Journal of Comorbidity

2

Authors: Marjan van den Akker, Jane Gunn, Stewart W. Mercer, Martin Fortin, Susan M. Smith

Despite the high proportion and growing number of people with comorbidity/multimorbidity, clinical trials often exclude this group, leading to a limited evidence base to guide policy and practice for these individuals [1–5]. This evidence gap can potentially be addressed by secondary analysis of studies that were not originally designed to specifically examine comorbidity/multimorbidity, but have collected information from participants on co-occurring conditions. For example, secondary data analysis from randomized controlled trials may shed light on whether there is a differential impact of interventions on people with comorbidity/multimorbidity. Furthermore, data regarding comorbidity/multimorbidity can often be obtained from registration networks or administrative data sets.

3

Authors: David Haslam

It is not often that a single patient successfully symbolizes almost every important trend in modern medicine, but one particular man achieved this in a solitary consultation. He was a patient in my general practice. He was 77 years old – exemplifying the ageing population, and had only lived in my area for 3 or 4 years – exemplifying an increasingly mobile population. I knew him well and saw him often – combining an aspiration for continuity, and increasing consultation rates in primary care. He had prostate cancer, but he also had hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, macular degeneration, hyperlipidaemia, an arthritic right hip, and, hardly surprisingly, depression. This was multimorbidity par excellence. Journal of Comorbidity 2015;5(1):132–134

10

Authors: Rebekah Pratt, Carina Hibberd, Isobel M. Cameron, Margaret Maxwell

Background: Social dimensions of health are known to contribute to what is often termed “patient complexity”, which is particularly common among patients with multimorbidity. Health-care professionals require tools to help them identify and manage these aspects of patient needs. Objectives: To examine: (i) the Patient Centered Assessment Method (PCAM), a tool for assessing patient complexity in ways that are sensitive to the biopsychosocial dimensions of health, in primary care settings in Scotland; (ii) the impact of the PCAM on referral patterns and its perceived value; and (iii) the PCAM’s perceived applicability for use in a complex patient population. Design: Two studies are described: (i) a mixed-methods prospective cohort study of the implementation of the PCAM in primary care clinics; and (ii) a qualitative exploratory study that evaluated the value of the PCAM in a complex patient population. Results: Use of the PCAM did not impact patient satisfaction or perception of practitioners’ empathy, but it did increase both the number of onward referrals per referred patient (9–12%) and the proportion of referrals to non-medical services addressing psychological, social, and lifestyle needs. Nurses valued the PCAM, particularly its ability to help them address psychological and social domains of patients’ lives, and found it to be highly relevant for use in populations with known high complexity. Conclusions: The PCAM represents a feasible approach for assessing patient needs with consideration to the social dimensions of health, and allows practitioners to refer patients to a broader range of services to address patient complexity. Journal of Comorbidity 2015;5(1):110–119

10

Authors: Charlotte E. Young, Frances M. Boyle, Katie S. Brooker, Allyson J. Mutch

Background: Clinical practice guidelines provide an evidence-based approach to managing single chronic conditions, but their applicability to multiple conditions has been actively debated. Incorporating patient-preference recommendations and involving consumers in guideline development may enhance their applicability, but further understanding is needed. Objectives: To assess guidelines that include recommendations for comorbid conditions to determine the extent to which they incorporate patient-preference recommendations; use consumer-engagement processes during development, and, if so, whether these processes produce more patient-preference recommendations; and meet standard quality criteria, particularly in relation to stakeholder involvement. Design: A review of Australian guidelines published from 2006 to 2014 that incorporated recommendations for managing comorbid conditions in primary care. Document analysis of guidelines examined the presence of patient-preference recommendations and the consumer-engagement processes used. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation instrument was used to assess guideline quality. Results: Thirteen guidelines were reviewed. Twelve included at least one core patient-preference recommendation. Ten used consumer-engagement processes, including participation in development groups (seven guidelines) and reviewing drafts (ten guidelines). More extensive consumer engagement was generally linked to greater incorporation of patient-preference recommendations. Overall quality of guidelines was mixed, particularly in relation to stakeholder involvement. Conclusions: Guidelines do incorporate some patient-preference recommendations, but more explicit acknowledgement is required. Consumer-engagement processes used during guideline development have the potential to assist in identifying patient preferences, but further research is needed. Clarification of the consumer role and investment in consumer training may strengthen these processes. Journal of Comorbidity 2015;5(1):122–131

13

Authors: Kylie J. McKenzie, David Pierce, Jane M. Gunn

Internationally, health systems face an increasing demand for services from people living with multimorbidity. Multimorbidity is often associated with high levels of treatment burden. Targeting lifestyle factors that impact across multiple conditions may promote quality of life and better health outcomes for people with multimorbidity. Motivational interviewing (MI) has been studied as one approach to supporting lifestyle behaviour change. A systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness of MI in healthcare settings and to consider its relevance for multimorbidity. Twelve meta-analyses pertinent to multimorbidity lifestyle factors were identified. As an intervention, MI has been found to have a small-to-medium statistically significant effect across a wide variety of single diseases and for a range of behavioural outcomes. This review highlights the need for specific research into the application of MI to determine if the benefits of MI seen with single diseases are also present in the context of multimorbidity.

15

Authors: Emma L. Healey, Clare Jinks, Valerie A. Tan, Carolyn A. Chew-Graham, Sarah A. Lawton, Elaine Nicholls, Andrew G. Finney, Mark Porcheret, Vince Cooper, Martyn Lewis, Krysia S. Dziedzic, Simon Wathall, Christian D. Mallen

Background: Long-term conditions (LTCs) are important determinants of quality of life and healthcare expenditure worldwide. Whilst multimorbidity is increasingly the norm in primary care, clinical guidelines and the delivery of care remain focused on single diseases, resulting in poorer clinical outcomes. Osteoarthritis, and anxiety and/or depression frequently co-occur with other LTCs, yet are seldom prioritized by the patient or clinician, resulting in higher levels of disability, poorer prognosis, and increased healthcare costs. Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of an integrated approach to LTC management, tackling the under-diagnosis and under-management of osteoarthritis-related pain and anxiety and/or depression in older adults with other LTCs in primary care. Design: The ENHANCE study is a pilot stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial to test the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led ENHANCE LTC review consultation for identifying, assessing, and managing joint pain, and anxiety and/or depression in patients attending LTC reviews. Specific objectives (process evaluation and research outcomes) will be achieved through a theoretically informed mixed-methods approach using participant self-reported questionnaires, a medical record review, an ENHANCE EMIS template, qualitative interviews, and audio recordings of the ENHANCE LTC review. Discussion: Success of the pilot trial will be measured against the level of the primary care team engagement, assessment of training delivery, and degree of patient recruitment and retention. Patient satisfaction and treatment fidelity will also be explored. ISRCTN registry number: 12154418. Journal of Comorbidity 2015;5(1):135–149