Search

A multimorbidity-focused approach may reflect common etiologic mechanisms and lead to better targeting of etiologic agents for broadly impactful public health interventions. Our aim was to identify clusters of chronic obesity-related, neurodevelopmental, and respiratory outcomes in children, and to examine associations between cluster membership and widely prevalent chemical exposures to demonstrate our epidemiologic approach. Early to middle childhood outcome data collected 2011-2022 for 1092 children were harmonized across the ECHO-PATHWAYS consortium of 3 prospective pregnancy cohorts in six U.S. cities. 15 outcomes included age 4-9 BMI, cognitive and behavioral assessment scores, speech problems, and learning disabilities, asthma, wheeze, and rhinitis. To form generalizable clusters across study sites, we performed k-means clustering on scaled residuals of each variable regressed on study site. Outcomes and demographic variables were summarized between resulting clusters. Logistic weighted quantile sum regressions with permutation test p-values associated odds of cluster membership with a mixture of 15 prenatal urinary phthalate metabolites in full-sample and sex-stratified models. Three clusters emerged, including a healthier Cluster 1 (n = 734) with low morbidity across outcomes; Cluster 2 (n = 192) with low IQ and higher levels of all outcomes, especially 0.4-1.8-standard deviation higher mean neurobehavioral outcomes; and Cluster 3 (n = 179) with the highest asthma (92 %), wheeze (53 %), and rhinitis (57 %) frequencies. We observed a significant positive, male-specific stratified association (odds ratio = 1.6; p = 0.01) between a phthalate mixture with high weights for MEP and MHPP and odds of membership in Cluster 3 versus Cluster 1. These results identified subpopulations of children with co-occurring elevated levels of BMI, neurodevelopmental, and respiratory outcomes that may reflect shared etiologic pathways. The observed association between phthalates and respiratory outcome cluster membership could inform policy efforts towards children with respiratory disease. Similar cluster-based epidemiology may identify environmental factors that impact multi-outcome prevalence and efficiently direct public policy efforts.

Background: In countries with high life expectancy, a growing share of the population is living with several diseases, a situation referred to as multi-morbidity. In addition to health data, cause-of-death data, based on the information reported on death certificates, can help monitor and characterize this situation. This requires going beyond the underlying cause of death and accounting for all causes on the death certificates which may have played various roles in the morbid process, depending on how they relate to each other. Methods: Apart from the underlying cause, the cause-of death data available in vital registration systems do not differentiate all other causes. We developed an algorithm based on the WHO rules that assigns a "role" to each entry on the death certificate. We distinguish between the following roles: originating (o), when the condition has initiated a sequence of events leading directly to death; precipitating (p), when it was caused by an originating condition or one of its consequences; associated (a), when it contributed to death but was not part of the direct sequence leading to death; ill-defined (i), i.e., conditions such as symptoms or signs or poorly informative causes. We applied this algorithm to all death records in four countries (Italy, France, Spain and the US) in 2017. Results: The average number of originating causes is similar in the four countries. The proportion of death certificates with more than one originating cause—a situation typical of multi-morbidity—ranges from 10% in the US to 18% in Spain. All ages combined, the proportion of deaths with at least one associated cause is higher in Italy (41%) and in the US (42%) than in France (29%) and in Spain (27%). It is especially high in the US at all adult ages. Variations in the average number of causes between the four countries are mainly due to precipitating and ill-defined causes. Conclusions: The output of our algorithm sheds light on cross-country differences in the average number of causes on death certificates. It also opens the door for improvements in the methods used for multiple cause-of-death analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rich conceptual literature on illness experiences has been based largely on singular diseases/conditions. However, over the last few decades, more complex disease patterns and increased longevity have complicated our understanding of how people experience illness. This study builds upon existing theoretical constructs (e.g. biographical disruption) to more robustly capture the illness experiences of those living with multi-morbid conditions. In-depth interviews, examining the post-diagnostic experiences of women living simultaneously with common somatic (diabetes) and psychiatric (clinical depression) conditions, revealed participants' evolving socially embedded illness identity, as they engaged in (re-)constructing new biographies. Socially contextualized situations shaped and were shaped by their illness identity as they managed social relationships, medication use, and choice of providers. Although diagnosed for years, many continued to have lives in upheaval. While most experienced crumbling self-images and described disrupted biographies, others experienced different trajectories with corresponding illness identities. A new typology emerged, extending Bury's concept of disrupted biographies to encompass redefined, and recovered, biographies, within and across the comorbid conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aimed to describe the prevalence and characteristics of ADRs and to identify the factors associated with ADRs among hospitalized patients. Methodology: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted over a 6 month period at Teaching Hospital Karapitiya (THK), Sri Lanka. A total of 2000 patients, who were admitted consecutively for any type of treatment during the study period were enrolled. The factors associated with ADRs were evaluated using logistic regression models, using ADR occurrence as the outcome. Results: A total of 123 ADRs were found from the sample. The prevalence of ADRs among hospitalized patients was 6.2%. (95% CI 5.1-7.2). ADRs were reported in 62 males (50.4%). The median (IQR) age of ADR occurrence was 52 (35-67) years. The most prevalent type of ADR was Type A (n = 62, 50.4%) and out of the total ADRs, 74 were moderately severe reactions (60.2%). Antibiotics (n = 29, 23.5%) were the most common causative agent for ADRs, followed by anticoagulants (n = 10, 8.1%). The multivariate logistic regression model showed that the number of prescribed drugs (P =.011), ADR history (P = 0 0.01) and diabetes mellitus (P =.003) were significantly associated with the occurrence of ADRs. Age (P =.21), gender (P =.31), ethnicity (P =.14), and other concomitant illnesses (Hypertension P =.66, Ischemic Heart Disease P =.25, etc.) did not associated with the occurrence of ADRs. Conclusion: According to this study the prevalence of ADRs was significant among inward patients in the Teaching Hospital, Karapitiya. The number of prescribed drugs, ADR history and diabetes mellitus were significantly correlated with the occurrence of ADRs. The results of the study can be used to guide healthcare professionals to revise the medication list frequently and monitor the patients who are at risk for developing ADRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to validate the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII®) and assess the cross-sectional associations between the DII® and multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) and biomarker concentrations and MLTCs using data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC-Norfolk) study (11,113 men and 13,408 women). The development of MLTCs is associated with low-grade chronic inflammation, and ten self-reported conditions were selected for our MLTC score. Data from a validated FFQ were used to calculate energy-adjusted DII® scores. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and circulating vitamins A, C, E, β-carotene and magnesium were available. Micronutrient biomarker concentrations were significantly lower as the diet became more pro-inflammatory (p-trend < 0.001), and hs-CRP concentrations were significantly higher in men (p-trend = 0.006). A lower DII® (anti-inflammatory) score was associated with 12–40% higher odds of MLTCs. Lower concentrations of vitamin C and higher concentrations of hs-CRP were associated with higher odds of MLTCs. The majority of the associations in our study between MLTCs, nutritional biomarkers, hs-CRP and the DII® were as expected, indicating that the DII® score has criterion validity. Despite this, a more anti-inflammatory diet was associated with higher odds of MLTCs, which was unexpected. Future studies are required to better understand the associations between MLTCs and the DII®. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article addresses the challenges of defining and measuring multimorbidity, a condition characterized by the coexistence of multiple chronic diseases. Topics include the variation in definitions across studies, the need for a standardized list of chronic conditions to represent multimorbidity, and the importance of considering patient-centered factors and social determinants in assessing its severity.

