on 24 different elicitation methods, were identified. The most commonly applied preference measurement techniques were "medication willingness" (description of a specific medication with inquiry of the participant's willingness to take it), discrete choice experiments, Likert scale-based questionnaires, and rank prioritization. The majority of the instruments were created for disease-specific or context-specific settings. Only three instruments (Outcome Prioritization Tool, a complex intervention, "MediMol" questionnaire) dealt with the broader issue of geriatric multimorbidity. Only seven of the identified tools showed somewhat favorable characteristics for a potential use of the respective method in the context of polypharmacy.

CONCLUSION

Up to now, few instruments have been specifically designed for the assessment of medication preferences in older patients with multimorbidity. To facilitate valid preference elicitation in the context of geriatric polypharmacy, future research should focus on suitable characteristics of existing techniques to develop new measurement approaches for this increasingly relevant population.

The assessment and management of quality of life of older adults with diabetes mellitus

Introduction: As the population ages, the number of older adults with diabetes mellitus will continue to rise. The burden of diabetes on older adults is significant due to the disease itself, its complications, and its treatments. This is compounded by geriatric syndromes such as frailty and cognitive dysfunction. Consequently, health and diabetes-related quality of life (QoL) are diminished.Areas covered: This article reviews the value of assessing QoL in providing patient-centered care and the associations between QoL measures and health outcomes. The determinants of QoL particular to diabetes and the older population are reviewed, including psychosocial, physical, and cognitive burdens of diabetes and aging and the impact of hypoglycemia on QoL. Strategies are described to alleviate these burdens and improve QoL, and barriers to multidisciplinary patient-centered care are discussed. QoL measurement instruments are reviewed.Expert opinion: The goals of treating diabetes and its complications should be considered carefully along with each patient's capacity to withstand the burdens of treatment. This capacity is reduced by socioeconomic, psychological, cognitive, and physical factors reduces this capacity. Incorporating measurement of HRQoL into clinical practices is possible, but deficiencies in the systems of health-care delivery need to be addressed to facilitate their use.

Priorities of patients with multimorbidity and of clinicians regarding treatment and health outcomes: a systematic mixed studies review

OBJECTIVES

To identify studies that have investigated the health outcome and treatment priorities of patients with multimorbidity, clinicians or both, in order to assess whether the priorities of the two groups are in alignment, or whether a disparity exists between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2019 using a predefined search strategy, as well as reference lists containing any relevant articles, as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies reporting health outcome and treatment priorities of adult patients with multimorbidity, defined as suffering from two or more chronic conditions, or of clinicians in the context of multimorbidity or both. There was no restriction by study design, and studies using quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We used a narrative synthesis approach to synthesise the quantitative findings, and a meta-ethnography approach to synthesise the qualitative findings.

RESULTS

Our search identified 24 studies for inclusion, which comprised 12 quantitative studies, 10 qualitative studies and 2 mixed-methods studies. Twelve studies reported the priorities of both patients and clinicians, 10 studies reported the priorities of patients and 2 studies reported the priorities of clinicians alone. Our findings have shown a mostly low level of agreement between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians. We found that prioritisation by patients was mainly driven by their illness experiences, while clinicians focused on longer-term risks. Preserving functional ability emerged as a key priority for patients from across our quantitative and qualitative analyses.

CONCLUSION

Recognising that there may be a disparity in prioritisation and understanding the reasons for why this might occur, can facilitate clinicians in accurately eliciting the priorities that are most important to their patients and delivering patient-centred care.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018076076.

Communication about Drug-Related Problems (DRPs) during Patients' Visits to Dutch Physicians and Pharmacies

The objective of this study is to assess the frequency and type of drug-related problems (DRPs) (1) raised and discussed (2) raised but not discussed or (3) not raised during patients' visits to healthcare practitioners (HCPs). In this cross-sectional study in Dutch outpatient clinics, GP practices and pharmacies, verbal cues from patients and HCPs indicating DRPs were inventoried by an observer during visits. It was also observed whether raised DRPs were discussed between patient and HCP. Post-encounter interviews (HCPs) were conducted and post-encounter questionnaires (patient) were distributed to identify DRPs not raised. In total, 431 patients were observed during a single visit. In 42.2% of these visits, 311 DRPs were raised (weighted mean (SD) 0.7 (±1.1) DRP/patient). Of these 311 DRPs, 82.0% were discussed between HCP and patient. HCPs did not raise existing DRPs in 3.9% of the 431 visits; in 6.3% of the 176 questionnaires the patient reported an existing DRP that had not been raised. In conclusion, almost one in six of the DRPs raised during visits are not discussed between HCP and patient. Furthermore, existing DRPs are not even raised in 4-6% of the visits. HCPs and patients should be aware that, although patients often have DRPs, these are not always discussed or not even raised during patients' visits.

