General practitioners' perspectives on the prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

Objective Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, and prevention of CVD is a public health priority. This paper aims to describe the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on the prevention of CVD across different contexts. Design Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies using the Enhancing Transparency of Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative research (ENTREQ) framework. Data sources MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from database inception to April 2018. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies We included qualitative studies on the perspectives of GPs on CVD prevention. Data extraction and synthesis We used HyperRESEARCH to code the primary papers and identified themes. Results We selected 34 studies involving 1223 participants across nine countries. We identified six themes: defining own primary role (duty to prescribe medication, refraining from risking patients’ lives, mediating between patients and specialists, delegating responsibility to patients, providing holistic care); trusting external expertise (depending on credible evidence and opinion, entrusting care to other health professionals, integrating into patient context); motivating behavioural change for prevention (highlighting tangible improvements, negotiating patient acceptance, enabling autonomy and empowerment, harnessing the power of fear, disappointment with futility of advice); recognising and accepting patient capacities (ascertaining patient’s drive for lifestyle change, conceding to ingrained habits, prioritising urgent comorbidities, tailoring to patient environment and literacy); avoiding overmedicalisation (averting long-term dependence on medications, preventing a false sense of security, minimising stress of sickness) and minimising economic burdens (avoiding unjustified costs to patients, delivering practice within budget, alleviating healthcare expenses). Conclusions GPs sought to empower patients to prevent CVD, but consideration of patients’ individual factors was challenging. Community-based strategies for assessing CVD risk involving other health professionals, and decision aids that address the individuality of the patient’s health and environment, may support GPs in their decisions regarding CVD prevention. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial.The work was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Partnership Grant (1092674), including support from the National Heart Foundation of Australia. AT is supported by a NHMRC Fellowship (1106716)

Patient and parent perspectives on transition from paediatric to adult healthcare in rheumatic diseases: an interview study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the experiences, priorities, and needs of patients with rheumatic disease and their parents during transition from paediatric to adult healthcare. SETTING: Face-to-face and telephone semistructured interviews were conducted from December 2018 to September 2019 recruited from five hospital centres in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen young people and 16 parents were interviewed. Young people were included if they were English speaking, aged 14-25 years, diagnosed with an inflammatory rheumatic disease (eg, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, juvenile dermatomyositis, systemic lupus erythematosus, panniculitis, familial Mediterranean fever) before 18 years of age. Young people were not included if they were diagnosed in the adult setting. RESULTS: We identified four themes with respective subthemes: avoid repeat of past disruption (maintain disease stability, preserve adjusted personal goals, protect social inclusion); encounter a daunting adult environment (serious and sombre mood, discredited and isolated identity, fear of a rigid system); establish therapeutic alliances with adult rheumatology providers (relinquish a trusting relationship, seek person-focused care, redefine personal-professional boundaries, reassurance of alternative medical supports, transferred trust to adult doctor) and negotiate patient autonomy (confidence in formerly gained independence, alleviate burden on patients, mediate parental anxiety). CONCLUSIONS: During transition, patients want to maintain disease stability, develop a relationship with their adult provider centralised on personal goals and access support networks. Strategies to comprehensively communicate information between providers, support self-management, and negotiate individualised goals for independence during transition planning may improve satisfaction, and health and treatment outcomes

Establishing a core outcome set for peritoneal dialysis : report of the SONG-PD (standardized outcomes in nephrology-peritoneal dialysis) consensus workshop

Outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD) are diverse, are measured inconsistently, and may not be important to patients, families, and clinicians. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-PD) initiative aims to establish a core outcome set for trials in PD based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders. We convened an international SONG-PD stakeholder consensus workshop in May 2018 in Vancouver, Canada. Nineteen patients/caregivers and 51 health professionals attended. Participants discussed core outcome domains and implementation in trials in PD. Four themes relating to the formation of core outcome domains were identified: life participation as a main goal of PD, impact of fatigue, empowerment for preparation and planning, and separation of contributing factors from core factors. Considerations for implementation were identified: standardizing patient-reported outcomes, requiring a validated and feasible measure, simplicity of binary outcomes, responsiveness to interventions, and using positive terminology. All stakeholders supported inclusion of PD-related infection, cardiovascular disease, mortality, technique survival, and life participation as the core outcome domains for PD

Core Outcomes Set for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The outcomes reported in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 are extremely heterogeneous and of uncertain patient relevance, limiting their applicability for clinical decision-making. The aim of this workshop was to establish a core outcomes set for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Four international online multistakeholder consensus workshops were convened to discuss proposed core outcomes for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, informed by a survey involving 9,289 respondents from 111 countries. The transcripts were analyzed thematically. The workshop recommendations were used to finalize the core outcomes set. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: Six themes were identified. "Responding to the critical and acute health crisis" reflected the immediate focus on saving lives and preventing life-threatening complications that underpinned the high prioritization of mortality, respiratory failure, and multiple organ failure. "Capturing different settings of care" highlighted the need to minimize the burden on hospitals and to acknowledge outcomes in community settings. "Encompassing the full trajectory and severity of disease" was addressing longer term impacts and the full spectrum of illness (e.g. shortness of breath and recovery). "Distinguishing overlap, correlation and collinearity" meant recognizing that symptoms such as shortness of breath had distinct value and minimizing overlap (e.g. lung function and pneumonia were on the continuum toward respiratory failure). "Recognizing adverse events" refers to the potential harms of new and evolving interventions. "Being cognizant of family and psychosocial wellbeing" reflected the pervasive impacts of coronavirus disease 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery are critically important outcomes to be consistently reported in coronavirus disease 2019 trials

Patient and caregiver priorities for medication adherence in gout, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis: nominal group technique

Objectives: This study aimed to identify and prioritize factors important to patients and caregivers with regard to medication adherence in gout, osteoporosis (OP) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to describe the reasons for their decisions. Methods: Patients with gout, OP and RA, and their caregivers purposively sampled from five rheumatology clinics in Australia, identified and ranked factors considered important for medication adherence using nominal group technique and discussed their decisions. An importance score (scale 0-1) was calculated, and qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results: From 14 focus groups, 82 participants (67 patients, 15 caregivers) identified 49 factors. The top five factors based on the ranking of all participants were trust in doctor (importance score 0.46), medication effectiveness (0.31), doctor's knowledge (0.25), side effects (0.23), medication taking routine (0.13). The order of the ranking varied by participant groupings with patients ranking trust in doctor the highest whilst caregivers ranked side effects the highest. Five themes reflecting the reasons for factors influencing adherence were: motivation and certainty in supportive individualised care; living well and restoring function; fear of toxicity and cumulative harm; seeking control and involvement; and unnecessarily difficult and inaccessible. Conclusions: Factors related to the doctor, medication properties and patients' medication knowledge and routine were important for adherence. Strengthening doctor-patient trust and partnership, managing side effects, and empowering patients with knowledge and skills for medicine-taking could enhance medication adherence in patients with rheumatic conditions

Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD): study protocol for establishing a core outcome set in polycystic kidney disease

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common potentially life threatening inherited kidney disease and is responsible for 5-10% of cases of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Cystic kidneys may enlarge up to 20 times the weight of a normal kidney due to the growth of renal cysts, and patients with ADPKD have an increased risk of morbidity, premature mortality, and other life-time complications including renal and hepatic cyst and urinary tract infection, intracranial aneurysm, diverticulosis, and kidney pain which impair quality of life. Despite some therapeutic advances and the growing number of clinical trials in ADPKD, the outcomes that are relevant to patients and clinicians, such as symptoms and quality of life, are infrequently and inconsistently reported. This potentially limits the contribution of trials to inform evidence-based decision-making. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD) project aims to establish a consensus-based set of core outcomes for trials in PKD (with an initial focus on ADPKD but inclusive of all stages) that patients and health professionals identify as critically important. METHODS: The five phases of SONG-PKD are: a systematic review to identify outcomes that have been reported in existing PKD trials; focus groups with nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify, rank, and describe reasons for their choices; qualitative stakeholder interviews with health professionals to elicit individual values and perspectives on outcomes for trials involving patients with PKD; an international three-round Delphi survey with all stakeholder groups (including patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, policy makers, researchers, and industry) to gain consensus on critically important core outcome domains; and a consensus workshop to review and establish a set of core outcome domains and measures for trials in PKD. DISCUSSION: The SONG-PKD core outcome set is aimed at improving the consistency and completeness of outcome reporting across ADPKD trials, leading to improvements in the reliability and relevance of trial-based evidence to inform decisions about treatment and ultimately improve the care and outcomes for people with ADPKD

Core outcome domains for trials in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: An international Delphi survey

Rationale & Objective Outcomes reported in trials involving patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) are heterogeneous and rarely include patient-reported outcomes. We aimed to identify critically important consensus-based core outcome domains to be reported in trials in ADPKD. Study Design An international 2-round online Delphi survey was conducted in English, French, and Korean languages. Setting & Participants Patients/caregivers and health professionals completed a 9-point Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) and a Best-Worst Scale. Analytical Approach The absolute and relative importance of outcomes were assessed. Comments were analyzed thematically. Results 1,014 participants (603 [60%] patients/caregivers, 411 [40%] health professionals) from 56 countries completed round 1, and 713 (70%) completed round 2. The prioritized outcomes were kidney function (importance score, 8.6), end-stage kidney disease (8.6), death (7.9), blood pressure (7.9), kidney cyst size/growth (7.8), and cerebral aneurysm (7.7). Kidney cyst–related pain was the highest rated patient-reported outcome by both stakeholder groups. Seven themes explained the prioritization of outcomes: protecting life and health, directly encountering life-threatening and debilitating consequences, specificity to ADPKD, optimizing and extending quality of life, hidden suffering, destroying self-confidence, and lost opportunities. Limitations Study design precluded involvement from those without access to internet or limited computer literacy. Conclusions Kidney function, end-stage kidney disease, and death were the most important outcomes to patients, caregivers, and health professionals. Kidney cyst–related pain was the highest rated patient-reported outcome. Consistent reporting of these top prioritized outcomes may strengthen the value of trials in ADPKD for decision making

Developing Consensus-Based Priority Outcome Domains for Trials in Kidney Transplantation:A Multinational Delphi Survey With Patients, Caregivers, and Health Professionals

Background: Inconsistencies in outcome reporting and frequent omission of patient-centered outcomes can diminish the value of trials in treatment decision-making. We identified critically important outcome domains in kidney transplantation based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals. Methods: In a 3-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation on a 9-point Likert scale and provided comments. During Round 2 and 3, participants re-rated the outcomes after reviewing their own score, the distribution of the respondents’ scores, and comments. We calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7-9 (critically important), and analyzed comments thematically. Results: 1018 participants (461 [45%] patients/caregivers and 557 [55%] health professionals) from 79 countries completed Round 1, and 779 (77%) completed Round 3. The top eight outcomes that met the consensus criteria in Round 3 (mean ≥7.5, median ≥8 and proportion >85%) in both groups were graft loss, graft function, chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer (excluding skin) and cardiovascular disease. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes (mean difference of 0.5 or more): skin cancer, surgical complications, cognition, blood pressure, depression, and ability to work. We identified five themes: capacity to control and inevitability, personal relevance, debilitating repercussions, gaining awareness of risks, and addressing knowledge gaps. Conclusions: Graft complications and severe comorbidities were critically important for both stakeholder groups. These stakeholder-prioritized outcomes will inform the core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of trials in kidney transplantation

Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology – Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-PD): establishing a core outcome set in peritoneal dialysis

Worldwide, approximately 11% of patients on dialysis receive peritoneal dialysis (PD). Whilst PD may offer more autonomy to patients compared with hemodialysis, patient and caregiver burnout, technique failure, and peritonitis remain major challenges to the success of PD. Improvements in care and outcomes are likely to be mediated by randomised trials of innovative therapies, but will be limited if the outcomes measured and reported are not important for patients and clinicians. The aim of the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-PD) study is to establish a set of core outcomes for trials in patients receiving PD based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders, so that outcomes of most relevance for decision-making can be evaluated, and that interventions can be compared reliably. The phases of the SONG-PD project included in this thesis are: a systematic review to identify outcomes and outcome measures that have been reported in randomised trials involving patients receiving PD; focus groups using nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify, rank and describe reasons for their choice of outcomes; a 3-round international Delphi survey involving a multi-stakeholder panel; and a consensus workshop to review and endorse the proposed set of core outcome domains for PD trials. The establishment of 3 to 5 high-priority core outcomes, to be measured and reported consistently in all trials in PD, will enable patients and clinicians to make informed decisions about treatment based on outcomes of common importance