Lena-Karin Gustafsson,1 Els-Marie Anbacken,2 Gunnel Östlund,2 Anna Bondesson,1 Tina Pettersson,1 Viktoria Zander3 1Division of Caring Science, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalens University, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 2Division of Social Work, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalens University, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 3Division of Health and Welfare Technology, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalens University, Eskilstuna, SwedenCorrespondence: Lena-Karin Gustafsson, Division of Caring Science, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalens University, Eskilstuna, Sweden, Tel +46 70 7874420, Email lena-karin.gustafsson@mdu.seAim: This study aims to describe experiences of the implementation of a new integrated healthcare model for older adults with complex care needs due to multimorbidity, living at home, from a health and welfare personnel perspective. The goal was to diminish hospitalization and still carry out high quality care at home for older adults living with multimorbidity. The model was implemented by two organizations working in cooperation, the municipality, and the region that handles interprofessional social care and healthcare in people’s homes.Materials and Method: Open-ended group interviews with personnel were carried out, three of the group interviews pre-implementations of the model, and three of the group interviews post-implementation. The interviews were audiotaped and analysed according to the procedure of thematic analysis.Results: The quality of the integrated care model was based on care-chain cooperation, shared professionalism, and creating relations with the patient including closeness to next of kin, which was underlined by the participants. Unencumbered time gave the professionals the possibility to develop quality in integrated healthcare as part of integrated and person-centred care. The coproduction of education, research interviews and the follow-up meeting identified successes in diminishing hospitalization rates according to the participants’ experiences of the post-implementation interviews. An identified failure was, however, that shared professionalism was not developed over time, rather the different responsibilities were accentuated according to the information retrieved at the follow-up meeting.Conclusion: Quality aspects of the model were identified in the present study. However, when implementation of a new model is completed, the organizations always have their own interpretation of how to further understand the model in question.Plain language summary: The intention of the present study was to follow the process of working with a new model of providing care at home, thus preventing increased numbers of hospital readmissions, based on the professionals´ point of view of what quality care is for older adults with complex care needs due to multimorbidity, living in their own home. The professionals were interviewed in group settings on several occasions during the implementation.The result showed hopeful expectations expressed by the professionals before the new model was implemented, such as a hope for getting more time for high-quality care for the older adults with multimorbidity. During the teamwork, the conversation within the team members was praised as a key factor that included shared professionalism from professionals with different levels of education and focus on their work. According to the staff, unnecessary hospital stays were reduced, while the interprofessional care-chain cooperation was improved through the work of the integrated care team. For many team members, the positive difference in both work and care satisfaction was highlighted in comparison to regular home care as they were able to use their multi-disciplinary skills and support.Keywords: integrated-care model, multi-morbidity, interprofessional care, home-based care, person-centred integrated care

Food addiction, or ultra-processed food addiction (UPFA), has emerged as a reliable and validated clinical entity that is especially common in individuals seeking treatment for eating disorders (EDs), substance use disorders (SUDs) and co-occurring psychiatric disorders (including mood, anxiety and trauma-related disorders). The clinical science of UPFA has relied on the development and proven reliability of the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS), or subsequent versions, e.g., the modified YFAS 2.0 (mYFAS2.0), as well as neurobiological advances in understanding hedonic eating. Despite its emergence as a valid and reliable clinical entity with important clinical implications, the best treatment approaches remain elusive. To address this gap, we have developed and described a standardized assessment and treatment protocol for patients being treated in a residential program serving patients with psychiatric multi-morbidity. Patients who meet mYFAS2.0 criteria are offered one of three possible approaches: (1) treatment as usual (TAU), using standard ED treatment dietary approaches; (2) harm reduction (HR), offering support in decreasing consumption of all UPFs or particular identified UPFs; and (3) abstinence-based (AB), offering support in abstaining completely from UPFs or particular UPFs. Changes in mYFAS2.0 scores and other clinical measures of common psychiatric comorbidities are compared between admission and discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vasculitides are a heterogeneous group of disorders producing inflammation of blood vessels (e.g. arteries or veins). All major vasculitides potentially have ophthalmological symptoms and signs including visual loss. Co-morbidity, multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and geriatric syndromes all play important roles in patient outcomes for these rheumatic conditions in the elderly. This monograph reviews the NCBI PubMed database (Feb 2023) literature on the neuro-ophthalmic and geriatric considerations in vasculitis. Cogan Syndrome, Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis, Giant Cell Arteritis, Polyarteritis Nodosa, Takayasu Arteritis, Vasculitis epidemiology, and neuro-ophthalmological symptoms. Geriatric patient care for vasculitis with neuro-ophthalmological manifestations can be complicated by the interplay of multiple co-morbidities, polypharmacy, and specific geriatric syndromes. The valuation and treatment of vasculitis and the complications associated with the disease can negatively impact patient care. Advances in noninvasive imaging and updates in diagnostic criteria have enabled increased identification of patients at earlier stages with less severe disease burden. Novel therapeutic agents can be glucocorticoid sparing and might reduce the adverse effects of chronic steroid use. Holistic care models like the 5 M geriatric care model (mind, mobility, medications, multicomplexity, and matters most) allow patients' needs to be in the forefront with biopsychosocial aspects of a patient being addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: To summarise the evidence regarding which patients might benefit from deprescribing antihypertensive medications. Recent Findings: Older patients with frailty, multi-morbidity and subsequent polypharmacy are at higher risk of adverse events from antihypertensive treatment, and therefore may benefit from antihypertensive deprescribing. It is possible to examine an individual's risk of these adverse events, and use this to identify those people where the benefits of treatment may be outweighed by the harms. While such patients might be considered for deprescribing, the long-term effects of this treatment strategy remain unclear. Summary: Evidence now exists to support identification of those who are at risk of adverse events from antihypertensive treatment. These patients could be targeted for deprescribing interventions, although the long-term benefits and harms of this approach are unclear. Perspectives: Randomised controlled trials are still needed to examine the long-term effects of deprescribing in high-risk patients with frailty and multi-morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The drug related problems are common among elderly especially those with multimorbidity who are involved in complex drug regimen. So, there is greater focus on medication considerations. Aim of the Study: It was to evaluate the effect of educational program about medication considerations on promoting quality of pharmacotherapy among elderly with multimorbidity. Subjects and Method: Study design: A quasi-experimental study design. Study settings: Health Insurance Hospital outpatient clinics, Outpatient clinics of Tanta University and Dar El Saada Geriatric Home in Tanta city. Study subjects: A convenience sample of 75 elderly patients who attended the previously mentioned settings. Study tools: Tool I: A structured interview schedule: Part 1: Socio-demographic characteristics of the studied elderly. Part 2: Medical history of the studied elderly. Tool II: BASNEF Model Based Questionnaire: Part 1: Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire. Part 2: Drug Attitude Inventory. Part 3: Assessment of Subjective Norms. Part 4: Assessment of Enabling Factors. Tool III: Medication Management Instrument for Deficiencies in Elderly. Results: There was statistically significant improvement on elderly beliefs about medication, their attitude toward medication, overall influential motivator for appropriate medication use, the enabling factors and medication management deficiency in all phases of evaluation. Conclusion and recommendations: The educational program was effective in improving the elderly patients' beliefs, attitude, overall influential motivator and the enabling factors which support them. Therefore, the nurse should assess the multi-morbid elderly and organize health education programs based on BASNEF model about safe medication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background and objectives Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of two or more long-term health conditions in an individual, is one of the most significant challenges facing health systems worldwide. This study aimed to identify determinants of classes of multimorbidity among older adults in Iran. Research Design and methods In a cross-sectional sample of older adults (aged ≥ 60 years) from the second stage of the Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program in southern Iran, latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify patterns of multimorbidity. Multinomial logistic regression was conducted to investigate factors associated with each multimorbidity class, including age, gender, education, household income, physical activity, smoking status, and polypharmacy. Results In 2,426 study participants (mean age 69 years, 52% female), the overall prevalence of multimorbidity was 80.2%. Among those with multimorbidity, 3 latent classes were identified. These comprised: class 1, individuals with a low burden of multisystem disease (56.9%); class 2, individuals with predominantly cardiovascular-metabolic disorders (25.8%) and class 3, individuals with predominantly cognitive and metabolic disorders (17.1%). Compared with men, women were more likely to belong to class 2 (odds ratio [OR] 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.52–2.54) and class 3 (OR 4.52, 95% CI 3.22–6.35). Polypharmacy was associated with membership class 2 (OR 3.52, 95% CI: 2.65–4.68) and class 3 (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.28–2.63). Smoking was associated with membership in class 3 (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01–2.08). Individuals with higher education levels (59%) and higher levels of physical activity (39%) were less likely to belong to class 3 (OR 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.62) and to class 2 (OR 0.61; 95% CI: 0.38–0.97), respectively. Those at older age were less likely to belong to class 2 (OR 0.95). Discussion and implications A large proportion of older adults in Iran have multimorbidity. Female sex, polypharmacy, sedentary lifestyle, and poor education levels were associated with cardiovascular-metabolic multimorbidity and cognitive and metabolic multimorbidity. A greater understanding of the determinants of multimorbidity may lead to strategies to prevent its development.