Independence and Caregiver Preferences Among Community-Dwelling Older People in Slovenia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Although Slovenia is becoming an aging society, very little is known about the abilities and needs of home-dwelling older people or their preferences regarding assistance. The aim of the study was to explore the need for assistance in daily activities among older Slovenian people living at home. Older adults aged between 65 and 97 years (N = 358) participated in the cross-sectional survey study. A questionnaire that assessed independence in daily activities and assistance in the home environment was developed. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, a nonparametric test (Wilcoxon signed rank test), and the chi-square test. The results showed that older Slovenians were more independent in activities of daily living (ADLs) than instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs). Independence was the highest for using the toilet, feeding, and mobility transfers, and the lowest for bathing. With IADLs, assistance was most often required with shopping and housework; this assistance was usually provided by family members. The provider of assistance was generally compatible with older people’s preferences concerning assistance at home. We found no differences in care preferences between urban and rural settings. Assistance in the home environment was predominantly provided by unpaid helpers, which reflects recent developments in health and social services that put an emphasis on a person’s social network. Due to demographic changes and the decrease in the number of adult children, reliance on close relatives might soon become a challenge. These findings can help policy makers understand older people’s choices and preferences better when planning long-term care.

Goal-Based Shared Decision-Making: Developing an Integrated Model

Objective:

Definitions of shared decision-making (SDM) have largely neglected to consider goal setting as an explicit component. Applying SDM to people with multiple long-term conditions requires attention to goal setting. We propose an integrated model, which shows how goal setting, at 3 levels, can be integrated into the 3-talk SDM model.

Method:

The model was developed by integrating 2 published models.

Results:

An integrated, goal-based SDM model is proposed and applied to a patient with multiple, complex, long-term clinical conditions to illustrate the use of a visualization tool called a Goal Board. A Goal Board prioritizes collaborative goals and aligns goals with interventional options.

Conclusion:

The model provides an approach to achieve person-centered decision-making by not only eliciting and prioritizing goals but also by aligning prioritized goals and interventions.

Practice Implications:

Further research is required to evaluate the utility of the proposed model.

A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Two Patient-Centered Interventions for Women with Unmet Social Needs: Personalized Support for Progress and Enhanced Screening and Referral

Background: Despite recent widespread acceptance that unmet social needs are critically relevant to health, limited guidance exists about how best to address them in the context of women's health care delivery. We aimed to evaluate two interventions: enhanced screening and referral (ESR), a screening intervention with facilitated referral and follow-up calls, and personalized support for progress (PSP), a community health worker intervention tailored to women's priorities. Materials and Methods: Women >18 years were screened for presence of elevated depressive symptoms in three women's health clinics serving primarily Medicaid-eligible patients. If eligible and interested, we enrolled and randomized women to ESR or PSP. Pre- and postintervention assessments were conducted. Primary outcomes were satisfaction, depression, and quality of life (QOL). Planned analyses of subgroup differences were also explored. Results: A total of 235 participants were randomized; 54% identified as African American, 19% as White, and 15% as Latina. Participant mean age was 30 years; 77% reported annual incomes below US $20,000/year; and 30% were pregnant at enrollment. Participants in both arms found the interventions satisfactory and improved for depression (p < 0.001). There were no differences between groups for the primary outcomes. Subgroups reporting greater improvement in QOL in PSP compared with ESR included participants who at baseline reported anxiety (p = 0.05), lack of access to depression treatment (p = 0.02), pain (p = 0.04), and intimate partner violence (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Clinics serving women with unmet social needs may benefit from offering PSP or ESR. Distinguishing how best to use these interventions in practice is the next step.

