Search

PURPOSE To measure the effectiveness of a 4-month interdisciplinary multifaceted intervention based on a change in care delivery for patients with multimorbidity in primary care practices. METHODS A pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a mixed-methods design in patients aged 18 to 80 years with 3 or more chronic conditions from 7 family medicine groups (FMGs) in Quebec, Canada. Health care professionals (nurses, nutritionists, kinesiologists) from the FMGs were trained to deliver the patient-centered intervention based on a motivational approach and self-management support. Primary outcomes: self-management (Health Education Impact Questionnaire); and self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes: health status, quality of life, and health behaviors. Quantitative analyses used multi-level mixed effects and generalized linear mixed models controlling for clustering within FMGs. We also conducted in-depth interviews with patients, family members, and health care professionals. RESULTS The trial randomized 284 patients (144 in intervention group, 140 in control group). The groups were comparable. After 4 months, the intervention showed a neutral effect for the primary outcomes. There was significant improvement in 2 health behaviors (healthy eating with odds ratios [OR] 4.36; P = .006, and physical activity with OR 3.43; P = .023). The descriptive qualitative evaluation revealed that the patients reinforced their self-efficacy and improved their self-management which was divergent from the quantitative results. CONCLUSIONS Quantitatively, this intervention showed a neutral effect on the primary outcomes and substantial improvement in 2 health behaviors as secondary outcomes. Qualitatively, the intervention was evaluated as positive. The combination of qualitative and quantitative designs proved to be a good design for evaluating this complex intervention. Key words: interdisciplinary research; multimorbidity; patient care team; pragmatic clinical trial, INTRODUCTION Much effort has been deployed internationally to improve care and outcomes for persons with multimorbidity in primary care. The Patient-Centered Innovations for Persons with Multimorbidity research program, funded by [...]

