Search

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

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

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