The Perspectives of Patients with Chronic Diseases and Their Caregivers on Self-Management Interventions : A Scoping Review of Reviews

Self-management (SM) interventions are supportive interventions systematically provided by healthcare professionals, peers, or laypersons to increase the skills and confidence of patients in their ability to manage chronic diseases. We had two objectives: (1) to summarise the preferences and experiences of patients and their caregivers (informal caregivers and healthcare professionals) with SM in four chronic diseases and (2) to identify and describe the relevant outcomes for SM interventions from these perspectives. We conducted a mixed-methods scoping review of reviews. We searched three databases until December 2020 for quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods reviews exploring patients' and caregivers' preferences or experiences with SM in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and heart failure (HF). Quantitative data were narratively synthesised, and qualitative data followed a three-step descriptive thematic synthesis. Identified themes were categorised into outcomes or modifiable factors of SM interventions. We included 148 reviews covering T2DM (n = 53 [35.8%]), obesity (n = 20 [13.5%]), COPD (n = 32 [21.6%]), HF (n = 38 [25.7%]), and those with more than one disease (n = 5 [3.4%]). We identified 12 main themes. Eight described the process of SM (disease progression, SM behaviours, social support, interaction with healthcare professionals, access to healthcare, costs for patients, culturally defined roles and perceptions, and health knowledge), and four described their experiences with SM interventions (the perceived benefit of the intervention, individualised care, sense of community with peers, and usability of equipment). Most themes and subthemes were categorised as outcomes of SM interventions. The process of SM shaped the perspectives of patients and their caregivers on SM interventions. Their perspectives were influenced by the perceived benefit of the intervention, the sense of community with peers, the intervention's usability, and the level of individualised care. Our findings can inform the selection of patient-important outcomes, decision-making processes, including the formulation of recommendations, and the design and implementation of SM interventions

Physical activity patterns and gestational diabetes outcomes – The wings project

AbstractObjectiveTo compare physical activity (PA) patterns in pregnant woman with and without gestational diabetes (GDM) and to assess the effects of an exercise intervention on change in PA patterns, blood glucose levels and pregnancy outcomes in GDM women.MethodsFor the first objective, PA patterns were studied in 795 pregnant women with and without GDM. For the second objective, the Women in India with Gestational Diabetes Strategy-Model of Care (WINGS-MOC) intervention were evaluated in 151 women out of 189 with GDM. PA was assessed using a validated questionnaire and a pedometer. Changes in PA patterns, glycemic parameters and neonatal outcomes were evaluated.ResultsOverall, only 10% of pregnant women performed recommended levels of PA. Women with GDM were significantly more sedentary compared to those without GDM (86.2 vs. 61.2%, p<0.001). After the MOC was implemented in women with GDM, there was a significant improvement in PA and a decrease in sedentary behaviour amongst women (before MOC, moderate activity: 15.2%, sedentary: 84.8% vs. after MOC-moderate: 26.5%, sedentary: 73.5%; p<0.001), and an increase in their daily step count from 2206/day to 2476/day (p<0.001). Fasting 1 and 2-h postprandial glucose values significantly decreased (p<0.001 for all). Sedentary behaviour was associated with a fourfold higher risk (p=0.02), and recreational walking with 70% decreased risk, of adverse neonatal outcomes (p=0.04) after adjusting for potential confounders.ConclusionsPA levels are inadequate amongst this group of pregnant women studied i.e. those with and without GDM. However, a low-cost, culturally appropriate MOC can bring about significant improvements in PA in women with GDM. These changes are associated with improved glycemic control and reduction in adverse neonatal outcomes

Development of an updated, standardized, patient-centered outcome set for lung cancer

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) defined an international consensus recommendation of the most important outcomes for lung cancer patients. The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) initiative aimed to develop an updated patient-centered core outcome set (COS) for lung cancer, to capture the patient perspective of the impact of lung cancer and (novel) treatments using a combination of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and clinical data as a means to drive value-based health-care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international, expert team of patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, academic researchers and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed potential outcomes generated through literature review. A broader group of patients/patient representatives (n = 31), healthcare professionals / academic researchers (n = 83), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 26), and health authority representatives (n = 6) participated in a Delphi study. In two survey rounds, participants scored the relevance of outcomes from a preliminary list. The threshold for consensus was defined as ≥ 70 % of participants scoring an outcome as 'highly relevant'. In concluding consensus-meeting rounds, the expert multidisciplinary team finalized the COS. RESULTS: The preliminary list defined by the core group consisted of 102 outcomes and was prioritized in the Delphi procedure to 64. The final lung cancer COS includes: 1) case-mix factors (n = 27); 2) PROs related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (n = 25); 3) clinical outcomes (n = 12). Patient-reported symptoms beyond domains included in the ICHOM lung cancer set in 2016 were insomnia, nausea, vomiting, anxiety, depression, lack of appetite, gastric problems, constipation, diarrhoea, dysphagia, and haemoptysis. CONCLUSIONS: We will implement the lung cancer COS in Europe within the H2O initiative by collecting the outcomes through a combination of clinician-reported measures and PRO measures. The COS will support the adoption and reporting of lung cancer measures in a standardized way across Europe and empower patients with lung cancer to better manage their health care