The aim of this study was to use longitudinal population-based data to examine the associations between childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and risk for adverse outcomes in multiple life domains across adulthood. In 937 individuals followed from birth to age 45y, we assessed associations between CSA (retrospectively reported at age 26y) and the experience of 22 adverse outcomes in seven domains (physical, mental, sexual, interpersonal, economic, antisocial, multi-domain) from young adulthood to midlife (26 to 45y). Analyses controlled for sex, socioeconomic status, prospectively reported child harm and household dysfunction adverse childhood experiences, and adult sexual assault, and considered different definitions of CSA. After adjusting for confounders, CSA survivors were more likely than their peers to experience internalizing, externalizing, and thought disorders, suicide attempts, health risk behaviors, systemic inflammation, poor oral health, sexually transmitted diseases, high-conflict relationships, benefit use, financial difficulties, antisocial behavior, and cumulative problems across multiple domains in adulthood. In sum, CSA was associated with multiple persistent problems across adulthood, even after adjusting for confounding life stressors, and the risk for particular problems incremented with CSA severity. The higher risk for most specific problems was small to moderate, but the cumulative long-term effects across multiple domains reflect considerable individual and societal burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background General practices are facing challenges such as rising patient demand and difficulties recruiting and retaining general practitioners. Greater use of digital technology has been advocated as a way of mitigating some of these challenges and improving patient access. This includes Digital First Primary Care, when a patient’s first contact with primary care is through a digital route, either through a laptop or smartphone. The use of Digital First Primary Care has been expedited since COVID-19. There is little evidence of staff experiences of using Digital First Primary Care with more complex patients, such as those with multiple long-term conditions. Objective To understand the experiences of those with multiple long-term conditions of Digital First Primary Care from the perspectives of healthcare professionals and stakeholders. Design This was a qualitative evaluation, comprised of four distinct work packages: Work package 1: Locating the study within the wider context, engaging with literature, and co-designing the study approach and research questions with patients. Work package 2: Interviews with health professionals working across general practice and key expert topic stakeholders, including academics and policy-makers. Work package 3: Analysis of data and generation of themes, and testing findings with patients. Work package 4: Synthesis, reporting and dissemination. Results The study commenced in January 2021 and in total 28 interviews were conducted with 14 health professionals and 15 stakeholders between January and August 2022. From the perspective of health professionals, Digital First Primary Care approaches could enable patients to speak with a clinician more quickly than traditional approaches. Those with multiple long-term conditions could submit healthcare readings from home, though health professionals felt patients may struggle navigating digital systems not designed to capture the nuances associated with living with multiple conditions. Clinicians expressed preferences for seeing patients face-to-face, particularly those with multiple long-term conditions, to identify non-verbal cues about a patient’s health. Digital First Primary Care approaches provided an opportunity for clinicians to engage with the carers of patients living with multiple long-term conditions, yet there were concerns around obtaining consent and confidentiality. There remain debates among stakeholders about the nature and extent to which Digital First Primary Care impacts on staff workload. Limitations At the time of data collection, general practices were facing considerable pressure to deliver care and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. While it was originally intended that the study would include interviews with patients with multiple long-term conditions and their carers, none of the general practices that took part in the study were willing and/or able to recruit patients and carers in the time available. Conclusions The rapid implementation of Digital First Primary Care, at a time of immense pressures, meant there has been little time for considering the impact on patients, including those with multiple long-term conditions. The impacts on care continuity depended largely on how surgeries implemented their approaches. Staff and stakeholders felt that Digital First Primary Care, as an additional route for accessing primary care, could be useful for patients with multiple long-term conditions but not at the expense of face-to-face consultations. Future work Future research obtaining patient and carer views of digital-first approaches, understanding the impacts on carers and how approaches are designed with patients with more complex conditions in mind, is essential. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 16/138/31) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Plain language summary Healthcare professionals want to provide the best primary care in the face of increasing pressures, as well as improve access to care for patients. Digital First Primary Care is one response to this situation, when a patients’ first contact with primary care is through a digital route, either through a laptop or smartphone. Online systems allow the patient to provide information to their practice about their symptoms or needs and request a response from a health professional. Our study aimed to understand how Digital First Primary Care works for healthcare professionals providing care to increasing numbers of patients with multiple long-term conditions and their carers. Firstly, we examined the relatively limited existing findings and then interviewed healthcare professionals and key stakeholders experienced in digital approaches within primary care (e.g. from policy organisations, universities and the National Health Service). While we attempted to speak to patients and carers directly, unfortunately the pressures in general practice meant we were unable to do so. However, the study was co-designed with patients. Healthcare professionals and stakeholders felt that patients with multiple long-term conditions faced additional challenges with the use of Digital First Primary Care compared to other patients. For example, they reported difficulties navigating online forms and not being able to speak with a general practitioner who knew them well. There were differing views from healthcare professionals and stakeholders about how far Digital First Primary Care could help staff in general practice and enhance care. For some clinicians, the workload was easier to manage and some simple tasks (e.g. sick notes) could be completed quickly. This could reduce stress for staff and mean more patients could be seen per day. Others felt that the digital system had shortcomings. This could be important for patients with multiple long-term conditions; for example, when a digital form may not fully inform the general practitioner as to the exact nature of the problem, potentially requiring a further follow-up appointment. Health professionals reported that carers of patients with multiple long-term conditions generally liked the new systems as they helped to improve contact with general practice staff. The summary was co-authored by members of the BRACE Patient and Public Involvement group. Scientific summary Background Digital First Primary Care has become widespread in England, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital First Primary Care is when a patients’ first contact with primary care is through a digital route, either through a laptop or smartphone. The design of Digital First Primary Care platforms varies by commercial provider, although the main principles are the same. The patient inputs their symptoms and concerns through a digital platform, either via a set of questions within a digital algorithm or through a free text submission. The patient is then given an appropriate response, which could be from a staff member within the practice or automatically generated by the algorithm. The consultation which results may be traditional in nature, for example by telephone or face-to-face, or be in the form of a message from a health professional to a patient or a video consultation. These approaches have been advocated by policy-makers in England since 2016, as it is believed they can enable clinicians to prioritise the care of patients. Despite the policy shift towards digital approaches, most general practitioner (GP) surgeries were not operating in this way in early 2020, with an analysis of primary care data suggesting that 13–15% of consultations were conducted remotely in January 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen a rapid change in modes of service delivery in general practice, with all GP surgeries having to quickly adapt their services and offer some form of non-face-to-face consultation, to prevent viral transmission. Several studies have been conducted on the use of digital approaches in the National Health Service (NHS). The findings from these studies are wide-ranging. To summarise, digital approaches can provide a benefit to both staff and patients (e.g. greater convenience, including no need to travel to a general practice, and better monitoring of conditions), although there are some challenges. These include issues such as remote consultations taking longer than face-to-face care, potential problems with missed or delayed diagnoses, safeguarding issues, marginalising those who are digitally excluded due to poverty and digital literacy and seeing an increase in referrals to wider services. A mapping of the literature identified potential issues for patients with more complex health conditions accessing digital approaches, as well as the impact on staff in general practice, such as an increased clinical workload. Notably, there is a paucity of evidence in relation to staff experiences of using digital approaches with patients living with multiple long-term conditions. This rapid evaluation examined the views of health professionals in general practice and expert stakeholders to understand how the introduction of Digital First Primary Care influences the nature of the care delivered, any facilitators or barriers and how its use may help patients living with multiple long-term conditions. The findings provide insights that are helpful to primary care NHS staff treating patients with multiple long-term health conditions. Objectives Originally, our aim was to understand the experiences of those with multiple long-term conditions of Digital First Primary Care from the perspectives of patients, their carers and healthcare professionals. However, due to challenges related to COVID-19, GP practices were unable to recruit patients/carers to the study. The team reviewed and refined the research questions with respect to the ongoing challenges and changes occurring in general practice more widely. As a result, our research questions have been amended not only due to recruitment challenges, but also how general practice has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. The research questions addressed in this rapid evaluation are: What is the experience of Digital First Primary Care for health professionals and stakeholders (including academics, policy makers and Digital First Primary Care providers), both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic? What is the impact of Digital First Primary Care on the nature of consultations, from the perspective of health professionals and stakeholders and for patients with multiple long-term conditions and their carers? This includes aspects of communication, timeliness of care and continuity of care. What, if any, are the advantages or disadvantages of Digital First Primary Care for health professionals when providing care for patients with multiple long-term conditions? What lessons can be learnt from staff and stakeholders, for future service delivery for patients with multiple long-term conditions in primary care? Are there individual groups within the community where there is particular learning for future service provision? Methods The evaluation comprised four interlinked work packages (WPs): WP1. Locating the study within the wider context, engaging with literature, as well as co-designing the study approach and research questions with patients–engaging with relevant literature on the use of Digital First Primary Care services by patients with multiple long-term conditions; a workshop with patients [members of the BRACE patient and public involvement (PPI) group] to shape the research questions (September 2020) as well as co-design research tools alongside continued engagement during data collection, analysis, and write up of findings. WP2. Interviews with health professionals working across general practice and key expert topic stakeholders–through in-depth interviews with GPs and nurses, at eight purposively selected general practice sites, identified via a range of strategies; analysis of data; testing findings with members from our BRACE steering group and BRACE PPI panel. The study included a variety of general practices covering differences across: (1) practice size; (2) mix of urban and rural; (3) the ethnic composition of patients; (4) the number of patients registered aged 65 years and over; (5) the nature of the digital-first applications implemented. Individual interviewees, 14 in all, were identified and approached through contacts in general practices. We also interviewed expert stakeholders (n = 15) from academia, policy think tanks and primary care-related member organisations. WP3. Analysis of data, generation of themes and testing findings with patients and carers–Data collection was undertaken between April and August 2022. We adopted a pragmatic approach to enable a comprehensive analysis within a rapid timescale: the collection and analysis of interview data were completed in parallel and facilitated through the use of one-page summaries of codes, frequent team meetings, data analysis workshops and systematic categorisation and coding according to an analytical framework based on the relevant literature identified in WP1. WP4. Synthesis, reporting and dissemination–Synthesis across WP1–3 and writing of the final report. Sharing of the findings with leading researchers and organisations in this field. Results We undertook interviews across eight general practice sites completing 14 interviews. Six of our eight practices were situated in rural locations, five were part of a single GP super-partnership and one practice was vertically integrated with an acute trust, while all practices used one of two different digital-first providers. All practices had introduced a programme of Digital First Primary Care prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, although its use had increased dramatically as a result of the pandemic. In addition, we undertook a further 15 interviews with a purposive selection of expert stakeholders. Owing to the small sample size, our findings cannot be assumed to be representative of general practice nationally, but they provide detailed insight from a diverse sample of practices where learning may be transferable to other primary care settings. The findings provide valuable insights into the use of Digital First Primary Care, both pre and post the COVID-19 pandemic. The implementation of Digital First Primary Care by health professionals providing care to patients with multiple long-term conditions The COVID-19 pandemic led to the rapid adoption and extensive roll out of Digital First Primary Care on a larger scale than pre-pandemic. The implementation of Digital First Primary Care across general practice was at speed and there was little opportunity for health care professionals to reflect on the impact that such an introduction would have on patient groups, such as those with multiple long-term conditions. In addition, the participants interviewed in our study felt that little consideration was given to the impact that the widespread use of these approaches might have on healthcare professionals who care for those with multiple long-term conditions. Some healthcare professionals felt that the introduction of Digital First Primary Care had led to an increase in demand from patients, as it was easier to access services in general practice. As a result, health professionals reported restricting the times Digital First Primary Care was available to patients in order to manage their workload and, ultimately, limited access (e.g. closing Digital First Primary Care platforms over weekends or for set times during the day). It was perceived by interviewees that patients with multiple long-term conditions may face additional challenges with the use of Digital First Primary Care compared to other patients. These challenges included navigating Digital First Primary Care systems (particularly those systems that used digital questionnaires for patients to report their symptoms/the reason they were seeking to consult, which followed algorithm approaches and restricted the opportunity to provide a descriptive narrative) and, potentially, reducing the likelihood of being able to speak with a health professional who knew them and their conditions well. Advantages and disadvantages of Digital First Primary Care for patients with multiple long-term conditions from the perspective of health professionals and stakeholders Participants reported that Digital First Primary Care could provide some benefits to patients with multiple long-term conditions, such as being seen or having their health-related queries addressed more quickly, receiving an initial response from their general practice within 1–2 days for non-urgent matters and avoiding the need to wait in long telephone queues for appointments. Where this was the case, it reduced the need for unnecessary face-to-face appointments and supported patients’ preferences where possible. Digital First Primary Care was also reported to be useful for patients with some long-term health conditions (e.g. diabetes, cardiovascular conditions, mental health conditions and hearing loss). For example, health professionals felt that patients with multiple long-term conditions found Digital First Primary Care platforms useful when submitting readings (e.g. blood sugar levels, blood pressure) from home compared to coming into the general practice, a feature which was particularly helpful for patients with well-managed long-term conditions. In addition, participants felt that younger patients, those working full-time and those who did not speak English as a first language (if translation was available within the system) benefitted from Digital First Primary Care. However, patient group participants who it was felt may benefit less from Digital First Primary Care included those who are older/frail and those without access to digital technology (or the skills or abilities to use it). Participants felt that there were some notable drawbacks when using Digital First Primary Care programmes for patients with multiple long-term conditions. Participants had concerns regarding how the introduction and application of Digital First Primary Care programmes impacts the quality of relationships patients have with healthcare professionals, as well as the impact on patient safety. Digital First Primary Care also puts the onus on the patient to articulate their problem through written means, and this can be challenging for patients who have difficulties with literacy. Further, several health professionals expressed a preference for seeing patients face-to-face, particularly those with multiple long-term conditions, so as to have the opportunity to holistically assess the patient. Finally, the participants felt that the carers of patients with long-term conditions may benefit from Digital First Primary Care as they can have more direct communication with healthcare professionals and can be more actively involved in their care. However, there are some concerns regarding confidentiality, privacy and consent when it comes to carers accessing medical information. Impact of Digital First Primary Care on the general-practice workforce within and outside of consultations with patients with multiple long-term conditions With regards to healthcare professionals, Digital First Primary Care can offer advantages in terms of better information sharing and communication across staff and patients, improved relationships with patients and greater efficiencies and flexibility. However, some felt that Digital First Primary Care was detrimental to the clinician–patient relationship, creating some inefficiencies. There were also concerns raised over the confidence staff have in their own clinical decision-making when using Digital First Primary Care and the issue of increased (unmanageable) patient demand. Conclusions Conducting interviews with clinical general-practice staff and expert stakeholders following the height of the pandemic was challenging. Useful insights have, nevertheless, been obtained. Digital First Primary Care approaches have been rapidly rolled out and COVID-19 has dramatically changed the way in which general practice operates. The implementation of Digital First Primary Care has been undertaken at great speed, with many in general practice reconsidering how best to use a suite of digital approaches, from initial patient contact to consultation, at a time of immense pressures on staff. The push for greater access to general practice and the corresponding focus on seeing and speaking to a patient rapidly have occurred at the expense of other aspects of general-practice care which the health professionals and stakeholders who were interviewed felt are valued by patients with multiple long-term conditions. These included continuity of care (particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic) and an established doctor–patient relationship which enables the clinician and patient to have clear communication. For the participants in our study, the overwhelming view was that Digital First Primary Care could be useful for patients with multiple long-term conditions, but it should be available in addition to, not at the expense of, face-to-face consultations. The authors see that there is important future work in obtaining the views of patients and their carers and comparing those alongside the views of health professionals and stakeholders obtained in this study; a cost-effectiveness analysis across providers; and understanding how individual providers of Digital First Primary Care are designed with the needs of complex patients in mind. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 16/138/31) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

