Neurotoxic substances also posing a cancer risk: a warning.

M. Csicsaky,E. Rodríguez-Farré

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0892-0362(90)90086-R

IF: 4.071

1990-11-01

Neurotoxicology and Teratology

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Evaluating the integration of chronic disease prevention and management services into primary health care

Martin Fortin,Maud-Christine Chouinard,Tarek Bouhali,Marie-France Dubois,Cynthia Gagnon,Martin Bélanger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-132

2013-04-08

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:BackgroundThe increasing number of patients with chronic diseases represents a challenge for health care systems. The Chronic Care Model suggests a multi-component remodelling of chronic disease services to improve patient outcomes. To meet the complex and ongoing needs of patients, chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) has been advocated as a key feature of primary care producing better outcomes, greater effectiveness and improved access to services compared to other sectors. The objective of this study is to evaluate the adaptation and implementation of an intervention involving the integration of chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) services into primary health care.Methods/DesignThe implementation of the intervention will be evaluated using descriptive qualitative methods to collect data from various stakeholders (decision-makers, primary care professionals, CDPM professionals and patients) before, during and after the implementation. The evaluation of the effects will be based on a combination of experimental designs: a randomized trial using a delayed intervention arm (n = 326), a before-and-after design with repeated measures (n = 163), and a quasi-experimental design using a comparative cohort (n = 326). This evaluation will utilize self-report questionnaires measuring self-efficacy, empowerment, comorbidity, health behaviour, functional health status, quality of life, psychological well-being, patient characteristics and co-interventions. The study will take place in eight primary care practices of the Saguenay region of Quebec (Canada). To be included, patients will have to be referred by their primary care provider and present at least one of the following conditions (or their risk factors): diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma. Patients presenting serious cognitive problems will be excluded.DiscussionIn the short-term, improved patient self-efficacy and empowerment are expected. In the mid-term, we expect to observe an improvement in health behaviour, functional health status, quality of life and psychological well-being. At the organizational level, the project should lead to coordinated service delivery, improved patient follow-up mechanisms and enhanced interprofessional collaboration. Integration of CDPM services at the point of care in primary care practices is a promising innovation in care delivery that needs to be thoroughly evaluated.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01319656

health care sciences & services
Comparative acyl specificities for transfer and selective uptake of high density lipoprotein cholesteryl esters.

S. Green,R. Pittman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2275(20)42069-3

IF: 6.676

1991-03-01

Journal of Lipid Research

Abstract:
Case management in primary healthcare for people with complex needs to improve integrated care: a large-scale implementation study protocol

Catherine Hudon,Maud-Christine Chouinard,Shelley Doucet,Helena Piccinini-Vallis,Kimberly Fairman,Tara Sampalli,Joanna Zed,Magaly Brodeur,Denis Chênevert,Andréa Dépelteau,Mariève Dupont,Marlène Karam,France Légaré,Alison Luke,Marilyn Macdonald,Adele Morvannou,Vivian R Ramsden,Lourdès Rodriguez Del Barrio,Sabrina T Wong,Mireille Lambert,Mathieu Bisson,Charlotte Schwarz,René Benoit,Marie-Dominique Poirier,Audrey-Lise Rock-Hervieux,Donna Rubenstein,Linda Wilhelm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083783

IF: 3.006

2024-08-12

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction: Case management (CM) is among the most studied effective models of integrated care for people with complex needs. The goal of this study is to scale up and assess CM in primary healthcare for people with complex needs. Methods and analysis: The research questions are: (1) which mechanisms contribute to the successful scale-up of CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare?; (2) how do contextual factors within primary healthcare organisations contribute to these mechanisms? and (3) what are the relationships between the actors, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes when scaling-up CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare? We will conduct a mixed methods Canadian interprovincial project in Quebec, New-Brunswick and Nova Scotia. It will include a scale-up phase and an evaluation phase. At inception, a scale-up committee will be formed in each province to oversee the scale-up phase. We will assess scale-up using a realist evaluation guided by the RAMESES checklist to develop an initial programme theory on CM scale-up. Then we will test and refine the programme theory using a mixed-methods multiple case study with 10 cases, each case being the scalable unit of the intervention in a region. Each primary care clinic within the case will recruit 30 adult patients with complex needs who frequently use healthcare services. Qualitative data will be used to identify contexts, mechanisms and certain outcomes for developing context-mechanism-outcome configurations. Quantitative data will be used to describe patient characteristics and measure scale-up outcomes. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained. Engaging researchers, decision-makers, clinicians and patient partners on the study Steering Committee will foster knowledge mobilisation and impact. The dissemination plan will be developed with the Steering Committee with messages and dissemination methods targeted for each audience.
Patient, carer and healthcare professional experiences of complex care quality in multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres: qualitative study with face-to-face, in-depth interviews and focus groups in five French multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres

Jérémy Derriennic,Marie Barais,Delphine Le Goff,Guillaume Fernandez,Françoise Le Borne,Jean-Yves Le Reste

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050165

IF: 3.006

2021-12-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objectives To explore care experiences in multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres from the patients, carers and healthcare professionals perspectives. Design This qualitative study used face-to-face, in-depth interviews and focus groups. Patients with multimorbidity monitored by a General Practitioner (GP) and another professional from the health centre were recruited through purposive sampling and included with their carer. They were interviewed together while professionals were interviewed separately. Verbatims were coded with subsequent blind analysis, using an inductive approach, to find aspects and features. The constant comparative method highlighted data consistencies and variations. Participants Twenty-six patients, 23 family carers and 57 healthcare professionals. Setting Five multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres, in France, between March 2017 and December 2018. Results This unique study grouped perspectives into nine core quality of primary care aspects: having accessible, available, and varied care; feeling welcome and enjoying comfortable, well-equipped, and clean premises; having quality medicotechnical care (medical knowledge and technical skills); having a reliable GP; receiving appropriate care from healthcare professionals other than the GP; maintaining an efficient relationship with healthcare professionals; benefiting from organised and coordinated care; being an informed, supported and involved patient; having an informed, supported and involved carer. New areas of interest include the multidisciplinary nature of the centres, appreciation of other professionals within the centre, medicotechnical dimensions of care and the carer’s role in maintaining patient autonomy. Conclusions This is the first study to interview patients and carers alongside healthcare professionals. This enhanced knowledge improves understanding of these aspects and can guide implementation of evaluation tools that truly reflect patient and carer needs and enable an efficient experience in terms of quality. To address deficiencies in existing questionnaires, the new perspectives found will be added to former aspects to create a comprehensive quality of primary care evaluation tool. Trial registration number NCT02934711 , Results.

medicine, general & internal
Planning and optimising CHAT&PLAN: A conversation-based intervention to promote person-centred care for older people living with multimorbidity

Teresa K Corbett,Amanda Cummings,Kellyn Lee,Lynn Calman,Vicky Fenerty,Naomi Farrington,Lucy Lewis,Alexandra Young,Hilary Boddington,Theresa Wiseman,Alison Richardson,Claire Foster,Jackie Bridges

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240516

IF: 3.7

2020-10-16

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Background: Older people are more likely to be living with cancer and multiple long-term conditions, but their needs, preferences for treatments, health priorities and lifestyle are often not identified or well-understood. There is a need to move towards a more comprehensive person-centred approach to care that focuses on the cumulative impact of a number of conditions on daily activities and quality of life. This paper describes the intervention planning process for CHAT& PLANTM, a structured conversation intervention to promote personalised care and support self-management in older adults with complex conditions. Methods: A theory-, evidence- and person-based approach to intervention development was undertaken. The intervention planning and development process included reviewing relevant literature and existing guidelines, developing guiding principles, conducting a behavioural analysis and constructing a logic model. Optimisation of the intervention and its implementation involved qualitative interviews with older adults with multimorbidity (n = 8), family caregivers (n = 2) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 20). Data were analysed thematically and informed changes to the intervention prototype. Results: Review findings reflected the importance of HCPs taking a person-centred (rather than disease-centred) approach to their work with older people living with multimorbidity. This approach involves HCPs giving health service users the opportunity to voice their priorities, then using these to underpin the treatment and care plan that follow. Findings from the planning stage indicated that taking a structured approach to interactions between HCPs and health service users would enable elicitation of individual concerns, development of a plan tailored to that individual, negotiation of roles and review of goals as individual priorities change. In the optimisation stage, older adults and HCPs commented on the idea of a structured conversation to promote person-centred care and on its feasibility in practice. The idea of a shared, person-centred approach to care was viewed positively. Concerns were raised about possible extra work for those receiving or delivering care, time and staffing, and risk of creating another "tick-box" exercise for staff. Participants concluded that anyone with the appropriate skills could potentially deliver the intervention, but training was likely to be required to ensure correct utilisation and self-efficacy to deliver to the intervention. Conclusions: CHAT&PLAN, a structured person-centred conversation guide appears acceptable and appealing to HCPs and older adults with multimorbidity. Further development of the CHAT&PLAN intervention should focus on ensuring that staff are adequately trained and supported to implement the intervention.
Living with multimorbidity: A qualitative exploration of shared experiences of patients, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals in managing symptoms in the United States

Anna Peeler,Katie Nelson,Vidisha Agrawalla,Sarah Badawi,Robyn Moore,David Li,Lara Street,David N. Hager,Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb,Patricia M. Davidson,Binu Koirala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15998

