Challenges of managing people with multimorbidity in today's healthcare systems

Multimorbidity is a growing issue and poses a major challenge to health care systems around the world. Multimorbidity is related to ageing but many studies have now shown that it is also socially patterned, being more common and occurring at an earlier age in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. There is lack of research on patients with multimorbidity, and thus guidelines are based on single-conditions. Polypharmacy is common in multimorbidity, increasing drug-disease and drug-drug interactions. Multimorbid patients need holistic care, but secondary care services are highly specialised and thus are often duplicative and fragmented and thus increase treatment burden in multimorbid patients. The cost of care is high in multimorbidity, due to high rates of primary and secondary care consultations and unplanned hospital admissions. The combination of mental and physical conditions increases complexity of care, and costs. Mental-physical multimorbidity is especially common in deprived areas. General practitioners and primary care teams have a key role in managing patients with multimorbidity, using a patient-centred generalist approach. Consultation length and continuity of care may need to be substantially enhanced in order to enable such patients. This will require a radical change in how health care systems are organised and funded in order to effectively meet the challenges of multimorbidity.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

'Learning together': Sharing international experience on new models of primary care

No abstract available

Acceptability of mindfulness from the perspective of stroke survivors and caregivers: a qualitative study

Background: Depression is very common among stroke survivors with estimated prevalence rates of approximately 33% among stroke survivors, but treatment options are limited. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is an effective treatment for depression generally, but benefits in stroke patients are unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of delivering MBSR to stroke survivors and their caregivers in the community. We conducted a study to gain views of MBSR as a potential treatment option among stroke survivors and their caregivers in the community. Methods: Participants were recruited from an urban community in Scotland (UK) using newspaper adverts, social media and support groups run by health charities. A 2-h MBSR taster session was delivered by two experienced mindfulness instructors, followed by focus group sessions with all participants on their user experience and suggestions for MBSR modifications for stroke survivors. The focus group sessions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcript data were analysed thematically using the framework approach. Results: The study sample consisted of 28 participants (16 females); there were 21 stroke survivors (11 females) and 7 caregivers (5 females). The median age for participants was 60 years. Most participants described the MBSR taster session as a positive experience. The main challenge reported was trying to maintain focus and concentration throughout the MBSR session. Some participants expressed reservations about the duration of standard mindfulness course sessions, suggesting a preference for shorter sessions. The potential for achieving better control over negative thoughts and emotions was viewed as a potential facilitator for future MBSR participation. Participants suggested having an orientation session prior to starting an 8-week course as a means of developing familiarity with the MBSR instructor and other participants. Conclusion: It was feasible to recruit 21 stroke survivors and 7 caregivers for MBSR taster sessions in the community. A shorter MBSR session and an orientation session prior to the full course are suggestions for potential MBSR modifications for stroke survivors, which needs further research and evaluation

Using normalisation process theory to understand barriers and facilitators to implementing mindfulness-based stress reduction for people with multiple sclerosis

Objectives: To study barriers and facilitators to implementation of mindfulness-based stress reduction for people with multiple sclerosis. Methods: Qualitative interviews were used to explore barriers and facilitators to implementation of mindfulness-based stress reduction, including 33 people with multiple sclerosis, 6 multiple sclerosis clinicians and 2 course instructors. Normalisation process theory provided the underpinning conceptual framework. Data were analysed deductively using normalisation process theory constructs (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring). Results: Key barriers included mismatched stakeholder expectations, lack of knowledge about mindfulness-based stress reduction, high levels of comorbidity and disability and skepticism about embedding mindfulness-based stress reduction in routine multiple sclerosis care. Facilitators to implementation included introducing a pre-course orientation session; adaptations to mindfulness-based stress reduction to accommodate comorbidity and disability and participants suggested smaller, shorter classes, shortened practices, exclusion of mindful-walking and more time with peers. Post-mindfulness-based stress reduction booster sessions may be required, and objective and subjective reports of benefit would increase clinician confidence in mindfulness-based stress reduction. Discussion: Multiple sclerosis patients and clinicians know little about mindfulness-based stress reduction. Mismatched expectations are a barrier to participation, as is rigid application of mindfulness-based stress reduction in the context of disability. Course adaptations in response to patient needs would facilitate uptake and utilisation. Rendering access to mindfulness-based stress reduction rapid and flexible could facilitate implementation. Embedded outcome assessment is desirable