Goals of older hospitalised patients: a qualitative descriptive study

OBJECTIVES

Since the population continues ageing and the number of patients with multiple chronic diseases is rising in Western countries, a shift is recommended from disease oriented towards goal-oriented healthcare. As little is known about individual goals and preferences of older hospitalised patients, the aim of this study is to elucidate the goals of a diverse group of older hospitalised patients.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive method with open interviews analysed with inductive content analysis.

SETTING

A university teaching hospital and a regional teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight hospitalised patients aged 70 years and older.

RESULTS

Some older hospitalised patients initially had difficulties describing concrete goals, but after probing all were able to state more concrete goals. A great diversity of goals were categorised into wanting to know what the matter is, controlling disease, staying alive, improving condition, alleviating complaints, improving daily functioning, improving/maintaining social functioning, resuming work/hobbies and regaining/maintaining autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Older hospitalised patients have a diversity of goals in different domains. Discussing goals with older patients is not a common practice yet. Timely discussions about goals should be encouraged because individual goals are not self-evident and this discussion can guide decision making, especially in patients with multimorbidity and frailty. Aids can be helpful to facilitate the discussion about goals and evaluate the outcomes of hospitalisation.

Goal setting is insufficiently recognised as an essential part of shared decision-making in the complex care of older patients: a framework analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity poses a challenge for decision-making processes and requires that more attention is paid to patient goals, preferences and needs; however, goal setting is not yet widely recognised as a core aspect of the shared decision-making (SDM) approach. This study aims to analyse clinician perceptions of the concept of goal setting within the context of SDM with older patients with multimorbidity.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and clinical geriatricians (CGs) were analysed using a framework analysis. The integrative model of SDM was used to develop a categorisation matrix, including goal setting as an additional component.

RESULTS

Sixteen of the 33 clinicians mentioned explicit Goal setting as an integrated component of their definition of SDM, which was comparable to the number of clinicians who listed Patient values and preferences (n = 16), Doctor knowledge and recommendations (n = 19) and Make or explicitly defer a decision (n = 19), elements which are commonly considered to be important aspects of SDM. The other 17 clinicians (6 CGs and 11 GPs) did not mention Goal setting as an explicit component of SDM. Our analysis revealed two potential reasons for this observation. Besides the use of other terminology, part of clinicians viewed collaborative goal setting and SDM as separate but related processes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study on clinician perspectives highlighted goal setting as component of a SDM approach and could therefore be considered supportive of recent theoretical insights that SDM models that lack an explicit goal-setting component appear to be deficient and overlook an important aspect of engaging patients in decision-making, particularly for patients with complex multimorbidities. We therefore call for the further development of a comprehensive SDM approach for older patients with multimorbidity to include explicit and unequivocal goal setting elements to sufficiently meet the expectations and needs of clinicians and their patients.

What the elderly think of the care provided by health services

Abstract Objective: To identify the social representations of the elderly on the care provided in health services. Method: An exploratory study with a qualitative approach was carried out, in which 238 elderly persons were interviewed about the care they received in Basic Health Units and in a center of specialized care. Their discourse was recorded and transcribed in its entirety, and processed using Iramuteq software. The results were discussed using Social Representation Theory. Results: The elderly associated good care with being treated with respect, attentiveness and politeness; and, at the same time, the requesting of diagnostic exams, referrals to medical specialists and the prescription of medicines. In their imaginary, the Basic Health Unit hinders their access to specialized care and doctors in this service do not know enough to meet the needs of people of different age groups and health problems, meaning that consulting with a specialist becomes more important. In practice, they encounter difficulties related to delays in being attended to and obtaining appointments with specialists, diagnostic exams and with the first come, first served appointment system, which is further limited by the number of places and treatment of specific groups on certain days. Conclusion: The practices in the care provided to the elderly in health services need to be reviewed to offer humanized and qualified care that can meet their needs. Health professionals and managers should consider the different characteristics of the elderly when approaching care.