We aimed to validate the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII®) and assess the cross-sectional associations between the DII® and multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) and biomarker concentrations and MLTCs using data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC-Norfolk) study (11,113 men and 13,408 women). The development of MLTCs is associated with low-grade chronic inflammation, and ten self-reported conditions were selected for our MLTC score. Data from a validated FFQ were used to calculate energy-adjusted DII® scores. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and circulating vitamins A, C, E, β-carotene and magnesium were available. Micronutrient biomarker concentrations were significantly lower as the diet became more pro-inflammatory (p-trend < 0.001), and hs-CRP concentrations were significantly higher in men (p-trend = 0.006). A lower DII® (anti-inflammatory) score was associated with 12–40% higher odds of MLTCs. Lower concentrations of vitamin C and higher concentrations of hs-CRP were associated with higher odds of MLTCs. The majority of the associations in our study between MLTCs, nutritional biomarkers, hs-CRP and the DII® were as expected, indicating that the DII® score has criterion validity. Despite this, a more anti-inflammatory diet was associated with higher odds of MLTCs, which was unexpected. Future studies are required to better understand the associations between MLTCs and the DII®.

Abstract Background The prevalence of multi-morbidity is increasing globally. Integrated models of care present a potential intervention to improve patient and health system outcomes. However, the intervention components and concepts within different models of care vary widely and their effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to describe and map the definitions, characteristics, components, and reported effects of integrated models of care in systematic reviews (SRs). Methods We conducted a scoping review of SRs according to pre-specified methods (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019119265). Eligible SRs assessed integrated models of care at primary health care level for adults and children with multi-morbidity. We searched in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, and Health Systems Evidence up to 3 May 2022. Two authors independently assessed eligibility of SRs and extracted data. We identified and described common components of integrated care across SRs. We extracted findings of the SRs as presented in the conclusions and reported on these verbatim. Results We included 22 SRs, examining data from randomised controlled trials and observational studies conducted across the world. Definitions and descriptions of models of integrated care varied considerably. However, across SRs, we identified and described six common components of integrated care: (1) chronic conditions addressed, (2) where services were provided, (3) the type of services provided, (4) healthcare professionals involved in care, (5) coordination and organisation of care and (6) patient involvement in care. We observed differences in the components of integrated care according to the income setting of the included studies. Some SRs reported that integrated care was beneficial for health and process outcomes, while others found no difference in effect when comparing integrated care to other models of care. Conclusions Integrated models of care were heterogeneous within and across SRs. Information that allows the identification of effective components of integrated care was lacking. Detailed, standardised and transparent reporting of the intervention components and their effectiveness on health and process outcomes is needed.