Mindfulness-based interventions for mental well-being among people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objective: Impairment of mental well-being (anxiety, depression, stress) is common among people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). Treatment options are limited, particularly for anxiety. The aim of this study was to update our previous systematic review (2014) and evaluate via meta-analysis the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for improving mental well-being in PwMS. Methods: Systematic searches for eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were carried out in seven major databases (November 2017, July 2018), using medical subject headings and key words. Studies were screened, data extracted, quality appraised and analysed by two independent reviewers, using predefined criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Mental well-being was the primary outcome. Random effects model meta-analysis was performed, with effect size reported as standardised mean difference (SMD). Results: Twelve RCTs including 744 PwMS were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review, eight had data extractable for meta-analysis; n=635. Ethnicity, socioeconomic status, comorbidity and disability were inconsistently reported. MBIs varied from manualised to tailored versions, lasting 6–9 weeks, delivered individually and via groups, both in person and online. Overall SMD for mental well-being (eight studies) was 0.40 (0.28–0.53), p<0.01, I2=28%; against active comparators only (three studies) SMD was 0.17 (0.01–0.32), p<0.05, I2 =0%. Only three adverse events were reported. Conclusions: MBIs are effective at improving mental well-being in PwMS. More research is needed regarding optimal delivery method, cost-effectiveness and comparative-effectiveness

Enhancing research quality and reporting: why the Journal of Comorbidity is now publishing study protocols

The Journal of Comorbidity was launched in 2011 and has since become established as a high-quality journal that publishes open-access, peer-reviewed articles, with a focus on advancing the clinical management of patients with comorbidity/multimorbidity. To further enhance research quality and reporting of studies in this field, the journal is now offering authors the opportunity to publish a summary of their study protocols – a move designed to generate interest and raise awareness in ongoing clinical research and to enable researchers to detail their methodologies in order that replication by scientific peers is possible

Health Benefits of Primary Care Social Work for Adults with Complex Health and Social Needs: A Systematic Review

The prevalence of complex health and social needs in primary care patients is growing. Furthermore, recent research suggests that the impact of psychosocial distress on the significantly poorer health outcomes in this population may have been underestimated. The potential of social work in primary care settings has been extensively discussed in both health and social work literature and there is evidence that social work interventions in other settings are particularly effective in addressing psychosocial needs. However, the evidence base for specific improved health outcomes related to primary care social work is minimal. This review aimed to identify and synthesise the available evidence on the health benefits of social work interventions in primary care settings. Nine electronic databases were searched from 1990 to 2015 and seven primary research studies were retrieved. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Although there is no definitive evidence for effectiveness, results suggest a promising role for primary care social work interventions in improving health outcomes. These include subjective health measures and self-management of long-term conditions, reducing psychosocial morbidity and barriers to treatment and health maintenance. Although few rigorous study designs were found, the contextual detail and clinical settings of studies provide evidence of the practice applicability of social work intervention. Emerging policy on the integration of health and social care may provide an opportunity to develop this model of care

Measuring empathic, person-centred communication in primary care nurses:validity and reliability of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure

Background Empathic patient-centred care is central to high quality health encounters. The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure is a patient-rated experience measure of the interpersonal quality of healthcare encounters. The measure has been extensively validated and is widely used by doctors in primary care but has not been validated in nursing. This study assessed the validity and reliability of the CARE Measure in routine nurse consultations in primary care. Methods Seventeen nurses from nine general medical practices located in three Scottish Health Boards participated in the study. Consecutive patients (aged 16 years or older) were asked to self-complete a questionnaire containing the CARE Measure immediately after their clinical encounter with the nurse. Statistical analysis included Spearman’s correlation and principal component analysis (construct validity), Cronbach’s alpha (internal consistency), and Generalisability theory (inter-rater reliability). Results A total of 774 patients (327 male and 447 female) completed the questionnaire. Almost three out of four patients (73 %) felt that the CARE Measure items were very important to their current consultation. The number of ‘not applicable’ responses and missing values were low overall (5.7 and 1.6 % respectively). The mean CARE Measure score in the consultations was 45.9 and 48 % achieved the maximum possible score of 50. CARE Measure scores correlated in predicted ways with overall satisfaction and patient enablement in support of convergent and divergent validity. Factor analysis found that the CARE Measure items loaded highly onto a single factor. The measure showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.97) and acceptable inter-rater reliability (G = 0.6 with 60 patients ratings per nurse). The scores were not affected by patients’ age, gender, self-perceived overall health, living arrangements, employment status or language spoken at home. Conclusions The CARE Measure has high face and construct validity, and internal reliability in nurse consultations in primary care. Its ability to discriminate between nurses is sufficient for educational and quality improvement purposes