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence and patterns of comorbidity in community‐dwelling older people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) attending general practice settings in Australia. Methods: This study involved a cross‐sectional analysis using the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) sub‐study data. In a series of sub‐studies, a representative sample of general practitioners was asked to record all diagnosed chronic conditions for patients at 40 consecutive encounters using structured paper‐based recording forms. The dataset was analysed with descriptive analyses, and exploratory factor analyses were applied to examine comorbidity patterns. Results: Of the 14,042 patients aged 65 years or older, 2688 had a diagnosis of T2DM (19%). Of the 2688 patients with T2DM, hypertension was present in 67% (95% CI: 64.6–70.0), followed by arthritis 52% (95% CI: 48.8–54.8), hyperlipidaemia 45% (95% CI: 41.8–47.9), ischemic heart disease, 23% (95% CI: 20.7–24.9), depression 16% (95% CI: 48.8–54.8), atrial fibrillation 10% (95% CI: 8.9–11.6), congestive heart failure 7% (95% CI: 6.0–8.1), stroke/cerebrovascular accident 7% (95% CI: 5.4–8.2) and peripheral vascular disease 5% (95% CI: 4.4–6.2). We identified two comorbidity patterns among older people with T2DM. The first were psychological and musculoskeletal conditions and the second were cardiovascular conditions and chronic renal failure. Conclusions: The prevalence of cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular comorbidities in community‐dwelling older people with T2DM was high. Adequate primary care strategies should be in place to support the long‐term care for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been conflicting evidence on the association between multimorbidity and blood pressure (BP) control. This study aimed to investigate this associations in people with hypertension attending primary care in Canada, and to assess whether individual long-term conditions are associated with BP control. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study in people with hypertension attending primary care in Toronto between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019. Uncontrolled BP was defined as systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg. A list of 11 a priori selected chronic conditions was used to define multimorbidity. Multimorbidity was defined as having ≥1 long-term condition in addition to hypertension. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between multimorbidity (or individual long-term conditions) with uncontrolled BP. Results: A total of 67 385 patients with hypertension were included. They had a mean age of 70, 53.1% were female, 80.6% had multimorbidity, and 35.7% had uncontrolled BP. Patients with multimorbidity had lower odds of uncontrolled BP than those without multimorbidity (adjusted OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.68-0.76). Among the long-term conditions, diabetes (aOR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.70-0.77), heart failure (aOR = 0.81, 95%CI 0.73-0.91), ischemic heart disease (aOR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.69-0.79), schizophrenia (aOR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.65-0.97), depression/anxiety (aOR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.86-0.95), dementia (aOR = 0.87, 95%CI 0.80-0.95), and osteoarthritis (aOR = 0.89, 95%CI 0.85-0.93) were associated with a lower likelihood of uncontrolled BP. Conclusion: We found that multimorbidity was associated with better BP control. Several conditions were associated with better control, including diabetes, heart failure, ischemic heart disease, schizophrenia, depression/anxiety, dementia, and osteoarthritis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lingering symptoms are frequently reported after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, a condition known as post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). The duration and severity of PCC in immunologically naïve persons remain unclear. Furthermore, the long-term consequences of these chronic symptoms on work and mental health are poorly documented. Objective: To determine the outcome, the risk factors, and the impact on work and mental health associated with post-COVID-19 symptoms. Methods: This prospective population-based study assessed acute COVID-19 symptoms and their evolution for up to nine months following infection. Individuals aged 18 years and older with COVID-19 in three Canadian regions between 1 November 2020 and 31 May 2021 were recruited. Participants completed a questionnaire that was either administered by trained student investigators over the phone or self-administered online. Results: A total of 1349 participants with a mean age of 46.6 ± 16.0 years completed the questionnaire. Participants were mostly unvaccinated at the time of their COVID-19 episode (86.9%). Six hundred and twenty-two participants (48.0%) exhibited one symptom or more, at least three months post-COVID-19. Among participants with PCC, 23.0% to 37.8% experienced fatigue at the time of survey. Moreover, 6.1% expressed psychological distress. Risk factors for PCC and fatigue included female sex (OR = 1.996), higher number of symptoms (OR = 1.292), higher severity of episode (OR = 3.831), and having a mental health condition prior to the COVID-19 episode (OR = 5.155). Conclusions: In this multicenter cohort study, almost half (47%) of the participants reported persistent symptoms >3 months after acute infection. Baseline risk factors for PCC include female sex, number and severity of symptoms during acute infection, and a previous diagnosis of mental health disorder. Having PCC negatively impacted health-related quality of life and these patients were more likely to exhibit psychological distress, as well as fatigue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with multimorbidity require coordinated and patient-centred care. Telemedicine IMPACT Plus provides such care for complex patients in Toronto, Ontario. We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing health care utilization and costs at 1-year postintervention for an intervention group and 2 control groups (RCT and propensity matched). Methods: Data for 82 RCT intervention and 74 RCT control participants were linked with health administrative data. We created a second control group using health administrative data–derived propensity scores to match (1:5) intervention participants with comparators. We evaluated 5 outcomes: acute hospital admissions, emergency department visits, costs of all insured health care, 30-day hospital readmissions and 7-day family physician follow-up after hospital discharge using generalized linear models for RCT controls and generalized estimating equations for propensity-matched controls. Results: There were no significant differences between intervention participants and either control group. For hospital admissions, emergency department visits, costs and readmissions, the relative differences ranged from 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39–2.60) to 1.67 (95% CI 0.82–3.38) with intervention costs at about Can$20 000, RCT controls costs at around Can$15 000 and propensity controls costs at around Can$17 000. There was a higher rate of follow-up with a family physician for the intervention participants compared with the RCT controls (53.13 v. 21.43 per 100 hospital discharges; relative difference 2.48 [95% CI 0.98–6.29]) and propensity-matched controls (49.94 v. 28.21 per 100 hospital discharges; relative difference 1.81 [95% CI 0.99–3.30]). Interpretation: Despite a complex patient-centred intervention, there was no significant improvement in health care utilization or cost. Future research requires larger sample sizes and should include outcomes important to patients and the health care system, and longer follow-up periods. Ontario ClinicalTrials.gov: 104191 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services vision and strategic framework on multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) incorporates recommendations designed to facilitate research that will improve our knowledge about interventions and systems that will benefit individuals with MCCs (or multimorbidity). The evidence base supporting the management of patients with MCCs will be built through intervention trials specifically designed to address multimorbidity and identification of MCCs in participants across the clinical trial range. This article specifically focuses on issues relating to external validity with specific reference to trials involving patients with MCCs. The exclusion of such patients from clinical trials has been well documented. Randomized control trials (RCTs) are considered the “gold standard” of evidence, but may have drawbacks in relation to external validity, particularly in relation to multimorbidity. It may, therefore, be necessary to consider a broader range of research methods that can provide converging evidence on intervention effects to address MCCs. Approaches can also be taken to increase the usefulness of RCTs in general for providing evidence to inform multimorbidity management. Additional improvements to RCTs would include better reporting of inclusion and exclusion criteria and participant characteristics in relation to MCCs. New trials should be considered in terms of how they will add to the existing evidence base and should inform how interventions may work in different settings and patient groups. Research on treatments and interventions for patients with MCCs is badly needed. It is important that this research includes patient-centered measures and that generalizability issues be explicitly addressed.

Multimorbidity, the presence of 1 + chronic condition in an individual, remains one of the greatest challenges to health on a global scale. Although the prevalence of multimorbidity has been well-established, its incidence is not fully understood. This systematic review determined the incidence of multimorbidity across the lifespan; the order in which chronic conditions accumulate to result in multimorbidity; and cataloged methods used to determine and report accumulation of chronic conditions resulting in multimorbidity. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane electronic databases. Two independent reviewers evaluated studies for inclusion and performed quality assessments. Of 36 included studies, there was high heterogeneity in study design and operational definitions of multi-morbidity. Studies reporting incidence (n = 32) reported a median incidence rate of 30.7 per 1,000 person-years (IQR 39.5 per 1,000 person-years) and a median cumulative incidence of 2.8% (IQR 28.7%). Incidence was notably higher for persons with older age and 1+ chronic conditions at baseline. Studies reporting patterns in accumulation of chronic conditions (n = 5) reported hypertensive and heart diseases, and diabetes, as among the common starting conditions resulting in later multimorbidity. Methods used to discern patterns were highly heterogenous, ranging from the use of latent growth trajectories to divisive cluster analyses, and presentation using alluvial plots to cluster trajectories. Studies reporting the incidence of multimorbidity and patterns in accumulation of chronic conditions vary greatly in study designs and definitions used. To allow for more accurate estimations and comparison, studies must be transparent and consistent in operational definitions of multimorbidity applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-centred interventions to help patients with multimorbidity have had mixed results.Aim: To assess the effectiveness of a provider-created, patient-centred, multi-provider case conference with follow-up, and understand under what circumstances it worked, and did not work.Design and Setting: Mixed-methods design with a pragmatic randomised trial and qualitative study, involving nine urban primary care sites in Ontario, Canada.Method: Patients aged 18-80 years with ≥3 chronic conditions were referred to the Telemedicine IMPACT Plus intervention; a nurse and patient planned a multi-provider case conference during which a care plan could be created. The patients were randomised into an intervention or control group. Two subgroup analyses and a fidelity assessment were conducted, with the primary outcomes at 4 months being self-management and self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were mental and physical health status, quality of life, and health behaviours. A thematic analysis explored the patients' experiences of the intervention.Results: A total of 86 patients in the intervention group and 77 in the control group showed no differences, except that the intervention improved mental health status in the subgroup with an annual income of ≥C$50 000 (β-coefficient 11.003, P = 0.006). More providers and follow-up hours were associated with poorer outcomes. Five themes were identified in the qualitative study: valuing the team, patients feeling supported, receiving a follow-up plan, being offered new and helpful additions to their treatment regimen, and experiencing positive outcomes.Conclusion: Overall, the intervention showed improvements only for patients who had an annual income of ≥C$50 000, implying a need to address the costs of intervention components not covered by existing health policies. Findings suggest a need to optimise team composition by revising the number and type of providers according to patient preferences and to enhance the hours of nurse follow-up to better support the patient in carrying out the case conference's recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is becoming increasingly prevalent in North America and has been described in association with specific chronic diseases, particularly cardiovascular diseases. In primary care, where the prevalence of co-occurring chronic conditions is very high, the potential association with OSA is unknown. The purpose of this study was to explore the association between OSA and 1) the presence and severity of multimorbidity (multiple co-occurring chronic conditions), and 2) subcategories of multimorbidity. Methods A cluster sampling technique was used to recruit 120 patients presenting with OSA of various severities from the records of a sleep laboratory in 2008. Severity of OSA was based on the results of the polysomnography. Patients invited to participate received a mail questionnaire including questions on sociodemographic characteristics and the Disease Burden Morbidity Assessment (DBMA). They also consented to give access to their medical records. The DBMA was used to provide an overall multimorbidity score and sub-score of diseases affecting various systems. Results Bivariate analysis did not demonstrate an association between OSA and multimorbidity (r = 0.117; p = 0.205). However, severe OSA was associated with multimorbidity (adjusted odds ratio = 7.33 [1.67-32.23], p = 0.05). OSA was moderately correlated with vascular (r = 0.26, p = 0.01) and metabolic syndrome (r = 0.26, p = 0.01) multimorbidity sub-scores. Conclusions This study showed that severe OSA is associated with severe multimorbidity and sub-scores of multimorbidity. These results do not allow any causal inference. More research is required to confirm these associations. However, primary care providers should be aware of these potential associations and investigate OSA when deemed appropriate.

Abstract Background Multimorbidity is now acknowledged as a research priority in primary care. The identification of risk factors and people most at risk is an important step in guiding prevention and intervention strategies. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between literacy and multimorbidity while controlling for potential confounders. Methods Participants were adult patients attending the family medicine clinic of a regional health centre in Saguenay (Quebec), Canada. Literacy was measured with the Newest Vital Sign (NVS). Multimorbidity was measured with the Disease Burden Morbidity Assessment (DBMA) by self-report. Information on potential confounders (age, sex, education and family income) was also collected. The association between literacy (independent variable) and multimorbidity was examined in bivariate and multivariate analyses. Two operational definitions of multimorbidity were used successively as the dependent variable; confounding variables were introduced into the model as potential predictors. Results One hundred three patients (36 men) 19–83 years old were recruited; 41.8% had completed 12 years of school or less. Forty-seven percent of patients provided fewer than four correct answers on the NVS (possible low literacy) whereas 53% had four correct responses or more. Literacy and multimorbidity were associated in bivariate analyses (p Conclusion This study suggests that there is no relationship between literacy and multimorbidity when controlling for age and family income.

Abstract Background The Disease Burden Morbidity Assessment (DBMA) is a self-report questionnaire used to estimate the disease burden experienced by patients. The aim of this study was to test and to measure the properties of the French translation of the DBMA (DBMA-Fv). Methods The original version of the DBMA was translated into French (Canadian) and first assessed during cognitive interviews. In the validation study, patients recruited during consecutive consultation periods completed the DBMA-Fv questionnaire while they were in the waiting room of a primary care setting (T1). Participants completed the same questionnaire mailed to their home two weeks later (T2). Concomitant validity of the DBMA-Fv was assessed using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS). Patient medical records were reviewed to verify chronic diseases and past medical history. Results Ninety-seven patients were recruited and 85 (88%) returned the mailed questionnaires; 5 (5.9%) were incomplete. DBMA-Fv scores of the 80 participants with a complete questionnaire at T2 ranged from 0 to 30 (median 5.5, mean 7.7, SD = 7.0). Test-retest reliability of the DBMA-Fv was high (ICC: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79-0.92). The DBMA-Fv and the CIRS correlated moderately at T1 (r = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.26 - 0.62, p < 0.01) and T2 (r = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.38 - 0.70, p < 0.01). The mean (SD) sensitivity of patient reports of a condition in relation to chart review at T2 was 73.9 (8.4) (range 62.5% to 90%). The overall mean (SD) specificity was 92.2 (6.7) (range 77.6% to 98.6%). Conclusions The DBMA-Fv's properties are similar to its English counterpart as to its median sensitivity and specificity compared to chart reviews. It correlated moderately with an established index of multimorbidity. A high percentage of patients were able to complete the test correctly as a mail questionnaire and it showed high test-retest reliability.

Abstract Background Clinical guidelines have been the subject of much criticism in primary care literature partly due to potential conflicts in their implementation among patients with multiple chronic conditions. We assessed the relevance of selected Canadian clinical guidelines on chronic diseases for patients with comorbidity and examined their quality. Methods We selected 16 chronic medical conditions according to their frequency of occurrence, complexity of treatment, and pertinence to primary care. Recent Canadian clinical guidelines (2004 - 2009) on these conditions, published in English or French, were retrieved. We assessed guideline relevance to the care of patients with comorbidity with a tool developed by Boyd and colleagues. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Results Regarding relevance, 56.2% of guidelines addressed treatment for patients with multiple chronic conditions and 18.8% addressed the issue for older patients. Fifteen guidelines (93.8%) included specific recommendations for patients with one concurrent condition; only three guidelines (18.8%) addressed specific recommendations for patients with two comorbid conditions and one for more than two concurrent comorbid conditions. Quality of the evaluated guidelines was good to very good in four out of the six domains measured using the AGREE instrument. The domains with lower mean scores were Stakeholder Involvement and Applicability. Conclusions The quality of the Canadian guidelines examined is generally good, yet their relevance for patients with two or more chronic conditions is very limited and there is room for improvement in this respect.

Abstract Background Patient enablement can be defined as the extent to which a patient is capable of understanding and coping with his or her health issues. This concept is linked to a number of health outcomes such as self-management of chronic diseases and quality of life. The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) was designed to measure this concept after a medical consultation. The instrument, in its original form and its translations into several languages, has proven to be reliable and valid. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the French version of the PEI (PEI-Fv) in a family practice setting. Methods One hundred and ten participants were recruited in a family medicine clinic in the Saguenay region of Quebec (Canada). The PEI-Fv was completed twice, immediately after consultation with a physician (T1) and 2 weeks after the consultation (T2). The internal consistency of the tool was assessed with Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient. Results The mean score for the PEI-Fv was 5.06 ± 3.97 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.30-5.81) at T1 and 4.63 ± 3.90 (95% CI: 3.82-5.44) at T2. Cronbach's α was high at T1 (α1 = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.95) and T2 (α2 = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.95). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.48-0.74), indicating a moderate test-retest reliability. Conclusions The internal consistency of the PEI-Fv is excellent. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good. Test-retest reliability should be examined in further studies at a less than 2-week interval to reduce maturation bias. This instrument can be used to measure enablement after consultation in a French-speaking family practice setting.

