Quality of care for people with multimorbidity:a case series

Abstract Background Multimorbidity is becoming increasingly prevalent and presents challenges for healthcare providers and systems. Studies examining the relationship between multimorbidity and quality of care report mixed findings. The purpose of this study was to investigate quality of care for people with multimorbidity in the publicly funded healthcare system in Denmark. Methods To investigate the quality of care for people with multimorbidity different groups of clinicians from the hospital, general practice and the municipality reviewed records from 23 persons with multimorbidity and discussed them in three focus groups. Before each focus group, clinicians were asked to review patients’ medical records and assess their care by responding to a questionnaire. Medical records from 2013 from hospitals, general practice, and health centers in the local municipality were collected and linked for the 23 patients. Further, two clinical pharmacologists reviewed the appropriateness of medications listed in patient records. Results The review of the patients’ records conducted by three groups of clinicians revealed that around half of the patients received adequate care for the single condition which prompted the episode of care such as a hospitalization, a visit to an outpatient clinic or the general practitioner. Further, the care provided to approximately two-thirds of the patients did not take comorbidities into account and insufficiently addressed more diffuse symptoms or problems. The review of the medication lists revealed that the majority of the medication lists contained inappropriate medications and that there were incongruity in medication listed in the primary and secondary care sector. Several barriers for providing high quality care were identified. These included relative short consultation times in general practice and outpatient clinics, lack of care coordinators, and lack of shared IT-system proving an overview of the treatment. Conclusions Our findings reveal quality of care deficiencies for people with multimorbidity. Suggestions for care improvement for people with multimorbidity includes formally assigned responsibility for care coordination, a change in the financial incentive structure towards a system rewarding high quality care and care focusing on prevention of disease exacerbation, as well as implementing shared medical record systems

Cancer Incidence and Mortality in 260,000 Nordic Twins With 30,000 Prospective Cancers

The Nordic countries have comprehensive, population-based health and medical registries linkable on individually unique personal identity codes, enabling complete long-term follow-up. The aims of this study were to describe the NorTwinCan cohort established in 2010 and assess whether the cancer mortality and incidence rates among Nordic twins are similar to those in the general population. We analyzed approximately 260,000 same-sexed twins in the nationwide twin registers in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Cancer incidence was determined using follow-up through the national cancer registries. We estimated standardized incidence (SIR) and mortality (SMR) ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) across country, age, period, follow-up time, sex and zygosity. More than 30,000 malignant neoplasms have occurred among the twins through 2010. Mortality rates among twins were slightly lower than in the general population (SMR 0.96; CI 95% [0.95, 0.97]), but this depends on information about zygosity. Twins have slightly lower cancer incidence rates than the general population, with SIRs of 0.97 (95% CI [0.96, 0.99]) in men and 0.96 (95% CI [0.94, 0.97]) in women. Testicular cancer occurs more often among male twins than singletons (SIR 1.15; 95% CI [1.02, 1.30]), while cancers of the kidney (SIR 0.82; 95% CI [0.76, 0.89]), lung (SIR 0.89; 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and colon (SIR 0.90; 95% CI [0.87, 0.94]) occur less often in twins than in the background population. Our findings indicate that the risk of cancer among twins is so similar to the general population that cancer risk factors and estimates of heritability derived from the Nordic twin registers are generalizable to the background populations.Peer reviewe

To Explain or Not to Explain?—Artificial Intelligence Explainability in Clinical Decision Support Systems

Explainability for artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine is a hotly debated topic. Our paper presents a review of the key arguments in favor and against explainability for AI-powered Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) applied to a concrete use case, namely an AI-powered CDSS currently used in the emergency call setting to identify patients with life-threatening cardiac arrest. More specifically, we performed a normative analysis using socio-technical scenarios to provide a nuanced account of the role of explainability for CDSSs for the concrete use case, allowing for abstractions to a more general level. Our analysis focused on three layers: technical considerations, human factors, and the designated system role in decision-making. Our findings suggest that whether explainability can provide added value to CDSS depends on several key questions: technical feasibility, the level of validation in case of explainable algorithms, the characteristics of the context in which the system is implemented, the designated role in the decision-making process, and the key user group(s). Thus, each CDSS will require an individualized assessment of explainability needs and we provide an example of how such an assessment could look like in practice