ObjectivesTo evaluate polypharmacy in older people to determine whether the number of medications de-prescribed correlates with the extent of improvement in quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes.DesignA prospective longitudinal cohort study of polypharmacy in people living in a community in Israel.SettingParticipants aged 65 years or older who took at least six prescription drugs followed up for at least 3 years (range 3–10 years) after poly-de-prescription (PDP) recommendations.InterventionsPDP recommended at first home visit using the Garfinkel algorithm. Annual follow-up and end-of-study questionnaires used to assess clinical outcomes, QoL, and satisfaction from de-prescribing. All medications taken, complications, hospitalizations, and mortality recorded. In total, 307 participants met the inclusion criteria; 25 incomplete end-of-study questionnaires meant 282 participants for subjective analysis. Participants divided into two subgroups: (i) those who discontinued more than 50% of the drugs (PDP group) or (ii) those who discontinued less than 50% of the drugs (non-responders, NR).Main outcome measuresObjective: 3-year survival rate and hospitalizations. Subjective: general satisfaction from de-prescribing; change in functional, mental, and cognitive status; improved sleep quality, appetite, and continence; and decreased pain.ResultsMean age: 83 years (range 65–99 years). Mean number of drugs at baseline visit: 9.8 (range 6–20); 6.7 ± 2.0 de-prescribed in the PDP group (n = 146) and 2.2 ± 2.1 in the NR group (n = 161) (p

Frailty describes a health state related to ageing where people become less resilient to health challenges and more likely to have adverse outcomes if they become unwell. People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are known to have poor health, with research suggesting that many become frail at a younger age than the general population. Previous research using small-scale primary data collection suggests that the prevalence of frailty in homeless populations varies widely (16–55%), with variations in sample sizes and settings partially accounting for differences in current estimates. The prevalence, risks, and outcomes of frailty in PEH are poorly understood. We propose to carry out a secondary analysis of existing health survey data collected from 2,792 PEH. This will involve creating a Frailty Index (FI) to identify frail people within the dataset. Regression analyses will be used to identify associations between potential risk factors and outcomes of frailty in this population. This protocol will: 1) Outline the creation of a FI to assess the frailty prevalence within a dataset of health information collected from a cohort of PEH and 2) Describe proposed methods of regression analysis for identification of associations between frailty and risks factors/outcomes of frailty in the cohort of PEH within the dataset. The processes described in this paper can inform future development of FIs in other datasets. It is expected that the FI created will be an appropriate and robust method for identifying frailty in a cohort of PEH and results of the secondary data analysis will provide a more robust estimate of the associations between frailty and risk factors/outcomes.

A multimorbidity-focused approach may reflect common etiologic mechanisms and lead to better targeting of etiologic agents for broadly impactful public health interventions. Our aim was to identify clusters of chronic obesity-related, neurodevelopmental, and respiratory outcomes in children, and to examine associations between cluster membership and widely prevalent chemical exposures to demonstrate our epidemiologic approach. Early to middle childhood outcome data collected 2011–2022 for 1092 children were harmonized across the ECHO-PATHWAYS consortium of 3 prospective pregnancy cohorts in six U.S. cities. 15 outcomes included age 4–9 BMI, cognitive and behavioral assessment scores, speech problems, and learning disabilities, asthma, wheeze, and rhinitis. To form generalizable clusters across study sites, we performed k-means clustering on scaled residuals of each variable regressed on study site. Outcomes and demographic variables were summarized between resulting clusters. Logistic weighted quantile sum regressions with permutation test p-values associated odds of cluster membership with a mixture of 15 prenatal urinary phthalate metabolites in full-sample and sex-stratified models. Three clusters emerged, including a healthier Cluster 1 (n = 734) with low morbidity across outcomes; Cluster 2 (n = 192) with low IQ and higher levels of all outcomes, especially 0.4–1.8-standard deviation higher mean neurobehavioral outcomes; and Cluster 3 (n = 179) with the highest asthma (92 %), wheeze (53 %), and rhinitis (57 %) frequencies. We observed a significant positive, male-specific stratified association (odds ratio = 1.6; p = 0.01) between a phthalate mixture with high weights for MEP and MHPP and odds of membership in Cluster 3 versus Cluster 1. These results identified subpopulations of children with co-occurring elevated levels of BMI, neurodevelopmental, and respiratory outcomes that may reflect shared etiologic pathways. The observed association between phthalates and respiratory outcome cluster membership could inform policy efforts towards children with respiratory disease. Similar cluster-based epidemiology may identify environmental factors that impact multi-outcome prevalence and efficiently direct public policy efforts.

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is commonly associated with an increasing complexity of multimorbidity. While some progress has been made in identifying genetic and non-genetic risk factors for T2D, understanding the longitudinal clinical history of individuals before/after T2D diagnosis may provide additional insights. Methods: In this study, we utilised longitudinal data from the DARE (Diabetes Alliance for Research in England) study to examine the trajectory of clinical conditions in individuals with and without T2D. Data from 1932 individuals (T2D n = 1196 vs. matched non-T2D controls n = 736) were extracted and subjected to trajectory analysis over a period of up to 50 years (25 years pre-diagnosis/25 years post-diagnosis). We also analysed the cumulative proportion of people with diagnosed coronary artery disease (CAD) in their general practice (GP) record with an analysis of lower respiratory tract infection (RTI) as a comparator group. Results: The mean age of diagnosis of T2D was 52.6 (95% confidence interval 52.0–53.4) years. In the years leading up to T2D diagnosis, individuals who eventually received a T2D diagnosis consistently exhibited a considerable increase in several clinical phenotypes. Additionally, immediately prior to T2D diagnosis, a significantly greater prevalence of hypertension (35%)/RTI (34%)/heart conditions (17%)/eye, nose, throat infection (19%) and asthma (12%) were observed. The corresponding trajectory of each of these conditions was much less dramatic in the matched controls. Post-T2D diagnosis, proportions of T2D individuals exhibiting hypertension/chronic kidney disease/retinopathy/infections climbed rapidly before plateauing. At the last follow-up by quintile of disadvantage, the proportion (%) of people with diagnosed CAD was 6.4% for quintile 1 (least disadvantaged) and 11% for quintile 5 (F = 3.4, p = 0.01 for the difference between quintiles). Conclusion: These findings provide novel insights into the onset/natural progression of T2D, suggesting an early phase of inflammation-related disease activity before any clinical diagnosis of T2D is made. Measures that reduce social inequality have the potential in the longer term to reduce the social gradient in health outcomes reported here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Whilst multi-morbidity is known to be a concern in people with cancer, very little is known about the risk of cancer in multi-morbid patients. This study aims to investigate the risk of being diagnosed with lung, colorectal, breast and prostate cancer associated with multi-morbidity. Methods We investigated the association between multi-morbidity and subsequent risk of cancer diagnosis in UK Biobank. Cox models were used to estimate the relative risks of each cancer of interest in multi-morbid participants, using the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score. The extent to which reverse causation, residual confounding and ascertainment bias may have impacted on the findings was robustly investigated. Results Of the 436,990 participants included in the study who were cancer-free at baseline, 21.6% (99,965) were multi-morbid (≥ 2 diseases). Over a median follow-up time of 10.9 [IQR 10.0–11.7] years, 9,019 prostate, 7,994 breast, 5,241 colorectal, and 3,591 lung cancers were diagnosed. After exclusion of the first year of follow-up, there was no clear association between multi-morbidity and risk of colorectal, prostate or breast cancer diagnosis. Those with ≥ 4 diseases at recruitment had double the risk of a subsequent lung cancer diagnosis compared to those with no diseases (HR 2.00 [95% CI 1.70–2.35] p for trend

Abstract ESCAPE Evaluation of a patient‐centred biopsychosocial blended collaborative care pathway for the treatment of multimorbid elderly patients. Therapeutic Area Healthcare interventions for the management of older patients with multiple morbidities. Aims Multi‐morbidity treatment is an increasing challenge for healthcare systems in ageing societies. This comprehensive cohort study with embedded randomized controlled trial tests an integrated biopsychosocial care model for multimorbid elderly patients. Hypothesis A holistic, patient‐centred pro‐active 9‐month intervention based on the blended collaborative care (BCC) approach and enhanced by information and communication technologies can improve health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and disease outcomes as compared with usual care at 9 months. Methods Across six European countries, ESCAPE is recruiting patients with heart failure, mental distress/disorder plus ≥2 medical co‐morbidities into an observational cohort study. Within the cohort study, 300 patients will be included in a randomized controlled assessor‐blinded two‐arm parallel group interventional clinical trial (RCT). In the intervention, trained care managers (CMs) regularly support patients and informal carers in managing their multiple health problems. Supervised by a clinical specialist team, CMs remotely support patients in implementing the treatment plan—customized to the patients' individual needs and preferences—into their daily lives and liaise with patients' healthcare providers. An eHealth platform with an integrated patient registry guides the intervention and helps to empower patients and informal carers. HRQoL measured with the EQ‐5D‐5L as primary endpoint, and secondary outcomes, that is, medical and patient‐reported outcomes, healthcare costs, cost‐effectiveness, and informal carer burden, will be assessed at 9 and ≥18 months. Conclusions If proven effective, the ESCAPE BCC intervention can be implemented in routine care for older patients with multiple morbidities across the participating countries and beyond.

Abstract Background Polypharmacy is associated with poorer health outcomes in older adults. Other than the associated multimorbidity, factors contributing to this association could include medication adverse effects and interactions, difficulties in managing complicated medication regimes, and reduced medication adherence. It is unknown how reversible these negative associations may be if polypharmacy is reduced. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of implementing an operationalized clinical pathway aimed to reduce polypharmacy in primary care and to pilot measurement tools suitable for assessing change in health outcomes in a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods We randomized consenting patients ≥ 70 years old on ≥ 5 long-term medications into intervention or control groups. We collected baseline demographic information and research outcome measures at baseline and 6 months. We assessed four categories of feasibility outcomes: process, resource, management, and scientific. The intervention group received TAPER (team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction), a clinical pathway for reducing polypharmacy using “pause and monitor” drug holiday approach. TAPER integrates patients’ goals, priorities, and preferences with an evidence-based “machine screen” to identify potentially problematic medications and support a tapering and monitoring process, all supported by a web-based system, TaperMD. Patients met with a clinical pharmacist and then with their family physician to finalize a plan for optimization of medications using TaperMD. The control group received usual care and were offered TAPER after follow-up at 6 months. Results All 9 criteria for feasibility were met across the 4 feasibility outcome domains. Of 85 patients screened for eligibility, 39 eligible patients were recruited and randomized; two were excluded post hoc for not meeting the age requirement. Withdrawals (2) and losses to follow-up (3) were small and evenly distributed between arms. Areas for intervention and research process improvement were identified. In general, outcome measures performed well and appeared suitable for assessing change in a larger RCT. Conclusions Results from this feasibility study indicate that TAPER as a clinical pathway is feasible to implement in a primary care team setting and in an RCT research framework. Outcome trends suggest effectiveness. A large-scale RCT will be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of TAPER on reducing polypharmacy and improving health outcomes. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT02562352 , Registered September 29, 2015.

Abstract Background Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) frequently co-exist. We assess the impact of having NAFLD on adverse clinical outcomes and all-cause mortality for people with CKD. Methods A total of 18,073 UK Biobank participants identified to have CKD (eGFR 3 mg/mmol) were prospectively followed up by electronic linkage to hospital and death records. Cox-regression estimated the hazard ratios (HR) associated with having NAFLD (elevated hepatic steatosis index or ICD-code) and NAFLD fibrosis (elevated fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score or NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS)) on cardiovascular events (CVE), progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and all-cause mortality. Results 56.2% of individuals with CKD had NAFLD at baseline, and 3.0% and 7.7% had NAFLD fibrosis according to a FIB-4 > 2.67 and NFS ≥ 0.676, respectively. The median follow-up was 13 years. In univariate analysis, NAFLD was associated with an increased risk of CVE (HR 1.49 [1.38–1.60]), all-cause mortality (HR 1.22 [1.14–1.31]) and ESRD (HR 1.26 [1.02–1.54]). Following multivariable adjustment, NAFLD remained an independent risk factor for CVE overall (HR 1.20 [1.11–1.30], p