Standardising personalised diabetes care across European health settings:A person-centred outcome set agreed in a multinational Delphi study

ObjectiveStandardised person-reported outcomes (PRO) data can contextualise clinical outcomes enabling precision diabetes monitoring and care. Comprehensive outcome sets can guide this process, but their implementation in routine diabetes care has remained challenging and unsuccessful at international level. We aimed to address this by developing a person-centred outcome set for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, using a methodology with prospects for increased implementability and sustainability in international health settings.MethodsWe used a three-round questionnaire-based Delphi study to reach consensus on the outcome set. We invited key stakeholders from 19 countries via purposive snowball sampling, namely people with diabetes (N = 94), healthcare professionals (N = 65), industry (N = 22) and health authorities (N = 3), to vote on the relevance and measurement frequency of 64 previously identified clinical and person-reported outcomes. Subsequent consensus meetings concluded the study.ResultsThe list of preliminary outcomes was shortlisted via the consensus process to 46 outcomes (27 clinical outcomes and 19 PROs). Two main collection times were recommended: (1) linked to a medical visit (e.g. diabetes-specific well-being, symptoms and psychological health) and (2) annually (e.g. clinical data, general well-being and diabetes self management-related outcomes).ConclusionsPROs are often considered in a non-standardised way in routine diabetes care. We propose a person-centred outcome set for diabetes, specifically considering psychosocial and behavioural aspects, which was agreed by four international key stakeholder groups. It guides standardised collection of meaningful outcomes at scale, supporting individual and population level healthcare decision making. It will be implemented and tested in Europe as part of the H2O project

Standardising personalised diabetes care across European health settings:A person-centred outcome set agreed in a multinational Delphi study

ObjectiveStandardised person-reported outcomes (PRO) data can contextualise clinical outcomes enabling precision diabetes monitoring and care. Comprehensive outcome sets can guide this process, but their implementation in routine diabetes care has remained challenging and unsuccessful at international level. We aimed to address this by developing a person-centred outcome set for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, using a methodology with prospects for increased implementability and sustainability in international health settings.MethodsWe used a three-round questionnaire-based Delphi study to reach consensus on the outcome set. We invited key stakeholders from 19 countries via purposive snowball sampling, namely people with diabetes (N = 94), healthcare professionals (N = 65), industry (N = 22) and health authorities (N = 3), to vote on the relevance and measurement frequency of 64 previously identified clinical and person-reported outcomes. Subsequent consensus meetings concluded the study.ResultsThe list of preliminary outcomes was shortlisted via the consensus process to 46 outcomes (27 clinical outcomes and 19 PROs). Two main collection times were recommended: (1) linked to a medical visit (e.g. diabetes-specific well-being, symptoms and psychological health) and (2) annually (e.g. clinical data, general well-being and diabetes self management-related outcomes).ConclusionsPROs are often considered in a non-standardised way in routine diabetes care. We propose a person-centred outcome set for diabetes, specifically considering psychosocial and behavioural aspects, which was agreed by four international key stakeholder groups. It guides standardised collection of meaningful outcomes at scale, supporting individual and population level healthcare decision making. It will be implemented and tested in Europe as part of the H2O project

Preferences Regarding Self-Management Intervention Outcomes of Dutch Chronically Ill Patients With Limited Health Literacy

Background: For many chronically ill patients self-management of their disease is difficult. This may be especially true for people with limited health literacy as they are faced with additional challenges in the day-to-day management of their disease. Research has shown that self-management support is most effective when tailored to the needs and preferences of patients. Therefore, this study explores the preferences regarding self-management outcomes of chronically ill patients with limited health literacy. Methods: A total of 35 patients with limited health literacy were invited to a concept-mapping procedure consisting of two card sorting tasks. Patients ranked 60 outcomes, which are often found in literature in relation to self-management, to the level that was important for themselves. Means were calculated for each outcome and domain, and differences within the group were analyzed. Results: For patients with limited health literacy, satisfaction with care is the most important outcome domain. This domain includes overall satisfaction, the communication with health care providers, the provision of information and trust. At an outcome level, outcomes related to symptom management and improving competences to self-management scored very high. No differences between patient groups for age and sex were found. Conclusion: Chronically ill patients with limited health literacy prefer a wide variety of outcomes for their self-management. Next to health related outcomes, patients mostly prefer to work on their competences for self-management. For health care professionals, acting on these patient preferences and building a solid relationship will enhance successful self-management

Women in India with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Strategy (WINGS): Methodology and development of model of care for gestational diabetes mellitus (WINGS 4)

