Measuring the burden of treatment for chronic disease: implications of a scoping review of the literature

Background: Although there has been growing research on the burden of treatment, the current state of evidence on measuring this concept is unknown. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge as well as clear recommendations for future research, within the context of chronic disease. Methods: Four health-based databases, Scopus, CINAHL, Medline, and PsychInfo, were comprehensively searched for peer-reviewed articles published between the periods of 2000–2016. Titles and abstracts were independently read by two authors. All discrepancies between the authors were resolved by a third author. Data was extracted using a standardized proforma and a comparison analysis was used in order to explore the key treatment burden measures and categorize them into three groups. Results: Database searching identified 1458 potential papers. After removal of duplications, and irrelevant articles by title, 1102 abstracts remained. An additional 22 papers were added via snowball searching. In the end, 101 full papers were included in the review. A large number of the studies involved quantitative measures and conceptualizations of treatment burden (n = 64; 63.4%), and were conducted in North America (n = 49; 48.5%). There was significant variation in how the treatment burden experienced by those with chronic disease was operationalized and measured. Conclusion: Despite significant work, there is still much ground to cover to comprehensively measure treatment burden for chronic disease. Greater qualitative focus, more research with cultural and minority populations, a larger emphasis on longitudinal studies and the consideration of the potential effects of “identity” on treatment burden, should be considered

Is the pharmacy profession innovative enough?: meeting the needs of Australian residents with chronic conditions and their carers using the nominal group technique

Background Community pharmacies are ideally located as a source of support for people with chronic conditions. Yet, we have limited insight into what innovative pharmacy services would support this consumer group to manage their condition/s. The aim of this study was to identify what innovations people with chronic conditions and their carers want from their ideal community pharmacy, and compare with what pharmacists and pharmacy support staff think consumers want. Methods We elicited ideas using the nominal group technique. Participants included people with chronic conditions, unpaid carers, pharmacists and pharmacy support staff, in four regions of Australia. Themes were identified via thematic analysis using the constant comparison method. Results Fifteen consumer/carer, four pharmacist and two pharmacy support staff groups were conducted. Two overarching themes were identified: extended scope of practice for the pharmacist and new or improved pharmacy services. The most innovative role for Australian pharmacists was medication continuance, within a limited time-frame. Consumers and carers wanted improved access to pharmacists, but this did not necessarily align with a faster or automated dispensing service. Other ideas included streamlined access to prescriptions via medication reminders, electronic prescriptions and a chronic illness card. Conclusions This study provides further support for extending the pharmacist’s role in medication continuance, particularly as it represents the consumer’s voice. How this is done, or the methods used, needs to optimise patient safety. A range of innovative strategies were proposed and Australian community pharmacies should advocate for and implement innovative approaches to improve access and ensure continuity of care

The ideal healthcare: priorities of people with chronic conditions and their carers

Background It is well established that health consumer opinions should be considered in the design, delivery, and evaluation of health services. However, the opinions of people with chronic conditions and their carers and what they actually consider as ideal healthcare is limited. The aim of this study is to investigate the healthcare priorities of consumers with chronic conditions and their carers, if there are differences between these two groups, and if priorities differ depending on geographical location. Methods The nominal group technique was used as a method to identify what is currently important to, or valued by, participants. This method was also particularly suited to learning about healthcare problems and generating important solutions, thereby helping to bridge the gap between research and policy. Recruitment was carried out via purposive sampling, with the assistance of community pharmacies, general practices, various health agencies, government and non-government organisations. A total of 11 nominal groups were conducted; five groups consisted predominantly of consumers (n = 33 participants), two groups consisted predominantly of carers (n = 12 participants) and four were mixed groups, i.e. consumers, carers, and both (n = 26 participants). Results The findings suggested that to create a model of ideal healthcare for people with chronic conditions and their carers, appropriate and timely healthcare access was of paramount importance. Continuity and coordinated care, patient-centred care and affordability were equally the second most important healthcare priorities for all groups. When compared with other groups, access was discussed more frequently among participants residing in the rural area of Mount Isa. Compared to consumers, carers also discussed priorities that were more reminiscent with their caring roles, such as increased access and continuity and coordinated care. Conclusions Access to healthcare is the most important priority for people with chronic conditions and their carers. In the event of inappropriate access for certain groups, all other efforts to increase the quality of healthcare delivery, e.g. patient-centred care, may be pointless. However, health professionals alone may be limited in their ability to address the concerns related to healthcare access; structural changes by health policy makers may be needed

Treatment Burden and Chronic Illness: Who is at Most Risk?

Background: There is a need to ascertain the type and level of treatment burden experienced by people with co-morbidities. This is important to identify the characteristics of participants who are at most risk of treatment burden.  Objective: The aim of this study is to identify the characteristics of participants who are at most risk of treatment burden.  Methods: This cross-sectional study was part of a larger project and recruitment was conducted across four Australian regions: rural, semi-rural and metropolitan. Participants were asked about their treatment burden using an adapted version of a measure, which included the following five dimensions: medication, time and administrative, lifestyle change, social life and financial burden.  Results: In total, 581 participants with various chronic health conditions reported a mean global treatment burden of 56.5 out of 150 (standard deviation = 34.5). Number of chronic conditions (β = .34, p < 0.01), age, (β = −.27, p < 0.01), the presence of an unpaid carer (β = .22, p < 0.001) and the presence of diabetes mellitus and other endocrine conditions (β = .13, p < 0.01) were significant predictors of overall treatment burden. For the five dimensions of treatment burden, social, medicine and administrative burden were predicted by the same cluster of variables: number of conditions, age, presence of an unpaid carer and diabetes. However, in addition to these variables, financial dimensions were also predicted by education level, ethnicity and health insurance. Educational level also influenced lifestyle burden.  Conclusion: A substantial proportion of community-dwelling adults with chronic conditions have considerable levels of treatment burden. Specifically, health professionals should provide greater focus on managing overall treatment burden for persons who are of young age, have an endocrine condition or an unpaid carer, or a combination of these factors