IF: 3.057

2024-01-12

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract:Aims To elicit experiences of patients, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals in intermediate care units (IMCUs) in an academic medical centre in Baltimore, MD related to the challenges and intricacies of multimorbidity management to inform development of a multimorbidity symptom management toolkit. Design Experience‐based co‐design. Methods Between July and October 2021, patients aged 55 years and older with multimorbidity admitted to IMCUs at an academic medical centre in Baltimore, Maryland, USA were recruited and interviewed in person. Interdisciplinary healthcare professionals working in the IMCU were interviewed virtually. Participants were asked questions about their role in recognizing and treating symptoms, factors affecting the quality of life, symptom burden and trajectory over time, and strategies that have and have not worked for managing symptoms. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used for analysis. Results Twenty‐three interviews were conducted: 9 patients, 2 family caregivers, and 12 healthcare professionals. Patients' mean age was 67.5 (±6.5) years, over half (n = 5) were Black or Hispanic, and the average number of comorbidities was 3.67. Five major themes that affect symptom management emerged: (1) the patient–provider relationship; (2) open and honest communication; (3) accessibility of resources during hospitalization and at discharge; (4) caregiver support, training, and education; and (5) care coordination and follow‐up care. Conclusion Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals often have similar goals but different priorities for multimorbidity management. It is imperative to identify shared priorities and target holistic interventions that consider patient and caregiver experiences to improve outcomes. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care and Impact This paper addresses the paucity of research related to the shared experience of disease trajectory and symptom management for people living with multimorbidity. We found that patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals often have similar goals but different care and communication priorities. Understanding differing priorities will help better design interventions to support symptom management so people with multimorbidity can have the best possible quality of life. Reporting Method We have adhered to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) guidelines in our reporting. Patient or Public Contribution This study has been designed and implemented with patient and public involvement throughout the process, including community advisory board engagement in the project proposal phase and interview guide development, and member checking in the data collection and analysis phases. The method we chose, experience‐based co‐design, emphasizes the importance of engaging members of a community to act as experts in their own life challenges. In the coming phases of the study, the public will be involved in developing and testing a new intervention, informed by these qualitative interviews and co‐design events, to support symptom management for people with multimorbidity.

nursing
Barriers to and facilitators of successful implementation of a palliative approach to care in primary care practices: a mixed methods study

Jodi Langley,Robin Urquhart,Cheryl Tschupruk,Erin Christian,Grace Warner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079234

IF: 3.006

2024-02-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objective Integrating a palliative approach to care into primary care is an emerging evidence-based practice. Despite the evidence, this type of care has not been widely adopted into primary care settings. The objective of this study was to examine the barriers to and facilitators of successful implementation of a palliative approach to care in primary care practices by applying an implementation science framework. Design This convergent mixed methods study analysed semistructured interviews and expression of interest forms to evaluate the implementation of a protocol, linked to implementation strategies, for a palliative approach to care called Early Palliation through Integrated Care (EPIC) in three primary care practices. This study assessed barriers to and facilitators of implementation of EPIC and was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A framework analysis approach was used during the study to determine the applicability of CFIR constructs and domains. Setting Primary care practices in Canada. Interviews were conducted between September 2020 and November 2021. Participants 10 individuals were interviewed, who were involved in implementing EPIC. Three individuals from each practice were reinterviewed to clarify emerging themes. Results Overall, there were implementation barriers at multiple levels that caused some practices to struggle. However, barriers were mitigated when practices had the following facilitators: (1) a high level of intra-practice collaboration, (2) established practices with organisational structures that enhanced communications, (3) effective leveraging of EPIC project supports to transition care, (4) perceptions that EPIC was an opportunity to make a long-term change in their approach to care as opposed to a limited term project and (5) strong practice champions. Conclusions Future implementation work should consider assessing facilitators identified in our results to better gauge primary care pre-implementation readiness. In addition, providing primary care practices with support to help offset the additional work of implementing innovations and networking opportunities where they can share strategies may improve implementation success.

medicine, general & internal
Response to Öllinger et al.,: Nighttime procedures are not associated with adverse outcomes in kidney transplantation

Jorge Ortiz,A. Parsikia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.12208

2014-01-01

Transplant International

Abstract:To the editors, We read with great interest the article “Nighttime procedures are not associated with adverse outcomes in kidney transplantation” by Kienzl-Wagner et al. [1]. We were gratified that our article “operative start times and complications after liver transplantation” was referenced [2]. However, we believe that our publication “operative start times and complications after kidney transplantation” was more germane [3]. We also studied results in 2 twelve-hour blocks. Similarly, we found no difference in patient and graft survival. However, we performed subanalyses of four-three hour blocks and found an increase in urologic complications in the 3 am–6 am cohort. The 12 am–3 am subgroup had the greatest odds of any complication. We also noted, in contradiction to KienzlWagner et al. [1] and Fechner et al. [4], a DECREASE in vascular complications in the night-time group. We believe that all of the contributions to the literature concerning this interesting topic are important in evaluating clinical outcomes and hospital performance. Unfortunately, because of small numbers, the effects of machine perfusion have not been adequately assessed. More studies with larger numbers are clearly necessary.
LIVING WITH MULTIMORBIDITY: SHARED EXPERIENCES OF PATIENTS, FAMILY CAREGIVERS, AND HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS

Anna Peeler,Katie Nelson,Sarah Badawi,Lara Street,David Hager,Patricia Davidson,Binu Koirala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igac059.1854

2022-11-01

Innovation in Aging

Abstract:Abstract Over 50% of patients in intermediate care units (IMCU) present with multimorbidity, two or more chronic conditions. Balancing the effects of multimorbidity and their treatments with quality-of-life can be a challenge. This experience-based co-design project aimed to elicit experiences of patients, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals in IMCU, in the context of challenges and intricacies of multimorbidity management, to inform the development of a symptom management toolkit. Patients aged 55 years and older were recruited and interviewed in person. Healthcare professionals working in IMCU (i.e., physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, social workers, etc.) were recruited and interviewed virtually. Participants were asked questions about their role in recognizing and treating symptoms, factors affecting quality of life, symptom burden and trajectory over time, and symptom management strategies that have and have not worked. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used for data analysis. Twenty-three interviews were conducted: 9 patients, 2 family-caregivers, and 12 healthcare professionals. Patients’ mean age was 67.5 (± 6.5) years, over half (n=5) were Black or Hispanic, and average number of multimorbidity was 3.67. Five major themes emerged: 1) importance of patient-provider relationship; 2) open and honest communication; 3) accessibility of resources during hospitalization and at discharge; 4) caregiver support, training, and education; and 5) care-coordination and follow-up care. Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals often have different priorities for multimorbidity management, treatment, and education. However, given the growing population of patients experiencing multimorbidity, it is imperative to identify shared priorities and target holistic interventions considering their experiences to enhance outcomes.
Interdisciplinary behavioral health provider perceptions of implementing the Collaborative Chronic Care Model: an i-PARIHS-guided qualitative study

Bo Kim,Jennifer L Sullivan,Karen L Drummond,Samantha L Connolly,Christopher J Miller,Kendra Weaver,Mark S Bauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-023-00407-5

2023-03-30

Abstract:Background: The evidence-based Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM), developed to help structure care for chronic health conditions, comprises six elements: work role redesign, patient self-management support, provider decision support, clinical information systems, linkages to community resources, and organizational/leadership support. As the CCM is increasingly implemented in real-world settings, there is heightened interest in understanding specific influences upon implementation. Therefore, guided by the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework, we (i) identified innovation-, recipient-, context-, and facilitation-related influences on CCM implementation and (ii) assessed the influences' relationship to each CCM element's implementation. Methods: Using semi-structured interviews, we examined interdisciplinary behavioral health providers' experiences at nine VA medical centers that implemented the CCM. We used i-PARIHS constructs as a priori codes for directed content analysis, then analyzed the data for cross-coding by CCM element and i-PARIHS construct. Results: Participants (31 providers) perceived the CCM innovation as enabling comprehensive care but challenging to coordinate with existing structures/procedures. As recipients, participants recounted not always having the authority to design CCM-consistent care processes. They perceived local leadership support to be indispensable to implementation success and difficult to garner when CCM implementation distracted from other organizational priorities. They found implementation facilitation helpful for keeping implementation on track. We identified key themes at the intersection of i-PARIHS constructs and core CCM elements, including (i) the CCM being an innovation that offers a formal structure to stepping down care intensity for patients to encourage their self-management, (ii) recipients accessing their multidisciplinary colleagues' expertise for provider decision support, (iii) relationships with external services in the community (e.g., homelessness programs) being a helpful context for providing comprehensive care, and (iv) facilitators helping to redesign specific interdisciplinary team member roles. Conclusions: Future CCM implementation would benefit from (i) facilitating strategic development of supportive maintenance plans for patients' self-management, (ii) collocating multidisciplinary staff (on-site or virtually) to enhance provider decision support, (iii) keeping information on available community resources up to date, and (iv) making clearer the explicit CCM-consistent care processes that work roles can be designed around. This work can inform concrete tailoring of implementation efforts to focus on the more challenging CCM elements, which is crucial to better account for multiple influences that vary across diverse care settings in which the CCM is being implemented.
Multilevel perspectives on the implementation of the collaborative care model for depression and anxiety in primary care

Avram Kordon,Allison J Carroll,Emily Fu,Lisa J Rosenthal,Jeffrey T Rado,Neil Jordan,C Hendricks Brown,Justin D Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-05930-w

