Dataset Information

Health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity: the protocol for an evidence map.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Interaction of conditions and treatments, complicated care needs and substantial treatment burden make patient-physician encounters involving multimorbid older patients highly complex. To optimally integrate patients' preferences, define and prioritise realistic treatment goals and individualise care, a patient-centred approach is recommended. However, the preferences of older patients, who are especially vulnerable and frequently multimorbid, have not been systematically investigated with regard to their health status. The purpose of this evidence map is to explore current research addressing health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity, and to identify the knowledge clusters and research gaps. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:To identify relevant research, we will conduct searches in the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, CINAHL, Social Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index Expanded and the Cochrane library from their inception. We will check reference lists of relevant articles and carry out cited reference research (forward citation tracking). Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, check full texts for eligibility and extract the data. Any disagreement will be resolved and consensus reached with the help of a third reviewer. We will include both qualitative and quantitative studies, and address preferences from the patients' perspectives in a multimorbid population of 60 years or older. There will be no restrictions on the publication language. Data extraction tables will present study and patient characteristics, aim of study, methods used to identify preferences and outcomes (ie, type of preferences). We will summarise the data using tables and figures (ie, bubble plot) to present the research landscape and to describe clusters and gaps. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Due to the nature of the proposed evidence map, ethics approval will not be required. Results from our research will be disseminated by means of specifically prepared materials for patients, at relevant (inter)national conferences and via publication in peer-reviewed journals.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Gonzalez AI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6731896 | biostudies-other | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity: the protocol for an evidence map.

González-González Ana Isabel AI Schmucker Christine C Blom Jeanet J van den Akker Marjan M Nguyen Truc Sophia TS Nothacker Julia J Meerpohl Joerg J JJ Röttger Kristian K Wegwarth Odette O Hoffmann Tammy T Straus Sharon E SE Gerlach Ferdinand M FM Muth Christiane C

BMJ open 20190903 9

<h4>Introduction</h4>Interaction of conditions and treatments, complicated care needs and substantial treatment burden make patient-physician encounters involving multimorbid older patients highly complex. To optimally integrate patients' preferences, define and prioritise realistic treatment goals and individualise care, a patient-centred approach is recommended. However, the preferences of older patients, who are especially vulnerable and frequently multimorbid, have not been systematically in ...[more]

PMID: 31481558

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To systematically identify knowledge clusters and research gaps in the health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity by mapping current evidence. DESIGN:Evidence map (systematic review variant). DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, CINAHL and Science Citation Index/Social Science Citation Index/-Expanded from inception to April 2018. STUDY SELECTION:Studies reporting primary research on health-related preferences of older patients (mean age ?60 years) with multimorbidity (?2 chronic/acute conditions). DATA EXTRACTION:Two independent reviewers assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data and clustered the studies using MAXQDA-18 content analysis software. RESULTS:The 152 included studies (62% from North America, 28% from Europe) comprised 57 093 patients overall (range 9-9105). All used an observational design except for one interventional study: 63 (41%) were qualitative (59 cross-sectional, 4 longitudinal), 85 (57%) quantitative (63 cross-sectional, 22 longitudinal) and 3 (2%) used mixed methods. The setting was specialised care in 85 (56%) and primary care in 54 (36%) studies. We identified seven clusters of studies on preferences: end-of-life care (n=51, 34%), self-management (n=34, 22%), treatment (n=32, 21%), involvement in shared decision making (n=25, 17%), health outcome prioritisation/goal setting (n=19, 13%), healthcare service (n=12, 8%) and screening/diagnostic testing (n=1, 1%). Terminology (eg, preferences, views and perspectives) and concepts (eg, trade-offs, decision regret, goal setting) used to describe health-related preferences varied substantially between studies. CONCLUSION:Our study provides the first evidence map on the preferences of older patients with multimorbidity. Included studies were mostly conducted in developed countries and covered a broad range of issues. Evidence on patient preferences concerning decision-making on screening and diagnostic testing was scarce. Differences in employed terminology, decision-making components and concepts, as well as the sparsity of intervention studies, are challenges for future research into evidence-based decision support seeking to elicit the preferences of older patients with multimorbidity and help them construct preferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Open Science Framework (OSF): DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/MCRWQ.