Abstract Background The inverse care law persists: people living in poverty have the greatest needs and face considerable challenges in getting the care they need. Evidence reveals that GPs encounter difficulties in delivering care to poor patients, while many of those patients feel stigmatized by healthcare professionals. Patients living in poverty report negative healthcare experiences and unmet healthcare needs. Indeed, there is a growing recognition in primary care research of the importance of addressing the capabilities and social conditions of the poor when delivering care. Few studies have looked at the factors contributing to effective and "socially responsive" care for people living in poverty. Methods/Design Our study adopts a qualitative ethnographic approach in four healthcare organizations in deprived areas of metropolitan Montreal (Québec, Canada), using patient shadowing techniques and interviews. Data will be collected through fieldwork observations and informal interviews with patients before and after consultations. We will observe medical consultations, care organization activities, and waiting areas and reception of patients. We will conduct a total of 36 individual interviews with 12 GPs and 24 patients. The interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed for purposes of analysis. The analysis consists of debriefing sessions, coding and interpretive analysis. Discussion This study aims to investigate how positive healthcare interactions between physicians and patients can improve the management of chronic conditions. We hypothesize that factors related to care organization, to healthcare professionals' experience and to patients may enhance the quality of healthcare interactions, which may have positive impacts for preventing and managing chronic conditions. Our study will provide a unique set of data grounded in the perspectives of healthcare professionals and of patients living in poverty.

Abstract Background Among the strategies used to reform primary care, the participation of nurses in primary care practices appears to offer a promising avenue to better meet the needs of vulnerable patients. The present study explores the perceptions and expectations of patients with multimorbidity regarding nurses' presence in primary care practices. Methods 18 primary (health) care patients with multimorbidity participated in semi-directed interviews, in order to explore their perceptions and expectations in regard to the involvement of nurses in primary care practices. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. After reviewing the transcripts, the principal investigator and research assistants performed thematic analysis independently and reached consensus on the retained themes. Results Patients with multimorbidity were open to the participation of nurses in primary care practices. They expected greater accessibility, for both themselves and for new patients. However, the issue of shared roles between nurses and doctors was a source of concern. Many patients held the traditional view of the nurse's role as an assistant to the doctor in his or her various duties. In general, participants said they were confident about nurses' competency but expressed concern about nurses performing certain acts that their doctor used to, notwithstanding a close collaboration between the two professionals. Conclusion Patients with multimorbidity are open to the involvement of nurses in primary care practices. However, they expect this participation to be established using clear definitions of professional roles and fields of practice.

Abstract Background Massive efforts in Canada have been made to renew primary healthcare. However, although early evaluations of initiatives and research on certain aspects of the reform are promising, none have examined the link between patient assessments of care and health outcomes or the impacts at a population level. The goal of this project is to examine the effect of patient-centred and effective primary healthcare on the evolution of chronic illness burden and health functioning in a population, and in particularly vulnerable groups: the multi-morbid and the poor. Methods/Design A randomly selected cohort of 2000 adults aged 25 to 75 years will be recruited within the geographic boundaries of four local healthcare networks in Quebec. At recruitment, cohort members will report on socio-demographic information, functional health and healthcare use. Two weeks, 12 months and 24 months after recruitment, cohort participants will complete a self-administered questionnaire on current health and health behaviours in order to evaluate primary healthcare received in the previous year. The dependent variables are calculated as change over time of functional health status, chronic illness burden, and health behaviours. Dimensions of patient-centred care and clinical processes are measured using sub-scales of validated instruments. We will use Poisson regression modelling to estimate the incidence rate of chronic illness burden scores and structural equation modelling to explore relationships between variables and to examine the impact of dimensions of patient-centred care and effective primary healthcare. Discussion Results will provide valuable information for primary healthcare clinicians on the course of chronic illness over time and the impact on health outcomes of accessible, patient-centred and effective care. A demonstration of impact will contribute to the promotion of continuous quality improvement activities at a clinical level. While considerable advances have been made in the management of specific chronic illnesses, this will make a unique contribution to effective care for persons with multiple morbidities. Furthermore, the cohort and data architecture will serve as a research platform for future projects.