Multimorbidity: can general practitioners identify the health conditions most important to their patients? Results from a national cross-sectional study in Switzerland

Background

Faced with patients suffering from more than one chronic condition, or multimorbidity, general practitioners (GPs) must establish diagnostic and treatment priorities. Patients also set their own priorities to handle the everyday burdens associated with their multimorbidity and these may be different from the priorities established by their GP. A shared patient–GP agenda, driven by knowledge of each other’s priorities, would seem central to managing patients with multimorbidity. We evaluated GPs’ ability to identify the health condition most important to their patients.

Methods

Data on 888 patients were collected as part of a cross-sectional Swiss study on multimorbidity in family medicine. For the main analyses on patients-GP agreement, data from 572 of these patients could be included. GPs were asked to identify the two conditions which their patient considered most important, and we tested whether either of them agreed with the condition mentioned as most important by the patient. In the main analysis, we studied the agreement rate between GPs and patients by grouping items medically-related into 46 groups of conditions. Socio-demographic and clinical variables were fitted into univariate and multivariate models.

Results

In 54.9% of cases, GPs were able to identify the health condition most important to the patient. In the multivariate model, the only variable significantly associated with patient–GP agreement was the number of chronic conditions: the higher the number of conditions, the less likely the agreement.

Conclusion

GPs were able to correctly identify the health condition most important to their patients in half of the cases. It therefore seems important that GPs learn how to better adapt treatment targets and priorities by taking patients’ perspectives into account.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-018-0757-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient priorities and the doorknob phenomenon in primary care: Can technology improve disclosure of patient stressors?

OBJECTIVE

Patients with multiple chronic conditions face many stressors (e.g. financial, safety, transportation stressors) that are rarely prioritized for discussion with the primary care provider (PCP). In this pilot randomized controlled trial we examined the effects of a novel technology-based intervention called Customized Care on stressor disclosure.

METHODS

The main outcomes were stressor disclosure, patient confidence and activation, as assessed by self-report and observational methods (transcribed and coded audio-recordings of the office visit).

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled. Compared with care as usual, intervention patients were 6 times more likely to disclose stressors to the PCP (OR=6.16, 95% CI [1.53, 24.81], p=0.011) and reported greater stressor disclosure confidence (exp[B]=1.06, 95% CI [1.01, 1.12], p=0.028). No differences were found in patient activation or the length of the office visit.

CONCLUSION

Customized Care improved the likelihood of stressor disclosure without affecting the length of the PCP visit.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Brief technology-based interventions, like Customized Care could be made available through patient portals, or on smart phones, to prime patient-PCP discussion about difficult subjects, thereby improving the patient experience and efficiency of the visit.

Understanding What Is Most Important to Individuals with Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Perspectives

BACKGROUND

To improve care for individuals living with multiple chronic conditions, patients and providers must align care planning with what is most important to patients in their daily lives. We have a limited understanding of how to effectively encourage communication about patients' personal values during clinical care.

OBJECTIVE

To identify what patients with multiple chronic conditions describe as most important to their well-being and health.

DESIGN

We interviewed individuals with multiple chronic conditions in their homes and analyzed results qualitatively, guided by grounded theory.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 31 patients (mean age 68.7 years) participated in the study, 19 of which included the participation of family members. Participants were from Kaiser Permanente Washington, an integrated health care system in Washington state.

APPROACH

Qualitative analysis of home visits, which consisted of semi-structured interviews aided by photo elicitation.

KEY RESULTS

Analysis revealed six domains of what patients described as most important for their well-being and health: principles, relationships, emotions, activities, abilities, and possessions. Personal values were interrelated and rarely expressed as individual values in isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

The domains describe the range and types of personal values multimorbid older adults deem important to well-being and health. Understanding patients' personal values across these domains may be useful for providers when developing, sharing, and following up on care plans.

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.

Creating Conditions for Patients' Values to Emerge in Clinical Conversations: Perspectives of Health Care Team Members

Eliciting, understanding, and honoring patients' values- the things most important to them in daily life-is a cornerstone of patient-centered care. However, this rarely occurs explicitly as a routine part of clinical practice. This is particularly problematic for individuals with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) because they face difficult choices about how to balance competing demands for self-care in accordance with their values. In this study, we sought to inform the design of interventions to support conversations about patient values between patients with MCC and their health care providers. We conducted a field study that included observations of 21 clinic visits for patients who have MCC, and interviews with 16 care team members involved in those visits. This paper contributes a practice-based account of ways in which providers engage with patient values, and discusses how future work in interactive systems design might extend and enrich these engagements.