Project description:IntroductionConsideration of the preferences for everyday living of older people with various care needs is a prerequisite for person-centred and evidence-based nursing care. Knowledge of and respect for these preferences by nursing staff are associated with better care outcomes for older people with various care needs. To assess preferences in a structured way, instruments focusing on different topics of everyday living appear to be useful. It is unclear which instruments exist for assessing preferences for everyday living. The aim of this planned review is to identify relevant instruments for assessing the preferences for everyday living of older people with various care needs in the form of an evidence map. Additionally, gaps requiring further research will be presented.Methods and analysisTo identify the different instruments, we will conduct a systematic search in the electronic databases MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL and PsycINFO (via EBSCO). In addition, we will perform backward and forward citation tracking via reference lists and Google Scholar. The identified records will be independently screened (title/abstract and full text) by two reviewers. Data from the included studies will be extracted independently by the same two reviewers. In all three steps, the results will be checked for deviations, and if there are any deviations, they will be discussed. If no consensus can be achieved through discussion, a third reviewer will be engaged. All study designs will be included, and there will be no limitations regarding the publication status or time period. We will include all studies published in English and German that use instruments focusing on the assessment of preferences for everyday living in people older than 60 years of age with various care needs. For data charting, we will extract the number, categories and types of preferences, the care setting for which the instrument was developed and, if available, psychometric properties. Finally, the various extracted results will be presented in the form of tables and a bubble plot.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical concerns related to the construction of an evidence map, and ethical approval was given by the Witten/Herdecke University (application number 226/2020). We will discuss our results with practitioners in the field of nursing care and persons with various care needs. We will also make our results available to practitioners in an upcoming Project (PELI-D II) and to the public at (inter)national conferences and in the form of practice and peer-reviewed articles.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence mapping is an emerging tool used to systematically identify, organize, and summarize the quantity, distribution, and characteristics of published studies with the goal of identifying knowledge gaps and future research needs.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to present an evidence-map database of all published studies that investigated dietary sugars and to select health outcomes for explicating research trends and gaps.MethodsTo update an evidence-map database previously published in 2013, we performed a literature search in MEDLINE to identify English-language, peer-reviewed human intervention and prospective cohort studies published from January 2013 to December 2016. Abstracts and full-text articles were dual screened on the basis of predefined eligibility criteria. We classified outcomes into 7 health outcome categories that are potentially affected by dietary sugar. Data from the updated evidence-map database were merged with those from the previous database for analysis and charting.ResultsThere were 918 sugar and control intervention arms from a total of 298 intervention studies from 1966 to December 2016. A variety of sugar interventions were investigated across the included intervention studies, and it appears that the research interest across all outcome categories (cardiovascular disease risks, diabetes risks, body weight, body composition, appetite, dietary intake, and liver health-related outcomes) sharply increased from 2006. Bubble plots showed research gaps in long-term intervention studies and in intervention studies in patients with diabetes. In contrast, all 25 included cohort studies had long-term follow-up durations and much larger sample sizes than did intervention studies. None of the cohort studies evaluated dietary intake outcomes, and only one cohort study each examined appetite- and liver health-related outcomes.ConclusionsThe research trends and research gaps have not changed since 2013 when the original evidence-map database was updated. With continuous updating, evidence mapping can facilitate the process of knowledge translation and possibly reduce research waste.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing worldwide, and older people with multimorbidity are frequent users of health care services. Since multimorbidity has a significant negative impact on Health-related Quality of Life (HrQoL) and is more common in older age it would be expected that factors related to HrQoL in this group might have been thoroughly researched, but this is not the case. Furthermore, it is important to look at old people living at home, considering the shift from residential to home-based care. Therefore, we aim to investigate factors that are related to HrQoL in older people with multimorbidity and high health care consumption, living at home.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a RCT study conducted in a municipality in south-eastern Sweden. The study had a longitudinal design with a two-year follow-up period assessing HrQoL, symptom burden, activities of daily living, physical activity and depression.ResultsIn total, 238 older people with multimorbidity and high health care consumption, living at home were included (mean age 82, 52% female). A multiple linear regression model including symptom burden, activities of daily living and depression as independent variables explained 64% of the HrQoL. Higher symptom burden, lower ability in activities of daily living and a higher degree of depression were negatively related to HrQoL. Depression at baseline and a change in symptom burden over a two-year period explained 28% of the change in HrQoL over a two-year period variability. A higher degree of depression at baseline and negative change in higher symptom burden were related to a decrease in HrQoL over a two-year period.ConclusionIn order to facilitate better delivery of appropriate health care to older people with high health care consumption living at home it is important to assess HrQoL, and HrQoL over time. Symptom burden, activities of daily living, depression and change in symptom burden over time are important indicators for HrQoL.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01446757 , the trial was registered prospectively with the date of trial registration October 5th, 2011.

Project description:PurposeMultimorbidity is commonly defined and measured using condition counts. The UK National Institute for Health Care Excellence Guidelines for Multimorbidity suggest that a medication-orientated approach could be used to identify those in need of a multimorbidity approach to management.ObjectivesTo compare the accuracy of medication-based and diagnosis-based multimorbidity measures at higher cut-points to identify older community-dwelling patients who are at risk of poorer health outcomes.DesignA secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study with a 2-year follow-up (2010-2012).Setting15 general practices in Ireland.Participants904 older community-dwelling patients.ExposureBaseline multimorbidity measurements based on both medication classes count (MCC) and chronic disease count (CDC).OutcomesMortality, self-reported health related quality of life, mental health and physical functioning at follow-up.AnalysisSensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) adjusting for clustering by practice for each outcome using both definitions.ResultsOf the 904 baseline participants, 53 died during follow-up and 673 patients completed the follow-up questionnaire. At baseline, 223 patients had 3 or more chronic conditions and 89 patients were prescribed 10 or more medication classes. Sensitivity was low for both MCC and CDC measures for all outcomes. For specificity, MCC was better for all outcomes with estimates varying from 88.8% (95% CI 85.2% to 91.6%) for physical functioning to 90.9% (95% CI 86.2% to 94.1%) for self-reported health-related quality of life. There were no differences between MCC and CDC in terms of PPV and NPV for any outcomes.ConclusionsNeither measure demonstrated high sensitivity. However, MCC using a definition of 10 or more regular medication classes to define multimorbidity had higher specificity for predicting poorer health outcomes. While having limitations, this definition could be used for proactive identification of patients who may benefit from targeted clinical care.

Dataset Information

Health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity: the protocol for an evidence map.

Publications

Health-related preferences of older patients with multimorbidity: the protocol for an evidence map.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets