Search

Introduction The burden of multimorbidity is recognised increasingly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), creating a strong emphasis on the need for effective evidence-based interventions. Core outcome sets (COS) appropriate for the study of multimorbidity in LMICs do not presently exist. These are required to standardise reporting and contribute to a consistent and cohesive evidence-base to inform policy and practice. We describe the development of two COS for intervention trials aimed at preventing and treating multimorbidity in adults in LMICs.Methods To generate a comprehensive list of relevant prevention and treatment outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and qualitative interviews with people with multimorbidity and their caregivers living in LMICs. We then used a modified two-round Delphi process to identify outcomes most important to four stakeholder groups (people with multimorbidity/caregivers, multimorbidity researchers, healthcare professionals and policymakers) with representation from 33 countries. Consensus meetings were used to reach agreement on the two final COS. Registration: https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1580.Results The systematic review and qualitative interviews identified 24 outcomes for prevention and 49 for treatment of multimorbidity. An additional 12 prevention and 6 treatment outcomes were added from Delphi round 1. Delphi round 2 surveys were completed by 95 of 132 round 1 participants (72.0%) for prevention and 95 of 133 (71.4%) participants for treatment outcomes. Consensus meetings agreed four outcomes for the prevention COS: (1) adverse events, (2) development of new comorbidity, (3) health risk behaviour and (4) quality of life; and four for the treatment COS: (1) adherence to treatment, (2) adverse events, (3) out-of-pocket expenditure and (4) quality of life.Conclusion Following established guidelines, we developed two COS for trials of interventions for multimorbidity prevention and treatment, specific to adults in LMIC contexts. We recommend their inclusion in future trials to meaningfully advance the field of multimorbidity research in LMICs.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020197293.

Abstract Aims Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is treatable but guideline‐directed medical therapy (GDMT) may not be affordable or accessible to people living with the disease. Methods and results In this cross‐sectional survey, we investigated the price, affordability, and accessibility of four pivotal classes of HFrEF GDMT: angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin‐neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI); beta‐blockers; mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA); and sodium glucose co‐transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). We sampled online or community pharmacies in 10 countries across a range of World Bank income groups, assessing mean 30 day retail prescription prices, affordability relative to gross national income per capita per month, and accessibility. We reported median price ratios relative to the International Reference Standard. We performed a literature review to evaluate accessibility to GDMT classes through publicly funded drug programmes in each country. HFrEF GDMT prices, both absolute and relative to the international reference, were highest in the United States and lowest in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The most expensive drug was the ARNI, sacubitril/valsartan, with a mean (standard deviation, SD) 30 day price ranging from $11.06 (0.81) in Pakistan to $611.50 (3.54) in United States. The least expensive drug was the MRA, spironolactone, with a mean (SD) 30 day price ranging from $0.18 (0.00) in Pakistan to $12.32 (0.00) in England. Affordability (SD) of quadruple therapy—ARNI, beta‐blockers, MRA, and SGLT2i—was best in high‐income and worst in low‐income countries, ranging from 1.49 (0.00)% of gross national income per capita per month in England to 232.47 (31.47)% in Uganda. Publicly funded drug programmes offset costs for eligible patients, but ARNI and SGLT2i were inaccessible through these programmes in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Price, affordability, and access were substantially improved in all countries by substituting ARNI for ACEi/ARB. Conclusions There was marked variation between countries in the retail price of HFrEF GDMT. Despite higher prices in high‐income countries, GDMT was more accessible and affordable than in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Publicly funded drug programmes in lower income countries increased affordability but limited access to newer HFrEF GDMT classes. Pharmaco‐disparities must be addressed to improve HFrEF outcomes globally.

Background The co-occurrence of chronic diseases and acute infectious events exacerbates disability and diminishes quality of life, yet research in Low- and Middle-Income countries is scarce. We aimed to investigate the relationship between infectious events and multimorbidity in resource-constrained settings. Methods We conducted a sequential mixed-method study in Lima and Tumbes, Peru, with participants having multimorbidity from the CRONICAS Cohort Study. They completed a questionnaire on the occurrence, treatment, and health-seeking behaviour related to acute infectious events. Qualitative interviews explored the perceptions and links between multimorbidity and acute infectious events for a subgroup of participants. Findings Among individuals with multimorbidity, low awareness of chronic conditions and poor medication adherence. The cumulative incidence for respiratory and gastrointestinal infections, the most reported acute conditions, was 2.0 [95%CI: 1.8–2.2] and 1.6 [1.2–1.9] events per person per year, respectively. Individuals with cancer (6.4 [1.6–11.2] events per person per year) or gastrointestinal reflux (7.2 [4.4–10.1] events per person per year) reported higher cumulative incidence of infectious events than others, such as those with cardiovascular and metabolic conditions (5.2 [4.6–5.8] events per person per year). Those with three or more chronic conditions had a slightly higher cumulative incidence compared with individuals with two conditions (5.7 [4.4–7.0] vs 5.0 [4.4–5.6] events per person per year). Around 40% of individuals with multimorbidity sought healthcare assistance, while others chose drugstores or didn't seek help. Our qualitative analysis showed diverse perceptions among participants regarding the connections between chronic and acute conditions. Those who recognized a connection emphasized the challenges in managing these interactions. Interpretation Our study advances understanding of multimorbidity challenges in resource-limited settings, highlighting the impact of acute infections on patients' existing multimorbidity burden.

Objective: To ascertain whether sociodemographic and health-related characteristics known from previous research to have a substantive impact on recovery from depression modified the effect of a digital intervention designed to improve depressive symptoms (CONEMO). Methods: The CONEMO study consisted of two randomized controlled trials, one conducted in Lima, Peru, and one in São Paulo, Brazil. As a secondary trial plan analysis, mixed logistic regression was used to explore interactions between the treatment arm and subgroups of interest defined by characteristics measured before randomization – suicidal ideation, race/color, age, gender, income, type of mobile phone, alcohol misuse, tobacco use, and diabetes/hypertension – in both trials. We estimated interaction effects between the treatment group and these subgroup factors for the secondary outcomes using linear mixed regression models. Results: Increased effects of the CONEMO intervention on the primary outcome (reduction of at least 50% in depressive symptom scores at 3-month follow-up) were observed among older and wealthier participants in the Lima trial (p = 0.030 and p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusion: There was no evidence of such differential effects in São Paulo, and no evidence of impact of any other secondary outcomes in either trial. Clinical trial registration: NCT02846662 (São Paulo, Brazil – SP), NCT03026426 (Lima, Peru – LI). Funded by the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (grant U19MH098780).