IF: 4.144

2024-07-22

BMC Psychiatry

Abstract:Background: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based mental health treatment in primary care. A greater understanding of the determinants of successful CoCM implementation, particularly the characteristics of multi-level implementers, is needed. Methods: This study was a process evaluation of the Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) study (NCT04321876) in which CoCM was implemented in 11 primary care practices. CBHP implementation included screening for depression and anxiety, referral to CBHP, and treatment with behavioral care managers (BCMs). Interviews were conducted 4- and 15-months post-implementation with BCMs, practice managers, and practice champions (primary care clinicians). We used framework-guided rapid qualitative analysis with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Version 2.0, focused on the Individuals domain, to analyze response data. These data represented the roles of Mid-Level Leaders (practice managers), Implementation Team Members (clinicians, support staff), Innovation Deliverers (BCMs), and Innovation Recipients (primary care/CBHP patients) and their characteristics (i.e., Need, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation). Results: Mid-level leaders (practice managers) were enthusiastic about CBHP (Motivation), appreciated integrating mental health services into primary care (Need), and had time to assist clinicians (Opportunity). Although CBHP lessened the burden for implementation team members (clinicians, staff; Need), some were hesitant to reallocate patient care (Motivation). Innovation deliverers (BCMs) were eager to deliver CBHP (Motivation) and confident in assisting patients (Capability); their opportunity to deliver CBHP could be limited by clinician referrals (Opportunity). Although CBHP alleviated barriers for innovation recipients (patients; Need), it was difficult to secure services for those with severe conditions (Capability) and certain insurance types (Opportunity). Conclusions: Overall, respondents favored sustaining CoCM and highlighted the positive impacts on the practice, health care team, and patients. Participants emphasized the benefits of integrating mental health services into primary care and how CBHP lessened the burden on clinicians while providing patients with comprehensive care. Barriers to CBHP implementation included ensuring appropriate patient referrals, providing treatment for patients with higher-level needs, and incentivizing clinician engagement. Future CoCM implementation should include strategies focused on education and training, encouraging clinician buy-in, and preparing referral paths for patients with more severe conditions or diverse needs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04321876). Registered: March 25,2020. Retrospectively registered.
Integrating Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into routine nurse-led primary care for patients with multimorbidity: a feasibility and acceptability study

Ian Porter,Antoinette Davey,Jaheeda Gangannagaripalli,Jonathan Evans,Charlotte Bramwell,Philip Evans,Chris Gibbons,Jose M. Valderas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01748-2

IF: 3.077

2021-04-26

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Abstract:Abstract Background The use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMS) in clinical practice has the potential to promote patient-centred care and improve patients’ quality of life. Individualized PROMs may be particularly helpful in identifying, prioritizing and monitoring health problems of patients with multimorbidity. We aimed to develop an intervention centred around PROMs feedback as part of Primary Care annual reviews for patients with multimorbidity and evaluate its feasibility and acceptability. Methods We developed a nurse-oriented intervention including (a) training of nurses on PROMs; (b) administration to patients with multimorbidity of individualized and standardized PROMS; and (c) feedback to both patients and nurses of PROMs scores and interpretation guidance. We then tailored the intervention to patients with two or more highly prevalent conditions (asthma, COPD, diabetes, heart failure, depression, and hip/knee osteoarthritis) and designed a non-controlled feasibility and acceptability evaluation in a convenience sample of primary care practices (5). PROMs were administered and scores fed back immediately ahead of scheduled annual reviews with nurses. Patients and nurses rated the acceptability of the intervention using with a brief survey including optional free comments. Thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with a sample of participating patients (10) and nurses (4) and of survey free comments was conducted for further in-depth evaluation of acceptability. Feasibility was estimated based on rates of participation and completion. Results Out of 68 recruited patients (mean age 70; 47% female), 68 completed the PROMs (100%), received feedback (100%) and confirmed nurse awareness of their scores (100%). Most patients (83%) “agreed”/”strongly agreed” that the PROMs feedback had been useful, a view supported by nurses in 89% of reviews. Thematic analysis of rich qualitative data on PROMS administration, feedback and role in annual reviews indicated that both patients and nurses perceived the intervention as acceptable and promising, emphasizing its comprehensiveness and patient-centredness. Conclusions We have developed and tested an intervention focusing on routine PROM assessment of patients with multimorbidity in Primary Care. Preliminary findings support its feasibility and a high degree of acceptability from both patients and nurses. The next step is to conduct a full-scale trial for evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed intervention.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Implementation of the BETTER 2 program: a qualitative study exploring barriers and facilitators of a novel way to improve chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care

Nicolette Sopcak,Carolina Aguilar,Mary Ann O’Brien,Candace Nykiforuk,Kris Aubrey-Bassler,Richard Cullen,Eva Grunfeld,Donna Patricia Manca