Self-Reported Questionnaire of Functional Health of Home-Dwelling Elderly People Living in Austria: Based on the Patient Questionnaire of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in Primary Care

Aim: The aim was to review the construct validity and reliability of a functional health assessment questionnaire (Questionnaire on Functional Health 2 [Q-FH2]). Methods: The Q-FH2 was used to assess 344 elderly people in a home setting. A polychoric correlation matrix was applied to conduct a principal axis factor analysis with oblique rotation. The number of factors was determined using various procedures and calculated using theta coefficients to estimate ordinal reliability. Results: The exploratory factor analysis supported a 4-factor solution with an explained total variance of 82%. The internal consistency showed θ coefficients ranging from 0.758 to 0.854. Conclusion: The Q-FH2 appears to be a useful instrument to assess the multidimensionality of functional health as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health to determine the resources and deficits regarding the independent living of older adults and to derive appropriate consulting measures.

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.

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.

[Patients' need for consultation after a geriatric assessment in family practice : Survey]

BACKGROUND

During a doctor-patient consultation patients usually seek information by disclosing their reasons for requesting the encounter. Geriatric assessment allows a proactive examination of patients' overall health and function and provides an opportunity to broach issues beyond the initial purposes of the consultation.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed at investigating older patients' information seeking behavior following a geriatric assessment and the kind of topics they wished to discuss, taking a variety of patient and health-related factors into account.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 317 patients (≥ 70 years) underwent a geriatric assessment in 40 general practices. Subsequently they obtained a list of the problems uncovered and rated the relevance and information needs for each problem. Analyses consisted of determining the prevalence of information need for each health topic and identifying predictors in a mixed model (multilevel regression analysis).

RESULTS

The 317 patients presented with a median of 11 health problems (interquartile range, IQR 8-14) and 80 % of the patients had information needs concerning only a few of the problems. High information needs were present for physical complaints and for vaccination issues. Little information seeking behavior was evident for unhealthy lifestyles, falls, limitations in daily activities and psychosocial problems. In the mixed model the personal relevance and the type of health problem both had a significant and independent effect on information seeking behavior.

CONCLUSION

A geriatric assessment generates a moderate need for information. It provides physicians with an opportunity to focus on those health problems that are important to older patients but not usually addressed in normal consultations. This particularly applies to limitations in daily activities and psychosocial problems.

Reasons for disagreement regarding illnesses between older patients with multimorbidity and their GPs - a qualitative study

Background

Chronic conditions are the most common themes in doctor-patient communication, especially for older patients with multimorbidity and their GPs. Former quantitative studies identified a variety of socio-demographic and health-related factors which were associated with the (dis-)agreement between medical records and patient self-reported diseases. The aim of this qualitative study was to identify reasons for disagreement regarding illnesses between patients and their GPs.

Methods

We conducted three focus groups with GPs (n = 15) and three focus groups with multimorbid patients aged 65 to 85 (n = 21). The participants were recruited from the MultiCare Cohort Study. Focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts of the focus groups were analysed using the qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. Categories were determined deductively and inductively.

Results

The analysis revealed seven themes concerning reasons for disagreement regarding illnesses between patients and their GPs: problems with communication and cooperation between health care professionals, disease management by the GP and the patient, the documentation behaviour of the GP, communication challenges between GP and patient, differences in the understanding of a disease between GP and patient, the prioritization and rating of diseases by GP and patient and obliviousness, repression and avoidance by the patient.

Conclusions

For older patients with multimorbidity, our study demonstrated that there is a need to enhance the cooperation between GPs, specialists and outpatient care, a demand to improve doctor-patient communication and a need for interventions to increase patients’ knowledge of diseases.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-015-0286-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient-reported areas for quality improvement in general practice: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

GPs are often a patient's first point of contact with the health system. The increasing demands imposed on GPs may have an impact on the quality of care delivered. Patients are well placed to make judgements about aspects of care that need to be improved.

