Integrating general practitioners' and patients' perspectives in the development of a digital tool supporting primary care for older patients with multimorbidity: a focus group study.

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2025-01-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333
Ingmar Schäfer, Vivienne Jahns, Valentina Paucke, Dagmar Lühmann, Martin Scherer, Julia Nothacker
{"title":"Integrating general practitioners' and patients' perspectives in the development of a digital tool supporting primary care for older patients with multimorbidity: a focus group study.","authors":"Ingmar Schäfer, Vivienne Jahns, Valentina Paucke, Dagmar Lühmann, Martin Scherer, Julia Nothacker","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The web application gp-multitool.de is based on the German clinical practice guideline \"multimorbidity\" and supports mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs (general practitioners) and patients. The application facilitates sending hyperlinks to standardized assessments by email, which can be completed by patients on any suitable digital device. GPs can document clinical decisions. The tool also supports a structured medication review. Aims of this study were to consider needs and wants of the target groups in implementing the \"multimorbidity\" clinical practice guideline in a digital tool, and to examine themes of discussions in order to identify which aspects were considered most important for customising a digital tool.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted six focus groups with 32 GPs and six focus groups with 33 patients. Eight groups were conducted alongside the programming of the web application and four after finishing a prototype. GPs were recruited by mail and asked to invite up to six eligible patients from their practice to participate. Focus groups were based on semi-structured interview guides and discussed assessments, functionalities, usability and reliability of gp-multitool.de. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPs wanted to avoid unnecessary and time-consuming functions and did not want to explore problems that they could not provide solutions for. For some assessments, GPs suggested simplifying scales or including residual categories. GPs and patients also addressed possible misunderstandings due to wording and discussed if some items might be too intimate or overtax patients intellectually. In most cases, participants confirmed usability, but they suggested changes in default settings and pointed out a few minor bugs that needed to be fixed. While some GPs considered data security an important topic, most patients were unconcerned with this issue and open to share their data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates that focus groups can be used to customize a digital tool according to the needs and wants of target groups and thus, improve content, functionality, usability, and reliability of digital tools. However, digital tools still need to be piloted and evaluated in everyday care. In our focus groups, study participants confirmed that gp-multitool.de can be a relevant approach for overcoming deficits in the information needed for mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":"7 ","pages":"1499333"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11790651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The web application gp-multitool.de is based on the German clinical practice guideline "multimorbidity" and supports mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs (general practitioners) and patients. The application facilitates sending hyperlinks to standardized assessments by email, which can be completed by patients on any suitable digital device. GPs can document clinical decisions. The tool also supports a structured medication review. Aims of this study were to consider needs and wants of the target groups in implementing the "multimorbidity" clinical practice guideline in a digital tool, and to examine themes of discussions in order to identify which aspects were considered most important for customising a digital tool.

Materials and methods: We conducted six focus groups with 32 GPs and six focus groups with 33 patients. Eight groups were conducted alongside the programming of the web application and four after finishing a prototype. GPs were recruited by mail and asked to invite up to six eligible patients from their practice to participate. Focus groups were based on semi-structured interview guides and discussed assessments, functionalities, usability and reliability of gp-multitool.de. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis.

Results: GPs wanted to avoid unnecessary and time-consuming functions and did not want to explore problems that they could not provide solutions for. For some assessments, GPs suggested simplifying scales or including residual categories. GPs and patients also addressed possible misunderstandings due to wording and discussed if some items might be too intimate or overtax patients intellectually. In most cases, participants confirmed usability, but they suggested changes in default settings and pointed out a few minor bugs that needed to be fixed. While some GPs considered data security an important topic, most patients were unconcerned with this issue and open to share their data.

Conclusion: Our study indicates that focus groups can be used to customize a digital tool according to the needs and wants of target groups and thus, improve content, functionality, usability, and reliability of digital tools. However, digital tools still need to be piloted and evaluated in everyday care. In our focus groups, study participants confirmed that gp-multitool.de can be a relevant approach for overcoming deficits in the information needed for mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs and patients.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
整合全科医生和患者的观点,开发支持对患有多种疾病的老年患者进行初级保健的数字化工具:焦点小组研究。
简介:web应用gp-multitool.de基于德国临床实践指南“多病”,支持全科医生和患者对治疗的相互优先排序。该应用程序便于通过电子邮件发送标准化评估的超链接,患者可以在任何合适的数字设备上完成。全科医生可以记录临床决定。该工具还支持结构化的药物审查。本研究的目的是考虑目标群体在数字工具中实施“多病症”临床实践指南时的需求和愿望,并检查讨论的主题,以确定哪些方面被认为是定制数字工具最重要的。材料与方法:6个焦点组共32名全科医生,6个焦点组共33名患者。其中8组在开发web应用程序的同时进行,另外4组在完成原型后进行。全科医生通过邮件招募,并要求从他们的实践中邀请最多六名符合条件的患者参与。焦点小组以半结构化访谈指南为基础,讨论了gp-multitool.de的评估、功能、可用性和可靠性。讨论被逐字记录下来,并使用内容分析进行分析。结果:全科医生希望避免不必要和耗时的功能,不愿意探索自己无法提供解决方案的问题。对于一些评估,全科医生建议简化量表或包括剩余类别。全科医生和患者还讨论了由于措辞可能产生的误解,并讨论了一些项目是否过于亲密或对患者的智力造成过度负担。在大多数情况下,参与者确认了可用性,但他们建议更改默认设置,并指出需要修复的一些小错误。虽然一些全科医生认为数据安全是一个重要的话题,但大多数患者并不关心这个问题,并愿意分享他们的数据。结论:我们的研究表明,焦点小组可以根据目标群体的需求定制数字工具,从而提高数字工具的内容、功能、可用性和可靠性。然而,数字工具仍需在日常护理中进行试点和评估。在我们的焦点小组中,研究参与者证实gp-multitool.de可以是一种相关的方法,用于克服全科医生和患者相互优先考虑治疗所需的信息缺陷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessing ChatGPT vs. evidence-based online responses for polycystic ovary syndrome self-management and education: an international cross-sectional blinded survey of healthcare professionals. Evaluating privacy leakages in LLM-driven ambient clinical documentation. Translating behavioral interventions into virtual reality: the Transcend Framework for immersive health design. Cybersecurity breaches in medical devices: analyzing FDA safety communications in response to patient security concerns. Editorial: Advancing digital mental health for youth.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1