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0525-0

2016-12-01

Implementation Science

Abstract:BackgroundBETTER (Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) is a patient-based intervention to improve chronic disease prevention and screening (CDPS) for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, and associated lifestyle factors in patients aged 40 to 65. The key component of BETTER is a prevention practitioner (PP), a health care professional with specialized skills in CDPS who meets with patients to develop a personalized prevention prescription, using the BETTER toolkit and Brief Action Planning. The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand facilitators and barriers of the implementation of the BETTER 2 program among clinicians, patients, and stakeholders in three (urban, rural, and remote) primary care settings in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.MethodsWe collected and analyzed responses from 20 key informant interviews and 5 focus groups, as well as memos and field notes. Data were organized using Nvivo 10 software and coded using constant comparison methods. We then employed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to focus our analysis on the domains most relevant for program implementation.ResultsThe following key elements, within the five CFIR domains, were identified as impacting the implementation of BETTER 2: (1) intervention characteristics—complexity and cost of the intervention; (2) outer setting—perception of fit including lack of remuneration, lack of resources, and duplication of services, as well as patients’ needs as perceived by physicians and patients; (3) characteristics of prevention practitioners—interest in prevention and ability to support and motivate patients; (4) inner setting—the availability of a local champion and working in a team versus working as a team; and (5) process—planning and engaging, collaboration, and teamwork.ConclusionsThe implementation of a novel CDPS program into new primary care settings is a complex, multi-level process. This study identified key elements that hindered or facilitated the implementation of the BETTER approach in three primary care settings in Newfoundland and Labrador. Employing the CFIR as an overarching typology allows for comparisons with other contexts and settings, and may be useful for practices, researchers, and policy-makers interested in the implementation of CDPS programs.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Developing an interprofessional people-centred care model for home-living older people with multimorbidities in a primary care health centre: A community-based study

Heini Kari,Hanna Kortejärvi,Raisa Laaksonen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsop.2022.100114

2022-02-05

Abstract:Background: The ageing population with multiple conditions and complex health needs has forced healthcare systems to rethink the optimal way of delivering services. Instead of trying to manage numerous diseases in a siloed approach, the emphasis should be on people-centred practice, in which healthcare services are tailored to people's needs and provided in partnership with them. Objective: The aim was to develop an interprofessional people-centred care model (PCCM), including the contribution of a clinically trained pharmacist for home-living multimorbid older people in primary care. Methods: Participatory action research method, including the active involvement of healthcare professionals, was utilised to develop the PCCM in a public health centre in Finland. The data comprised interview transcripts, workshop materials, field notes, surveys, and memos and were analysed using inductive content analysis. Results: The PCCM was developed in iterative phases, including planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. The PCCM comprised: 1) A self-management evaluation questionnaire sent before a home visit; 2) A person-centred patient interview at home with a named nurse and a pharmacist; 3) A nurse-led health review and a pharmacist-led clinical medication review; 4) An interprofessional (a GP, a pharmacist and a named nurse) case conference meeting; 5) A care plan, including health and medication plans; and 6) Health support and empowerment interventions. The PCCM shifted working practices in the health centre from parallel and consultative practice towards interprofessional people-centred practice and more holistic care. The patient's active involvement in their own care was encouraged. Healthcare professionals appreciated the advantages of the new skill-mix, including the clinically trained pharmacist. Building trust among healthcare professionals and between the professionals and the patients was essential. Conclusion: The successfully developed PCCM improved holistic and more people-centred care in primary care. Healthcare professionals appreciated the advantages of the skill mix and found that trust was essential for implementing the PCCM.
A mixed‐methods systematic review of nurse‐led interventions for people with multimorbidity

Chris McParland,Bridget Johnston,Mark Cooper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15427

IF: 3.057

2022-09-07

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract:Aims To identify types of nurse‐led interventions for multimorbidity and which outcomes are positively affected by them. Design Mixed‐methods systematic review following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods for convergent‐integrated reviews. PROSPERO ID: CRD42020197956. Data Sources Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE were searched in October 2020. Grey literature sources included OpenGrey, the Journal of Multimorbidity and Comorbidity and reference mining. Review Methods English‐language reports of nurse‐led interventions for people with multimorbidity were included based on author consensus. Two reviewers performed independent quality appraisal using JBI tools. Data were extracted and synthesized using a pre‐existing taxonomy of interventions and core outcome set. Results Twenty studies were included, with a median summary quality score of 77.5%. Interventions were mostly case‐management or transitional care interventions, with nurses in advanced practice, support to self‐manage conditions, and an emphasis on continuity of care featuring frequently. Patient‐centred outcomes such as quality of healthcare and health‐related quality of life were mostly improved, with mixed effects on healthcare utilization, costs, mortality and other outcomes. Conclusion Interventions such as case management are agreeable to patients and transitional care interventions may have a small positive impact on healthcare utilization. Interventions include long‐term patient management or short‐term interventions targeted at high‐risk junctures. These interventions feature nurses in advanced practice developing care plans in partnership with patients, to simplify and improve the quality of care both in the long and short‐term. Impact This is the first mixed‐methods review which includes all types of nurse‐led interventions for multimorbidity and does not focus on specific comorbidities or elderly/frail populations. Using adapted consensus‐developed frameworks for interventions and outcomes, we have identified the common features of interventions and their overall typology. We suggest these interventions are of value to patients and healthcare systems but require localization and granular evaluation of their components to maximize potential benefits.

nursing
Assessing the extent of drug interactions among patients with multimorbidity in primary and secondary care in the West Midlands (UK): a study protocol for the Mixed Methods Multimorbidity Study (MiMMS)