AIM

To determine whether general practice patients perceive that the care they receive is 'patient-centred' across eight domains of care, and to determine the association between sociodemographic, GP and practice characteristics, detection of preventive health risks, and receipt of patient-centred care.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional survey of patients attending Australian general practice clinics.

METHOD

Patients completed a touchscreen survey in the waiting room to rate the care received from their GP across eight domains of patient-centred care. Patients also completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and self-reported health risk factors. GPs completed a checklist for each patient asking about the presence of health risk factors.

RESULTS

In total 1486 patients and 51 GPs participated. Overall, 83% of patients perceived that the care they received was patient-centred across all eight domains. Patients most frequently perceived the 'access to health care when needed' domain as requiring improvement (8.3%). Not having private health insurance and attending a practice located in a disadvantaged area were significantly associated with perceived need for improvements in care (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients in general practice report that accessibility is an aspect of care that could be improved. Further investigation of how indicators of lower socioeconomic status interact with the provision of patient-centred care and health outcomes is required.

The understanding of pain by older adults who consider themselves to have aged successfully

OBJECTIVES

Despite an ageing population and an increased prevalence of chronic pain, the relationship between chronic pain and the concept of successful ageing is unclear. The aim of the present research was to explore older people's views on past and present experiences of pain, and its management, and how these experiences relate to their perceptions of successful ageing.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with six participants, aged 75 years or older, who considered themselves to have aged successfully, explored what this concept meant to them and their experiences of pain. Data analysis used methods drawn from grounded theory. The themes reported in this article are 'understanding of pain' and 'perceptions of ageing'.

RESULTS

None of the participants recalled painful experiences that were not attributable to physical trauma. They believed that pain is part of life and a natural consequence of the ageing process. While some accepted this with little resistance, others felt frustration at what they considered a dismissive attitude towards older people experiencing pain from healthcare practitioners. The concept of successful ageing was previously unfamiliar to participants, and their conceptualization of ageing derived from comparing themselves with their peers.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggest that predictable experiences of pain as one ages may contribute to an acceptance of pain as a biomedical certainty, a belief reinforced both by health professionals and society. However, one may have chronic pain and yet consider oneself to have aged successfully, and it should therefore be recognized that there is a distinction between having pain and having a problem with pain.

"It's MAGIC"--development of a manageable geriatric assessment for general practice use

Background

Geriatric assessments are established tools in institutional care since they enable standardized detection of relevant age-related disorders. Geriatric assessments could also be helpful in general practice. However, they are infrequently used in this setting, mainly due to their lengthy administration. The aim of the study was the development of a “manageable geriatric assessment – MAGIC”, specially tailored to the requirements of daily primary care.

Methods

MAGIC was developed based on the comprehensive Standardized Assessment for Elderly People in Primary Care (STEP), using four different methodological approaches: We relied on A) the results of the PRISCUS study by assessing the prevalence of health problems uncovered by STEP, the importance of the respective problems rated by patients and general practitioners, as well as the treatment procedures initiated subsequently to the assessment. Moreover, we included findings of B) a literature analysis C) a review of the STEP assessment by experienced general practitioners and D) focus groups with general practitioners.

Results

The newly created MAGIC assessment consists of 9 items and covers typical geriatric health problems and syndromes: function, falls, incontinence, cognitive impairment, impaired ears and eyes, vaccine coverage, emotional instability and isolation.

Conclusions

MAGIC promises to be a helpful screening instrument in primary care consultations involving elderly multimorbid patients. Applicable within a minimum of time it still covers health problems highly relevant with regard to a potential loss of autonomy. Feasibility will be tested in the context of a large, still ongoing randomized controlled trial on “reduction of potentially inadequate medication in elderly patients” (RIME study; DRKS-ID: DRKS00003610) in general practice.

Professional competencies in primary health care for attending to older adults

Objective To identify and analyze the necessary competencies in primary health care for attending to older adults. Method An exploratory, descriptive, and quali-quantitative study was developed. Three rounds of the Delphi Technique were conducted with participants from primary health care services and a multidisciplinary committee. The first questionnaire asked participants to indicate the competencies needed for attending to older adults in primary health care. They were compiled into a list and added to a Likert Scale (from 1 to 5) for the second and third questionnaires. A consensus criterion of 70% was adopted. Results Twenty eight competencies were reached by consensus and were classified into twelve domains. Conclusion The competencies reflect Brazilian health care policy and constitute a reference for professional health practice and education when caring for the older adult in primary health care.

