Search

Background: Chronic conditions and multimorbidity, the presence of two or more chronic conditions, are increasingly common in older adults. Effective management of chronic conditions and multimorbidity in older adults requires a collaborative and person‐centred approach that considers the individual's goals, preferences and priorities. However, ensuring high‐quality personalised care for older adults with multimorbidity can be challenging due to the complexity of their care needs, limited time and a lack of patient preparation to discuss their personal goals and preferences with their healthcare team. Objective: To codesign a communication and goal‐setting tool, My Wellbeing Journal, to support personalised care planning for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Design: We drew on an experience‐based codesign approach to develop My Wellbeing Journal. This article reports on the final end‐user feedback, which was collected via an online survey with older adults and their carers. Setting and Participants: Older adults with chronic conditions, multimorbidity and informal carers living in Australia. Personalised care planning was considered in the context of primary care. Results: A total of 88 participants completed the online survey. The survey focused on participants' feedback on the tool in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction and errors encountered. This feedback resulted in modifications to My Wellbeing Journal, which can be used during clinical encounters to facilitate communication, goal setting and progress tracking. Discussion and Conclusions: Clinicians and carers can use the tool to guide discussions with older adults about their care planning and help them set realistic goals that are meaningful to them. The findings of this study could be used to inform the development of recommendations for healthcare providers to implement person‐centred, goal‐oriented care for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Patient or Public Contribution: Older adults living with chronic conditions and multimorbidity and their carers have contributed to the development of a tool that has the potential to significantly enhance the experience of personalised care planning. Their direct involvement as collaborators has ensured that the tool is optimised to meet the standards of effectiveness and usability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Latinos in the United States represent a disproportionate burden of illness and disease and face barriers to accessing health care and related resources. Culturally tailored, evidence‐based interventions hold promise in addressing many of these challenges. Yet, ensuring patient voice is vital in the successful development and implementation of such interventions. Thus, this paper examines the application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to inform the augmentation and implementation of an evidence‐based chronic disease self‐management programme for underserved Latinos living with both minor depression and chronic illness. The process of AHP allows for direct input from the individuals that would utilize such a programme, including afflicted individuals, their family members and the health educators/promotores that would be responsible for implementation. Specifically, 45 participants, including 15 individuals with chronic disease, 15 family members/caregivers and 15 promotores, partook in the Stakeholder Values Questionnaire, which elicited preferences and values regarding major goals, processes and content for the intervention. AHP was employed to analyse pairwise comparison ratings and to determine differences and similarities across stakeholder groups. This analytical technique allowed for the adaptation of the EBI to stakeholders' specific priorities and preferences and facilitated complex decision‐making. Findings not only shed light on similarities and differences between stakeholder groups, but also the magnitude of these priorities and preferences and allowed the intervention to be driven by the participants, themselves. Applying AHP was a unique opportunity to optimize the decision‐making process to inform cultural adaptation of an EBI while considering multiple viewpoints systematically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing use of the question, "What matters most to you?" is a welcome development in the effort to provide patient‐centered care. However, it is difficult for clinicians to translate answers to this question into treatment plans for chronic conditions, including recognizing when to consider options other than clinical practice guideline (CPG)–directed therapy. Goal elicitation is most helpful when a patient has different treatment options with clearly identifiable trade‐offs. In the face of trade‐offs, goal elicitation helps patients to prioritize among potentially competing outcomes. While decision aids (DAs) focus on trade‐offs by delineating options and outcomes, the robust outcome data necessary to create DAs for older patients with multimorbidity are often lacking and even mild cognitive impairment makes the use of DAs difficult. The challenges for providing chronic disease care to older patients who are at risk for adverse events from CPG‐directed therapy because of multimorbidity and/or frailty are to organize the complexity of individual combinations of diseases, conditions, and syndromes into common sets of trade‐offs and to identify those goals or priorities that will directly inform a plan of care. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:474–477, 2020 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To inform the development of a data-driven measure of quality care for individuals with multiple chronic conditions ( MCCs) derived from an electronic health record ( EHR). Design Qualitative study using focus groups, interactive webinars, and a modified Delphi process. Setting Research department within an integrated delivery system. Participants The webinars and Delphi process included 17 experts in clinical geriatrics and primary care, health policy, quality assessment, health technology, and health system operations. The focus group included 10 individuals aged 70-87 with three to six chronic conditions selected from a random sample of individuals aged 65 and older with three or more chronic medical conditions. Measurements Through webinars and the focus group, input was solicited on constructs representing high-quality care for individuals with MCCs. A working list was created of potential measures representing these constructs. Using a modified Delphi process, experts rated the importance of each possible measure and the feasibility of implementing each measure using EHR data. Results High-priority constructs reflected processes rather than outcomes of care. High-priority constructs that were potentially feasible to measure included assessing physical function, depression screening, medication reconciliation, annual influenza vaccination, outreach after hospital admission, and documented advance directives. High-priority constructs that were less feasible to measure included goal setting and shared decision-making, identifying drug-drug interactions, assessing social support, timely communication with patients, and other aspects of good customer service. Lower-priority domains included pain assessment, continuity of care, and overuse of screening or laboratory testing. Conclusion High-quality MCC care should be measured using meaningful process measures rather than outcomes. Although some care processes are currently extractable from electronic data, capturing others will require adapting and applying technology to encourage holistic, person-centered care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a response to the article by Paul Falzer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

See the Reply by Fried et al. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article looks at the New England Framework of guided self-health for people in rural areas with physical and psychological conditions. According to the Framework, a health worker must go beyond dispensing health information or brokering services and serve as a guide to help the person pinpoint the problem and make change. The Framework includes information gathering, giving and guiding with follow-up and engages individuals in finding their own solutions to health problems.