Ruth Backman,Philip Weber,Alice M Turner,Mark Lee,Ian Litchfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016713

IF: 3.006

2017-09-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction The numbers of patients with three or more chronic conditions (multimorbidity) are increasing, and will rise to 2.9 million by 2018 in the UK alone. Currently in the UK, conditions are mainly managed using over 250 sets of single-condition guidance, which has the potential to generate conflicting recommendations for lifestyle and concurrent medication for individual patients with more than one condition. To address some of these issues, we are developing a new computer-based tool to help manage these patients more effectively. For this tool to be applicable and relevant to current practice, we must first better understand how existing patients with multimorbidity are being managed, particularly relating to concerns over prescribing and potential polypharmacy. Methods and analysis Up to four secondary care centres, two community pharmacies and between four and eight primary care centres in the West Midlands will be recruited. Interviewees will be purposively sampled from these sites, up to a maximum of 30. In this mixed methods study, we will perform a dual framework analysis on the qualitative data; the first analysis will use the Theoretical Domains Framework to assess barriers and enablers for healthcare professionals around the management of multimorbid patients; the second analysis will use Normalisation Process Theory to understand how interventions are currently being successfully implemented in both settings. We will also extract quantitative anonymised patient data from primary care to determine the extent of polypharmacy currently present for patients with multimorbidity in the West Midlands. Discussion We aim to combine these data so that we can build a useful, fully implementable tool which addresses the barriers most amenable to change within both primary and secondary care contexts. Ethics and dissemination Favourable ethical approval has been granted by The University of Birmingham Research Ethics Committee (ERN_16–0074) on 17 May 2016. Our work will be disseminated through peer-reviewed literature, trade journals and conferences. We will also use the dedicated web page hosted by the University to serve as a central point of contact and as a repository of our findings. We aim to produce a minimum of three articles from this work to contribute to the international scientific literature. Protocol registration number NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Registration CPMS ID 30613.

medicine, general & internal
Care coordination across health care and social services sectors: patient and provider perspectives

Marlène Karam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.icic23384

2023-12-28

International Journal of Integrated Care

Abstract:Introduction: This project is the result of a partnership between a research team including a patient partner, a clinical setting, and patients. The Nursing Department of the Integrated Health and Social Services Center (IHSSC) in Laval (Quebec, Canada) has implemented several care coordination functions for several years for patients with complex needs. These functions include those of liaison nurses in geriatrics, palliative care, home care and support, oncology, and many others. To date, no evaluation of these functions has been established. The aim of this study is to establish a diagnosis of these current coordination practices, their effects from the perspective of the patients who benefit from them, and the facilitating factors and barriers according to the nurse coordinators. The Nursing Department’s request for this partnership is part of their process of continuous improvement of the quality of care and services offered to patients with complex needs. Methods: A qualitative research method following an experience-based co-design approach is used. The Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (Valentijn et al., 2013) is the conceptual framework guiding this study. Between November 2022 and February 2023, individual interviews with 10 coordinators and 10 patients with complex health and social care needs will be conducted in order to explore their experiences and the facilitating factors and obstacles to coordination. Patients aged 65 and older, who had 3 or more hospitalizations or visits to the emergency department within the last 12 months, and suffer from one or more chronic conditions will be included. Interviews will take place at the time and place of their choice and last one hour. Nurses with 6 months or more of experience in their current position as care coordinator will be included. Subsequently, two group interviews that bring together participating nurses and patients will identify joint improvement priorities in order to meet the needs expressed by the patients and the difficulties encountered by the coordinators. Mixed thematic analysis combining inductive and deductive analysis (following the Rainbow Model of integrated care) will be conducted so as to allow us to collect stories and experiences, facilitating factors, barriers and areas for improvement according to the different levels (macro, meso and micro). Expected Results: The expected results of this co-design approach include better alignment of the IHSSC care and services with the needs expressed by its target patients, leading to a better experience and better quality of care for them. Discussion and conclusion: Partnering with clinical settings facilitates the knowledge translation and guides the decision-making of the partner organization in its process of restructuring the coordination services and reviewing this function. Limitations: The relatively small number of participants limits the generalizability of the results to other settings and patient populations. Suggestions for future research: Future research should include informal caregiver perspectives and identify unmet needs of specific subgroups of patients with complex needs.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Assessment of multi-professional primary healthcare center quality by patients with multimorbidity

Antoine Dany,Paul Aujoulat,Floriane Colin,Jean-Yves Le Reste,Delphine Le Goff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11315-2