Exploring patient priorities among long-term conditions in multimorbidity: A qualitative secondary analysis

OBJECTIVE

A lack of agreement between health-care providers and patient priorities can impact the health-care provider-patient relationship, treatment concordance and potentially health outcomes. Evidence suggests that people living with multiple morbidities do prioritise among their long-term conditions. However, the evidence revealing the underlying reasons behind this prioritisation remains limited. Given the potential implications for day-to-day self-management activity and ultimately patient outcomes, this study aims to explore how and why people with multimorbidity prioritise some long-term conditions over others and what the potential implications may be for self-management activity, and in turn, suggest how such information may help clinicians negotiate the management of multimorbidity patients.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of qualitative data was conducted utilising four existing data sets collated from the three research centres involved. Purposive sampling provided a sample of 41 participants who had multimorbidity. The research team collectively coded and analysed the data thematically.

RESULTS

All participants, except two, identified one 'main' priority long-term condition. Current priorities were arrived at by participants making comparisons between their long-term conditions, specifically by trading off the various attributes, impacts and perceived consequences of their individual long-term conditions. Two main themes emerged as to why participants identified a particular main long-term condition: (a) proximate issues surrounding barriers to functional health and (b) prioritisation of long-term conditions perceived to have a particular future risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The recent focus on multimorbidity within the medical literature reflects its prevalence. It is therefore important to understand the complexities of the multimorbidity illness experience. We have added to the limited literature on condition prioritisation by revealing some novel understandings of the process of condition prioritisation which can feed into patient-provider consultations in order to allow better communication and treatment planning as well as, ultimately, optimise patient outcomes.

Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study

The study was designed to evaluate the acceptance of the self-rated version of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in primary care in Europe (STEP) by patients and general practitioners, as well as the feasibility, comprehensibility, and usefulness in gaining new information. In all, 1007 of 1540 patients aged 65 and above, from 28 different Saxon general practices took part. We recognized that 96% of the patients were able to fill in the questionnaire by themselves. It took them an average of approximately 20 minutes to do so. Further analysis of 257 randomly selected patients identified 281 previously unknown problems (1.1 per patient). In the practitioners' opinion, 16% of these problems, particularly physiological and mental ones, could lead to immediate consequences. Remarkably, newly identified psychosocial problems were not followed by any consequences. Fourteen of the 75 questionnaire items were not answered by more than 9% of the participants. Eight of the 14 frequently unanswered items were marked as difficult to understand by the patients. Altogether the self-rating version of the STEP was found to be feasible and useful. It was well accepted among patients; however, some questions need further review to improve their comprehensibility. Furthermore, it should be investigated why some identified problems do not have consequences and whether there is a need to record these issues at all.

Setting priorities in primary health care--on whose conditions? A questionnaire study

BACKGROUND

In Sweden three key criteria are used for priority setting: severity of the health condition; patient benefit; and cost-effectiveness. They are derived from the ethical principles established by the Swedish parliament 1997 but have been used only to a limited extent in primary care. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse: 1) GPs', nurses', and patients' prioritising in routine primary care 2) The association between the three key priority setting criteria and the overall priority assigned by the GPs and nurses to individual patients.

METHODS

Paired questionnaires were distributed to all patients and the GPs or nurses they had contact with during a 2-week period at four health centres in Sweden. The staff registered the health conditions or health problem, and the planned intervention. Then they estimated the severity of the health condition, the expected patient benefit, and the cost-effectiveness of the planned intervention. Both the staff and the patients reported their overall prioritisation of the patient. In total, 1851 paired questionnaires were collected.

RESULTS

Compared to the medical staff, the patients assigned relatively higher priority to acute/minor conditions than to preventive check-ups for chronic conditions. Severity of the health condition was the priority setting criterion that had the strongest association with the overall priority for the staff as a whole, but for the GPs it was cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenge for primary care providers is to balance the patients' demands with medical needs and cost-effectiveness. Transparent priority setting in primary care might contribute to a greater consensus between GPs and nurses on how to use the key priority setting criteria.