Data regarding the effect of specific dietary behaviors, such as meal frequency, on multi-morbidity are scarce. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the effect of meal frequency on multi-morbidity in a Cypriot population. A representative sample of 1255 adults >18 years old was surveyed during 2022–2023. Data regarding sociodemographic characteristics, multi-morbidity, and meal frequency consumption were collected through validated questionnaires. Diseases were listed according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision [ICD-10]. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS Statistics v.19.0. Responders who consumed more than three meals and snacks daily had a higher probability of multi-morbidity [OR: 1.505 [95% CI: 1.505–2.069]] compared with those who consumed three or fewer meals and snacks daily. The relation was not statistically significant after adjusting for age and gender and for socioeconomic characteristics. Furthermore, participants who consumed more than three snacks per day had a 1.776 [AOR: 1.616 [95% CI: 1.054–2.476]] higher risk of having multi-morbidity compared with participants who did not consume any snack or consumed one snack per day. The findings suggest that people with multi-morbidity have a higher risk when consuming three or more snacks per day regardless of age, gender, and socioeconomic characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prevalence of multi-morbidity is increasing globally. Integrated models of care present a potential intervention to improve patient and health system outcomes. However, the intervention components and concepts within different models of care vary widely and their effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to describe and map the definitions, characteristics, components, and reported effects of integrated models of care in systematic reviews (SRs). Methods: We conducted a scoping review of SRs according to pre-specified methods (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019119265). Eligible SRs assessed integrated models of care at primary health care level for adults and children with multi-morbidity. We searched in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, and Health Systems Evidence up to 3 May 2022. Two authors independently assessed eligibility of SRs and extracted data. We identified and described common components of integrated care across SRs. We extracted findings of the SRs as presented in the conclusions and reported on these verbatim. Results: We included 22 SRs, examining data from randomised controlled trials and observational studies conducted across the world. Definitions and descriptions of models of integrated care varied considerably. However, across SRs, we identified and described six common components of integrated care: (1) chronic conditions addressed, (2) where services were provided, (3) the type of services provided, (4) healthcare professionals involved in care, (5) coordination and organisation of care and (6) patient involvement in care. We observed differences in the components of integrated care according to the income setting of the included studies. Some SRs reported that integrated care was beneficial for health and process outcomes, while others found no difference in effect when comparing integrated care to other models of care. Conclusions: Integrated models of care were heterogeneous within and across SRs. Information that allows the identification of effective components of integrated care was lacking. Detailed, standardised and transparent reporting of the intervention components and their effectiveness on health and process outcomes is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To quantify the association between opioid agonist treatment (OAT) and overdose death by age group; test the hypothesis that across different age groups, opioid overdose mortality is lowest during OAT with buprenorphine compared with time out of treatment or OAT with methadone; and test associations between OAT and opioid overdose mortality in the presence of chronic circulatory, respiratory, liver and kidney diseases. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study using linked administrative data. Setting: New South Wales, Australia. Participants: A total of 37 764 people prescribed OAT, 1 August 2002 and 31 December 2017. Measurements OAT exposure, opioid overdose mortality and key confounders were measured using linked population data sets on OAT entry and exit, hospitalization, mental health care, incarceration and mortality. ICD‐10 codes were used to define opioid overdose mortality and chronic disease groups of interest. Findings Relative to time out of treatment, time in OAT was associated with a lower risk of opioid overdose death across all age groups and chronic diseases. Among people aged 50 years and older, there was weak evidence that buprenorphine may be associated with greater protection against opioid overdose death than methadone [generalized estimating equation (GEE) adjusted incident rate ratio (aIRR) = 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.21, 1.02; marginal structural models (MSM) aIRR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.17, 1.41]. Buprenorphine was associated with greater protection against overdose death than methadone for clients with circulatory (MSM aIRR = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.11, 0.67) or respiratory (MSM aIRR = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.94) diseases, but not liver (MSM aIRR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.14, 2.43) or kidney (MSM aIRR = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.31, 4.36) diseases. Conclusions: Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) appears to reduce mortality risk in people with opioid use disorder who are older or who have physical comorbidities. Opioid overdose mortality during OAT with buprenorphine appears to be lower and reduced in clients with circulatory and respiratory diseases compared with OAT with methadone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The average age of the surgical population continues to increase, as does prevalence of long-term diseases. However, outcomes amongst multi-morbid surgical patients are not well described. We included adults undergoing non-obstetric surgical procedures in the English National Health Service between January 2010 and December 2015. Patients could be included multiple times in sequential 90-day procedure spells. Multi-morbidity was defined as presence of two or more long-term diseases identified using a modified Charlson comorbidity index. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative death. Secondary outcomes included emergency hospital readmission within 90 days. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using logistic regression. We compared the outcomes associated with different disease combinations. We identified 20 193 659 procedure spells among 13 062 715 individuals aged 57 (standard deviation 19) yr. Multi-morbidity was present among 2 577 049 (12.8%) spells with 195 965 deaths (7.6%), compared with 17 616 610 (88.2%) spells without multi-morbidity with 163 529 deaths (0.9%). Multi-morbidity was present in 1 902 859/16 946 808 (11.2%) elective spells, with 57 663 deaths (2.7%, OR 4.9 [95% CI: 4.9–4.9]), and 674 190/3 246 851 (20.7%) non-elective spells, with 138 302 deaths (20.5%, OR 3.0 [95% CI: 3.0–3.1]). Emergency readmission followed 547 399 (22.0%) spells with multi-morbidity compared with 1 255 526 (7.2%) without. Multi-morbid patients accounted for 57 663/114 783 (50.2%) deaths after elective spells, and 138 302/244 711 (56.5%) after non-elective spells. The rate of death varied five-fold from lowest to highest risk disease pairs. One in eight patients undergoing surgery have multi-morbidity, accounting for more than half of all postoperative deaths. Disease interactions amongst multi-morbid patients is an important determinant of patient outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Whilst multi-morbidity is known to be a concern in people with cancer, very little is known about the risk of cancer in multi-morbid patients. This study aims to investigate the risk of being diagnosed with lung, colorectal, breast and prostate cancer associated with multi-morbidity. Methods: We investigated the association between multi-morbidity and subsequent risk of cancer diagnosis in UK Biobank. Cox models were used to estimate the relative risks of each cancer of interest in multi-morbid participants, using the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score. The extent to which reverse causation, residual confounding and ascertainment bias may have impacted on the findings was robustly investigated. Results: Of the 436,990 participants included in the study who were cancer-free at baseline, 21.6% (99,965) were multi-morbid (≥ 2 diseases). Over a median follow-up time of 10.9 [IQR 10.0–11.7] years, 9,019 prostate, 7,994 breast, 5,241 colorectal, and 3,591 lung cancers were diagnosed. After exclusion of the first year of follow-up, there was no clear association between multi-morbidity and risk of colorectal, prostate or breast cancer diagnosis. Those with ≥ 4 diseases at recruitment had double the risk of a subsequent lung cancer diagnosis compared to those with no diseases (HR 2.00 [95% CI 1.70–2.35] p for trend < 0.001). These findings were robust to sensitivity analyses aimed at reducing the impact of reverse causation, residual confounding from known cancer risk factors and ascertainment bias. Conclusions: Individuals with multi-morbidity are at an increased risk of lung cancer diagnosis. While this association did not appear to be due to common sources of bias in observational studies, further research is needed to understand what underlies this association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with epilepsy (PWE) and people with intellectual disabilities (ID) both live shorter lives than the general population and both conditions increase the risk of death further. We aimed to measure associations between certain risk factors for death in PWE and ID. Methods: A retrospective case–control study was conducted in ten regions in England and Wales. Data were collected on PWE registered with secondary care ID and neurology services between 2017 and 2021. Prevalence rates of neurodevelopmental, psychiatric and medical diagnoses, seizure frequency, psychotropic and antiseizure medications (ASM) prescribed, and health activity (epilepsy reviews/risk assessments/care plans/compliance etc.) recorded were compared between the two groups. Results: 190 PWE and ID who died were compared with 910 living controls. People who died were less likely to have had an epilepsy risk assessment but had a greater prevalence of genetic conditions, older age, poor physical health, generalized tonic–clonic seizures, polypharmacy (not ASMs) and antipsychotic use. The multivariable logistic regression for risk of epilepsy-related death identified that age over 50, medical condition prevalence, antipsychotic medication use and the lack of an epilepsy review in the last 12 months as associated with increased risk of death. Reviews by psychiatrists in ID services was associated with a 72% reduction in the odds of death compared neurology services. Conclusions: Polypharmacy and use of antipsychotics may be associated with death but not ASMs. Greater and closer monitoring by creating capable health communities may reduce the risk of death. ID services maybe more likely to provide this holistic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with multi‐morbidity and frailty, but influence on hip fracture outcomes is poorly understood. The primary aim was to investigate the association between deprivation and mortality, and secondary aims were to assess the effects on: (i) age at presentation; (ii) inpatient outcomes, and (iii) post‐discharge outcomes. Method: This cohort study included all patients aged >50 years admitted with a hip fracture to a high‐volume centre between 01 March 2020 and 20 November 2021. Data were collected contemporaneously by specialist auditors and underwent validation using live health records after 180 days follow‐up. Variables were demographics including Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, injury and management factors, and outcome measures including length of stay, discharge destination, readmission, and mortality status at 180 days. Results: There were 1822 patients of which 1306/1822 (72%) were female. Deprivation was independently associated with younger age at hip fracture, demonstrating a linear correlation with each deprivation level. The overall mean age was 80.7 years (range 50–102), with the mean age in the most deprived group being 77.2 years (95% CI; 75.7–78.7) versus 82.8 years (95% CI; 82.0–83.5) in the least deprived. Multivariate logistic regression showed no association between deprivation and 30‐ or 180‐day mortality risk. Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis demonstrated no difference between the most deprived versus least deprived (log‐rank, p = 0.854). Deprivation had no influence on length of stay, discharge destination, or COVID‐19 status, but deprived patients had an increased risk of readmission (OR 1.63, 95% CI [1.18–2.24]; p = 0.003). Conclusion: Deprivation showed no linear correlation with early mortality risk (within 180 days of injury), but it was associated with an earlier age at presentation (the most deprived sustained a hip fracture 5.6 years earlier than the least deprived) which may impact overall life expectancy. More deprived patients were more likely to require further acute hospital admissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ESCAPE: Evaluation of a patient‐centred biopsychosocial blended collaborative care pathway for the treatment of multimorbid elderly patients. Therapeutic Area: Healthcare interventions for the management of older patients with multiple morbidities. Aims: Multi‐morbidity treatment is an increasing challenge for healthcare systems in ageing societies. This comprehensive cohort study with embedded randomized controlled trial tests an integrated biopsychosocial care model for multimorbid elderly patients. Hypothesis: A holistic, patient‐centred pro‐active 9‐month intervention based on the blended collaborative care (BCC) approach and enhanced by information and communication technologies can improve health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and disease outcomes as compared with usual care at 9 months. Methods: Across six European countries, ESCAPE is recruiting patients with heart failure, mental distress/disorder plus ≥2 medical co‐morbidities into an observational cohort study. Within the cohort study, 300 patients will be included in a randomized controlled assessor‐blinded two‐arm parallel group interventional clinical trial (RCT). In the intervention, trained care managers (CMs) regularly support patients and informal carers in managing their multiple health problems. Supervised by a clinical specialist team, CMs remotely support patients in implementing the treatment plan—customized to the patients' individual needs and preferences—into their daily lives and liaise with patients' healthcare providers. An eHealth platform with an integrated patient registry guides the intervention and helps to empower patients and informal carers. HRQoL measured with the EQ‐5D‐5L as primary endpoint, and secondary outcomes, that is, medical and patient‐reported outcomes, healthcare costs, cost‐effectiveness, and informal carer burden, will be assessed at 9 and ≥18 months. Conclusions: If proven effective, the ESCAPE BCC intervention can be implemented in routine care for older patients with multiple morbidities across the participating countries and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) frequently co-exist. We assess the impact of having NAFLD on adverse clinical outcomes and all-cause mortality for people with CKD. Methods: A total of 18,073 UK Biobank participants identified to have CKD (eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or albuminuria > 3 mg/mmol) were prospectively followed up by electronic linkage to hospital and death records. Cox-regression estimated the hazard ratios (HR) associated with having NAFLD (elevated hepatic steatosis index or ICD-code) and NAFLD fibrosis (elevated fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score or NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS)) on cardiovascular events (CVE), progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and all-cause mortality. Results: 56.2% of individuals with CKD had NAFLD at baseline, and 3.0% and 7.7% had NAFLD fibrosis according to a FIB-4 > 2.67 and NFS ≥ 0.676, respectively. The median follow-up was 13 years. In univariate analysis, NAFLD was associated with an increased risk of CVE (HR 1.49 [1.38–1.60]), all-cause mortality (HR 1.22 [1.14–1.31]) and ESRD (HR 1.26 [1.02–1.54]). Following multivariable adjustment, NAFLD remained an independent risk factor for CVE overall (HR 1.20 [1.11–1.30], p < 0.0001), but not ACM or ESRD. In univariate analysis, elevated NFS and FIB-4 scores were associated with increased risk of CVE (HR 2.42 [2.09–2.80] and 1.64 [1.30–2.08]) and all-cause mortality (HR 2.82 [2.48–3.21] and 1.82 [1.47–2.24]); the NFS score was also associated with ESRD (HR 5.15 [3.52–7.52]). Following full adjustment, the NFS remained associated with an increased incidence of CVE (HR 1.19 [1.01–1.40]) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.31 [1.13–1.52]). Conclusions: In people with CKD, NAFLD is associated with an increased risk of CVE, and the NAFLD fibrosis score is associated with an elevated risk of CVE and worse survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Polypharmacy is associated with poorer health outcomes in older adults. Other than the associated multimorbidity, factors contributing to this association could include medication adverse effects and interactions, difficulties in managing complicated medication regimes, and reduced medication adherence. It is unknown how reversible these negative associations may be if polypharmacy is reduced. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of implementing an operationalized clinical pathway aimed to reduce polypharmacy in primary care and to pilot measurement tools suitable for assessing change in health outcomes in a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods: We randomized consenting patients ≥ 70 years old on ≥ 5 long-term medications into intervention or control groups. We collected baseline demographic information and research outcome measures at baseline and 6 months. We assessed four categories of feasibility outcomes: process, resource, management, and scientific. The intervention group received TAPER (team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction), a clinical pathway for reducing polypharmacy using "pause and monitor" drug holiday approach. TAPER integrates patients' goals, priorities, and preferences with an evidence-based "machine screen" to identify potentially problematic medications and support a tapering and monitoring process, all supported by a web-based system, TaperMD. Patients met with a clinical pharmacist and then with their family physician to finalize a plan for optimization of medications using TaperMD. The control group received usual care and were offered TAPER after follow-up at 6 months. Results: All 9 criteria for feasibility were met across the 4 feasibility outcome domains. Of 85 patients screened for eligibility, 39 eligible patients were recruited and randomized; two were excluded post hoc for not meeting the age requirement. Withdrawals (2) and losses to follow-up (3) were small and evenly distributed between arms. Areas for intervention and research process improvement were identified. In general, outcome measures performed well and appeared suitable for assessing change in a larger RCT. Conclusions: Results from this feasibility study indicate that TAPER as a clinical pathway is feasible to implement in a primary care team setting and in an RCT research framework. Outcome trends suggest effectiveness. A large-scale RCT will be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of TAPER on reducing polypharmacy and improving health outcomes. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02562352, Registered September 29, 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction An increasing number of individuals are living with multiple chronic conditions, often combined with psychosocial complexities. For these patients with complex conditions, an integrated primary care model that provides care coordination and a team-based approach can help manage their multiple needs. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are recognized as a critical enabler of integrated primary care. A better understanding of the use of ICTs in an integrated care setting and how ICTs are being leveraged would be beneficial to identify knowledge gaps and could lead to successful implementation for ICT-based interventions. Objective This study will systematically scope the literature on the topic of ICT-enabled integrated healthcare delivery models for patients with complex care needs to identify which technologies have been used in integrated primary care settings. Method This study protocol outlines a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature, using Arksey and O’Malley’s (enhanced by Levac et al.) scoping review methodology. Peer-reviewed literature will be identified using a multi-database search strategy. The results of the search will be screened, abstracted, and charted in duplicate by six research team members. Discussion The key findings of the study will be thematically analyzed to describe the implemented ICTs aimed for complex patients within the integrated primary care model. The finding will highlight what types of ICTs are being put in place to support these models, and how these ICTs are enabling care integration. This review will be the first step to formally identify how ICT is used to support integrated primary health care models. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and special interest groups.