Aim: The Women In India with GDM Strategy (WINGS) project was conducted with the aim of developing a model of care (MOC) suitable for women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in low- and middle-income countries. Methodology: The WINGS project was carried out in Chennai, Southern India, in two phases. In Phase I, a situational analysis was conducted to understand the practice patterns of health-care professionals and to determine the best screening criteria through a pilot screening study. Results: Phase II involved developing a MOC-based on findings from the situational analysis and evaluating its effectiveness. The model focused on diagnosis, management, and follow-up of women with GDM who were followed prospectively throughout their pregnancy. An educational booklet was provided to all women with GDM, offering guidance on self-management of GDM including sample meal plans and physical activity tips. A pedometer was provided to all women to monitor step count. Medical nutrition therapy (MNT) was the first line of treatment given to women with GDM. Women were advised to undergo fasting blood glucose and postprandial blood glucose testing every fortnight. Insulin was indicated when the target blood glucose levels were not achieved with MNT. Women were evaluated for pregnancy outcomes and postpartum glucose tolerance status. Conclusions: The WINGS MOC offers a comprehensive package at every level of care for women with GDM. If successful, this MOC will be scaled up to other resource-constrained settings with the hope of improving lives of women with GDM

Current practices in the diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes mellitus in India (WINGS-5)

Aim: To obtain information on existing practices in the diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) among physicians/diabetologists/endocrinologists and obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) in India. Methods: Details regarding diagnostic criteria used, screening methods, management strategies, and the postpartum follow-up of GDM were obtained from physicians/diabetologists/endocrinologists and OB/GYNs across 24 states of India using online/in-person surveys using a structured questionnaire. Results: A total of 3841 doctors participated in the survey of whom 68.6% worked in private clinics. Majority of OB/GYNs (84.9%) preferred universal screening for GDM, and screening in the first trimester was performed by 67% of them. Among the OB/GYNs, 600 (36.7%) reported using the nonfasting 2 h criteria for diagnosing GDM whereas 560 (29.4%) of the diabetologists/endocrinologists reported using the same. However, further questioning on the type of blood sample collected and the glucose load used revealed that, in reality, only 208 (12.7%) and 72 (3.8%), respectively, used these criteria properly. The survey also revealed that the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria was followed properly by 299 (18.3%) of OB/GYNs and 376 (19.7%) of physicians/diabetologists/endocrinologists. Postpartum oral glucose tolerance testing was advised by 56% of diabetologists and 71.6% of OB/GYNs. Conclusion: More than half of the physicians/diabetologists/endocrinologists and OB/GYNs in India do not follow any of the recommended guidelines for the diagnosis of GDM. This emphasizes the need for increased awareness about screening and diagnosis of GDM both among physicians/diabetologists/endocrinologists and OB/GYNs in India

The development of a core outcomes set for self-management interventions for patients living with obesity

Self-management interventions (SMIs) can improve the life of patients living with obesity. However, there is variability in the outcomes used to assess the effectiveness of SMIs and these are often not relevant for patients. In the context of COMPAR-EU, our aim was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for the evaluation of SMIs for patients with obesity. We followed a four steps multimethod approach: (1) the development of the initial catalogue of outcomes; (2) a scoping review of reviews on patients' values and preferences on outcomes of self-management (SM); (3) a Delphi survey including patients and patient representatives to rate the importance of outcomes; and (4) a 2-day consensus workshop with patients, patient representatives, healthcare professionals and researchers. The initial catalogue included 82 outcomes. Ten patients and patient's representatives participated in the Delphi survey. We identified 16 themes through the thematic synthesis of the scoping review that informed 37.80% of the outcomes on initial catalogue. Five patients, five healthcare professionals, and four researchers participated in the consensus workshop. After the consensus process, 15 outcomes were selected to be part of the final COS, and five supplementary outcomes were also provided. We developed a COS for the evaluation of SMIs in obesity with a significant involvement of patients and other key stakeholders. This COS will help improving data synthesis and increasing the value of SM research data in healthcare decision making

Self-management interventions for adults living with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): The development of a Core Outcome Set for COMPAR-EU project.

BackgroundA large body of evidence suggests that self-management interventions (SMIs) may improve outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, accurate comparisons of the relative effectiveness of SMIs are challenging, partly due to heterogeneity of outcomes across trials and uncertainty about the importance of these outcomes for patients. We aimed to develop a core set of patient-relevant outcomes (COS) for SMIs trials to enhance comparability of interventions and ensure person-centred care.MethodsWe undertook an innovative approach consisting of four interlinked stages: i) Development of an initial catalogue of outcomes from previous EU-funded projects and/or published studies, ii) Scoping review of reviews on patients and caregivers' perspectives to identify outcomes of interest, iii) Two-round Delphi online survey with patients and patient representatives to rate the importance of outcomes, and iv) Face-to-face consensus workshop with patients, patient representatives, health professionals and researchers to develop the COS.ResultsFrom an initial list of 79 potential outcomes, 16 were included in the COS plus one supplementary outcome relevant to all participants. These were related to patient and caregiver knowledge/competence, self-efficacy, patient activation, self-monitoring, adherence, smoking cessation, COPD symptoms, physical activity, sleep quality, caregiver quality of life, activities of daily living, coping with the disease, participation and decision-making, emergency room visits/admissions and cost effectiveness.ConclusionThe development of the COPD COS for the evaluation of SMIs will increase consistency in the measurement and reporting of outcomes across trials. It will also contribute to more personalized health care and more informed health decisions in clinical practice as patients' preferences regarding COPD outcomes are more systematically included