Antipsychotic prescribing for vulnerable populations: a clinical audit at an acute Australian mental health unit at two-time points

Background: Antipsychotics are recognised as a critical intervention for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Guidelines globally endorse the routine practice of antipsychotic monotherapy, at the minimum effective dose. Even in treatmentresistant schizophrenia, clozapine use is endorsed before combining antipsychotics. This aim of this study was to review antipsychotic polytherapy alone, high-dose therapy alone, polytherapy and highdose prescribing patterns in adults discharged from an inpatient mental health unit at two time-points, and the alignment of this prescribing with clinical guideline recommendations. Additionally, associations with polytherapy and high-dose antipsychotic prescribing, including patient and clinical characteristics, were explored. Methods: A retrospective clinical audit of 400 adults (200 patients at two different time-points) discharged with at least one antipsychotic. Preliminary findings and education sessions were provided to physicians between Cohorts. Outcomes (polytherapy alone, high-dose therapy alone, polytherapy and high-dose therapy) were compared between study Cohorts using chi-squared and rank-sum tests. Associations between outcomes and covariates were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Most patients (62.5%) were discharged on a single antipsychotic within the recommended dose range. There was a clear preference for prescribing second generation antipsychotics, and in this respect, prescribing is aligned with current evidence-based guidelines. However, sub-optimal prescribing practices were identified for both Cohorts in relation to polytherapy and high-dose antipsychotic rates. Involuntary treatment, frequent hospitalisations and previous clozapine use significantly increased the risk of all three prescribing outcomes at discharge. Conclusions: In a significant minority, antipsychotic prescribing did not align with clinical guidelines despite increased training, indicating that the education program alone was ineffective at positively influencing antipsychotic prescribing practices. Further consideration should be given when prescribing antipsychotics for involuntary patients, people with frequent hospitalisations, and those who have previously trialled clozapine

A simplified (modified) Duke Activity Status Index (M-DASI) to characterise functional capacity: A secondary analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study

Background Accurate assessment of functional capacity, a predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality, is essential to improving surgical planning and outcomes. We assessed if all 12 items of the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) were equally important in reflecting exercise capacity. Methods In this secondary cross-sectional analysis of the international, multicentre Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study, we assessed cardiopulmonary exercise testing and DASI data from 1455 participants. Multivariable regression analyses were used to revise the DASI model in predicting an anaerobic threshold (AT) >11 ml kg −1 min −1 and peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 peak) >16 ml kg −1 min −1, cut-points that represent a reduced risk of postoperative complications. Results Five questions were identified to have dominance in predicting AT>11 ml kg −1 min −1 and VO 2 peak>16 ml.kg −1min −1. These items were included in the M-DASI-5Q and retained utility in predicting AT>11 ml.kg −1.min −1 (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic [AUROC]-AT: M-DASI-5Q=0.67 vs original 12-question DASI=0.66) and VO 2 peak (AUROC-VO2 peak: M-DASI-5Q 0.73 vs original 12-question DASI 0.71). Conversely, in a sensitivity analysis we removed one potentially sensitive question related to the ability to have sexual relations, and the ability of the remaining four questions (M-DASI-4Q) to predict an adequate functional threshold remained no worse than the original 12-question DASI model. Adding a dynamic component to the M-DASI-4Q by assessing the chronotropic response to exercise improved its ability to discriminate between those with VO 2 peak>16 ml.kg −1.min −1 and VO 2 peak<16 ml.kg −1.min −1. Conclusions The M-DASI provides a simple screening tool for further preoperative evaluation, including with cardiopulmonary exercise testing, to guide perioperative management

Integration of the Duke Activity Status Index into preoperative risk evaluation: a multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) questionnaire might help incorporate self-reported functional capacity into preoperative risk assessment. Nonetheless, prognostically important thresholds in DASI scores remain unclear. We conducted a nested cohort analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study to characterise the association of preoperative DASI scores with postoperative death or complications. METHODS: The analysis included 1546 participants (≥40 yr of age) at an elevated cardiac risk who had inpatient noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day death or myocardial injury. The secondary outcomes were 30-day death or myocardial infarction, in-hospital moderate-to-severe complications, and 1 yr death or new disability. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to characterise the adjusted association of preoperative DASI scores with outcomes. RESULTS: The DASI score had non-linear associations with outcomes. Self-reported functional capacity better than a DASI score of 34 was associated with reduced odds of 30-day death or myocardial injury (odds ratio: 0.97 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-0.99) and 1 yr death or new disability (odds ratio: 0.96 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Self-reported functional capacity worse than a DASI score of 34 was associated with increased odds of 30-day death or myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 1.05 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.00-1.09), and moderate-to-severe complications (odds ratio: 1.03 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.01-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: A DASI score of 34 represents a threshold for identifying patients at risk for myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, moderate-to-severe complications, and new disability

Erratum to: Methods for evaluating medical tests and biomarkers

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s41512-016-0001-y.]