Dataset Information

Explaining the facilitators of quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), the disease's complications and manifestations affect a person's ability to function normally and leads to further disruptions in their education, family life, job opportunities, and daily life activities, thereby reduce their quality of life. Different factors as facilitators or inhibitors affect the quality of life in patients with MS. This study aimed to explain the facilitators of quality of life in patients with MS.

Methods

This research applied qualitative methodology, utilizing semi-structured interviews with individuals with MS and their family members/caregivers. Purposeful sampling was done among people who referred to Isfahan MS Association. Participants were selected with a maximum variation in terms of gender, age, education, occupation and marital status. Interviews were continued to reach data saturation. The gathered data were concurrently analyzed by the content analysis technique. MAXQDA software version 10 was used for data management.

Results

Saturation was reached after eighteen interviews. A total of three main categories and 8 sub-categories were extracted from the data. The identified facilitators were: personal facilitators (leisure time and coping strategies), interpersonal facilitators (exercise therapy, social support and social organizations) and needs and suggestions for improvement (family therapy, adopting urban architecture and facilities, and supportive systems).

Conclusions

Based on these findings, in order to improve the quality of life in patients with MS, we should pay attention to factors such as leisure time, spirituality and positive thinking, exercise, social support and social organizations. Health professionals, the government, community and families could help to improve patients' quality of life through adapting urban architecture, holding family therapy sessions and providing supportive systems.

SUBMITTER: Homayuni A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8111999 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDiroximel fumarate (DRF) is an oral fumarate for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS). Clinical and real-world studies of DRF have demonstrated improved gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability and low (< 1%) GI-related treatment discontinuation versus dimethyl fumarate (DMF) and high rates of treatment adherence. Our aim was to conduct a concept elicitation study to identify treatment-related concepts most meaningful to patients and to evaluate how these concepts shape the patient perspective of DRF.MethodsIn-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients from October to December 2020. US adults who had been prescribed DRF through routine clinical care and had taken DRF for ≥ 3 weeks in the past 6 months were eligible to participate. Semi-structured interviews explored patient perceptions on treatment selection and impact.ResultsSeventeen patients participated in the study. Mean (SD) age was 49.3 (12.0) years. Sixteen patients reported prior disease-modifying therapy, while 10 (58.8%) had prior DMF. DRF treatment duration ranged from ~ 6 weeks to 10 months. Four key concepts emerged: (1) overall wellness and quality of life, (2) ease of administration, (3) minimal and manageable side effects, and (4) patient optimism due to MS treatments. Mode of administration (82.4%), no/mild side effects (70.6%), convenience over injectable/infusion medications (58.8%), and effectiveness (64.7%) were cited as positive aspects of DRF treatment. Frequent dosing (52.9%) and food requirements (41.2%) were cited as negative attributes; however, 94.1% had no dietary changes since starting treatment.ConclusionThe patient perspective is a key aspect when considering a disease-modifying therapy for MS, given the multitude of options currently available. Overall wellness, ease of administration, and minimal and manageable side effects were DRF-related concepts most meaningful to patients on therapy. Acknowledging these patient perceptions in shared decision-making may lead to greater patient adherence and optimal treatment outcomes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Approximately one-third of all adults worldwide are diagnosed with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). The literature has identified several challenges facing providers and patients coping with managing MCCs in the community, yet few studies have considered their viewpoints in combination. A qualitative study involving healthcare providers and users was thus conducted to examine facilitators and barriers of managing patients with MCCs in the community in Singapore. METHODS:This study involves 26 semi-structured interviews with 10 physicians, 2 caregivers and 14 patients seeking treatment in the polyclinics that provide subsidised primary care services. Topic guides were developed with reference to the literature review, Chronic Care Model (CCM) and framework for patient-centred access to healthcare. RESULTS:Despite the perceived affordability and availability of the support system, some patients still encountered financial difficulties in managing care. These include inadequacy of the nation-wide medical savings scheme to cover outpatient treatment and medications. Half of healthcare users did not know where to seek help. While patients could access comprehensive services in polyclinics, those who did not visit the clinics might not receive timely care. Furthermore, patients reported long consultation waiting time. Physicians were able to propose and drive quality improvement projects to improve care quality. However, there were challenges to delivering safe and quality care with limited consultation duration due to the need to manage high patient load and waiting time, inadequate communication with specialists to coordinate care, and resource constraints in managing complex patients. Although providers could equip patients with self-management and lifestyle-related guidelines, patients' actions are influenced by multiple factors, including work requirements, beliefs and environment. CONCLUSIONS:There were barriers on care access, delivery and self-management. It is crucial to adopt a whole-of-society approach involving individuals, community, institutions and policymakers to improve and support MCC management. This study has also highlighted the importance of considering the different viewpoints of healthcare providers and users in policy formulation and community care planning.