Peggy B Leung, Andrea C Cabassa Miskimen, Dianna L Mejia, Diksha Brahmbhatt, Melissa Rusli, Judy Tung, Madeline R Sterling Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Peggy B Leung, Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, 505 East 70th St, HT-4, New York, NY, 10021, USA, Tel +1-415-613-7831, Fax +1-360-323-2145, Email pbl9001@med.cornell.eduAbstract: During the COVID-19 pandemic, adults with chronic conditions delayed or avoided seeking preventative and general medical care, leading to adverse consequences for morbidity and mortality. In order to bring patients back into care, we, in this qualitative study, sought to understand the foremost health-related needs of our multi-morbid ambulatory patients to inform future outreach interventions. Via a telephone-based survey of our high-risk patients, defined using a validated EPIC risk model for hospitalization and ED visits, we surveyed 214 participants an open-ended question, “What is your top health concern that you would like to speak with a doctor or nurse about”. We found 4 major themes: 1) primary care matters, 2) disruptions in health care, 3) COVID-19ʹs impact on physical and mental health, and 4) amplified social vulnerabilities. Our results suggest that interventions that reduce barriers to preventative services and disruptions to healthcare delivery are needed.Keywords: health priority, primary care, multi-morbidity, ambulatory patients

The article "Breathless and heart broken in COPD" published in the journal Respirology discusses the elevated risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Shared risk factors such as tobacco smoke exposure contribute to this increased risk, and managing cardiovascular risk in COPD is crucial for improving patient outcomes. The article emphasizes the importance of identifying and mitigating cardiovascular risk factors in COPD patients to prevent premature death, highlighting the need for further research and interventions in this area. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Both multi‐morbidity (MM) and polypharmacy (PP) are common in the elderly and pose a challenge for health and social care systems. However, high‐quality patient‐centred care requires context‐bound understanding of the patterns and use of medications in those with MM. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of PP in community‐dwelling elderly, and the factors associated with MM, PP, excessive polypharmacy (EPP), and the types of drugs used. Methods: We analysed data of 164 community‐dwelling subjects aged ≥60 years from January to December 2020 at a general hospital in a rural area of Taiwan. MM was defined as >4 diagnoses of chronic health conditions. Non‐polypharmacy (NP), PP, and EPP were defined as <5, 5–8, and >8 prescriptions, respectively. Other variables including basic activities of daily living (BADL), severity of frailty, depressive mood, screening for intellectual impairment, and nutritional status were also analysed. Results: Of the 164 participants, 34.8% had >4 diagnoses, 66.5% had PP, and 26.2% had EPP. The patients with >4 diagnoses had worse performance in BADL, higher levels of frailty, and more prescriptions than those with fewer diagnoses. The EPP group had worse performance in BADL, a higher level of frailty, more comorbidities, and higher prevalences of diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease compared to the NP and PP groups. After adjusting for covariates, we further found a higher number of medications associated with having more comorbidities, and a higher level of frailty associated with having a greater number of medications. Conclusion: We found relationships between frailty and PP, and between PP and MM, but frailty did not associate with MM. Since frailty, PP, and MM may be viewed as an inevitable trinity of ageing, reducing PP could be a method to both prevent frailty and disentangle this trinity in the elderly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Obesity is a potentially modifiable risk factor that has been consistently associated with the development and progression of multi-morbidity (MM). However, obesity may be more problematic for some persons compared to others because of interactions with other risk factors. Therefore, we studied the effect of interactions between patient characteristics and overweight and obesity on the rate of accumulation of MM. Methods: We studied 4 cohorts of persons ages 20-, 40-, 60-, and 80-years residing in Olmsted County, Minnesota between 2005 and 2014 using the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) medical records-linkage system. Body mass index, sex, race, ethnicity, education, and smoking status were extracted from REP indices. The rate of accumulation of MM was calculated as the number of new chronic conditions accumulated per 10 person years through 2017. Poisson rate regression models were used to identify associations between characteristics and rate of MM accumulation. Additive interactions were summarized using relative excess risk due to interaction, attributable proportion of disease, and the synergy index. Results: Greater than additive synergistic associations were observed between female sex and obesity in the 20- and 40-year cohorts, between low education and obesity in the 20-year cohort (both sexes), and between smoking and obesity in the 40-year cohort (both sexes). Conclusions: Interventions targeted at women, persons with lower education, and smokers who also have obesity may result in the greatest reduction in the rate of MM accumulation. However, interventions may need to focus on persons prior to mid-life to have the greatest effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The etiology of neck/shoulder pain is complex. Our purpose was to investigate if respiratory disorders are risk factors for troublesome neck/shoulder pain in people with no or occasional neck/shoulder pain. Methods: This prospective cohort study was based on the Stockholm Public Health Cohorts (SPHC) 2006/2010 and the SPHC 2010/2014. We included adults who at baseline reported no or occasional neck/shoulder pain in the last six months, from the two subsamples (SPHC 06/10 n = 15 155: and SPHC 2010/14 n = 25 273). Exposures were self-reported asthma at baseline in SPHC 06/10 and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) at baseline in SPHC 10/14. The outcome was having experienced at least one period of troublesome neck/shoulder pain which restricted work capacity or hindered daily activities to some or to a high degree during the past six months, asked for four years later. Binomial regression analyses were used to calculate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: Adjusted results indicate that those reporting to suffer from asthma at baseline had a higher risk of troublesome neck/shoulder pain at follow-up four years later (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10–2.01) as did those reporting to suffer from COPD (RR 2.12 95%CI 1.54–2.93). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that those with no or occasional neck/shoulder pain and reporting to suffer from asthma or COPD increase the risk for troublesome neck/shoulder pain over time. This highlights the importance of taking a multi-morbidity perspective into consideration in health care. Future longitudinal studies are needed to confirm our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]