2024-08-20

Abstract:Background: The main aim of this study was to build an item bank for assessing the care quality of multi-professional healthcare centers (MPHCC) from the perspective of patients with multimorbidity. This study was part of the QUALSOPRIM (QUALité des SOins PRIMaires; primary healthcare quality) research project to create a psychometrically robust self-administered questionnaire to assess healthcare quality. Methods: First, twelve experts built an item bank using data from a previous qualitative work and a systematic literature review. Second, the validity of each item was assessed in a sample of patients. Adult patients with multimorbidity were recruited from six French MPHCC. Items were assessed based on ceiling effects, the level of missing or neutral responses and patient feedback. Patient feedback was recorded after the item bank completion. Based on results, items were validated, improved, or removed during expert meetings. In case of disagreement the Delphi method was used to reach consensus. Results: The study sample included 209 outpatients. The most frequent medical conditions were cardiovascular risk factors, cardiovascular diseases and rheumatological conditions. In total, a bank of 109 items classified in nine domains was built. The validity assessment led to the removal of 34 items. Retained items explored a variety of topics related to care quality: availability, accessibility, premises' layout and building, technical care, expertise, organization, relationships with caregivers and communication, involvement and personal relationships. Conclusions: This study allowed cross-validation of a bank of 75 items, leading to a complete picture of the patient perception of care quality items. Overall, patients were generally satisfied with their care at the MPHCC. Nonetheless, there were still numerous items on subjects for which patients' satisfaction could be improved.
Improving person-centred care for older persons with serious multimorbidity in LMICs

Duncan Kwaitana,Dorothee Van Breevoort,Modai Mnenula,Kennedy Nkhoma,Richard Harding,Maya J Bates

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v16i1.4440

2024-05-31

Abstract:Background: Few interventions are documented to meet person-centred needs of older people with serious multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries where access to palliative care is limited. Most of the care in these settings is delivered by primary care health workers. Aim: This study reports the development and acceptability testing of a communication skills training and mentorship intervention for primary health care workers in Malawi. Setting: This study was conducted at Mangochi District Hospital in the south-eastern region of Malawi. Methods: Twelve primary health care workers (four clinical officers and eight nurses) working in the primary care clinics received the intervention. The intervention was designed using modified nominal group technique, informed by stakeholder interviews and a theory of change workshop. Acceptability is reported from thematic analysis of a focus group discussion with primary health care workers who received the intervention using NVivo version 14. Results: Older persons with serious multi-morbidity and their caregivers identified a need for enhanced communication with their healthcare providers. This helped to inform the development of a communication training skills and mentorship intervention package based on the local best practice six-step Ask-Ask-Tell-Ask-Ask-Plan framework. Primary health care workers reported that the intervention supported person-centred communication and improved the quality of holistic assessments, although space, workload and availability of medication limited the implementation of person-centred communication. Conclusion: The Ask-Ask-Tell-Ask-Ask-Plan framework, supported person-centered communication and improved the quality of holistic assessment.Contribution: This intervention offers an affordable, local model for integrating person-centered palliative care in resource-limited primary healthcare settings.
[Graft of blood stem cells].

J. Reiffers

Abstract:

Neurotoxic substances also posing a cancer risk: a warning.

Evaluating the integration of chronic disease prevention and management services into primary health care

Comparative acyl specificities for transfer and selective uptake of high density lipoprotein cholesteryl esters.

Case management in primary healthcare for people with complex needs to improve integrated care: a large-scale implementation study protocol

Patient, carer and healthcare professional experiences of complex care quality in multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres: qualitative study with face-to-face, in-depth interviews and focus groups in five French multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres

Planning and optimising CHAT&PLAN: A conversation-based intervention to promote person-centred care for older people living with multimorbidity

Living with multimorbidity: A qualitative exploration of shared experiences of patients, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals in managing symptoms in the United States

Barriers to and facilitators of successful implementation of a palliative approach to care in primary care practices: a mixed methods study

Response to Öllinger et al.,: Nighttime procedures are not associated with adverse outcomes in kidney transplantation

LIVING WITH MULTIMORBIDITY: SHARED EXPERIENCES OF PATIENTS, FAMILY CAREGIVERS, AND HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS

Interdisciplinary behavioral health provider perceptions of implementing the Collaborative Chronic Care Model: an i-PARIHS-guided qualitative study

Multilevel perspectives on the implementation of the collaborative care model for depression and anxiety in primary care

Integrating Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into routine nurse-led primary care for patients with multimorbidity: a feasibility and acceptability study

Implementation of the BETTER 2 program: a qualitative study exploring barriers and facilitators of a novel way to improve chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care

Developing an interprofessional people-centred care model for home-living older people with multimorbidities in a primary care health centre: A community-based study

A mixed‐methods systematic review of nurse‐led interventions for people with multimorbidity

Assessing the extent of drug interactions among patients with multimorbidity in primary and secondary care in the West Midlands (UK): a study protocol for the Mixed Methods Multimorbidity Study (MiMMS)

Care coordination across health care and social services sectors: patient and provider perspectives

Assessment of multi-professional primary healthcare center quality by patients with multimorbidity

Improving person-centred care for older persons with serious multimorbidity in LMICs

[Graft of blood stem cells].