Addressing What Matters: A Pilot Study and Mixed Methods Evaluation of Patient Priorities Care in Four Clinical Settings

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Journal of the American Geriatrics Society Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.1111/jgs.19419
Carolina Fonseca Valencia, Brent R. Schell, Christa Guerrier, Gabrielle A. VanSpeybroeck, Jacqueline Gurevitch, MaryBeth Harrington, Barbara Hayes, Katherine C. Ritchey, Michelle Martinchek, Andrea Wershof Schwartz, Shivani K. Jindal
{"title":"Addressing What Matters: A Pilot Study and Mixed Methods Evaluation of Patient Priorities Care in Four Clinical Settings","authors":"Carolina Fonseca Valencia,&nbsp;Brent R. Schell,&nbsp;Christa Guerrier,&nbsp;Gabrielle A. VanSpeybroeck,&nbsp;Jacqueline Gurevitch,&nbsp;MaryBeth Harrington,&nbsp;Barbara Hayes,&nbsp;Katherine C. Ritchey,&nbsp;Michelle Martinchek,&nbsp;Andrea Wershof Schwartz,&nbsp;Shivani K. Jindal","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Older adults with multiple chronic conditions face significant challenges with their health. Patient Priorities Care (PPC) is an Age-Friendly approach that explores ‘what matters’ by identifying values, care preferences, and health priorities, and aligning healthcare based on patients' health outcome goals.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patient priorities care was implemented in four clinical settings (Hospital in Home, a transitional care case management program and in two embedded clinics within specialty care settings) within a large academically affiliated Veteran Affairs hospital system. During the pilot phase, the structured PPC approach was deployed through multiple modalities within specialty practices, including telehealth, and descriptive measures were evaluated. During the evaluation phase, clinical process measures related to care alignment were assessed, and clinicians' perspectives on PPC were explored through semi-structured interviews, which were then coded and analyzed for themes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>During the pilot phase, a total of 109 PPC conversations were conducted by telephone (48%), video (35%) and in-person (17%) across the four clinical settings. Participants were on average 80 ± 9 years old, white (89%), and male (94%). Multimorbidity (17 ± 8 chronic conditions per patient), cognitive impairment (39% of participants), and polypharmacy (15 ± 7 prescriptions per patient) were prevalent. During the evaluation phase, a total of 46 documented PPC conversations were reviewed. Clarifying preferences for life-sustaining treatment, modifying medications, and ordering durable medical equipment were the most common care alignment outcomes resulting from health priorities identification. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians responsible for continuing care alignment, and seven emergent themes were described, highlighting perceived barriers and promoters to utilizing the PPC framework.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>PPC is an Age-Friendly approach to addressing ‘what matters’ that is feasible to implement in various clinical settings and through multiple modalities, including telehealth. Continuing to expand the delivery of conversations about ‘what matters’ is essential for developing and scaling Age-Friendly care.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":"73 7","pages":"2229-2237"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://agsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jgs.19419","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Older adults with multiple chronic conditions face significant challenges with their health. Patient Priorities Care (PPC) is an Age-Friendly approach that explores ‘what matters’ by identifying values, care preferences, and health priorities, and aligning healthcare based on patients' health outcome goals.

Methods

Patient priorities care was implemented in four clinical settings (Hospital in Home, a transitional care case management program and in two embedded clinics within specialty care settings) within a large academically affiliated Veteran Affairs hospital system. During the pilot phase, the structured PPC approach was deployed through multiple modalities within specialty practices, including telehealth, and descriptive measures were evaluated. During the evaluation phase, clinical process measures related to care alignment were assessed, and clinicians' perspectives on PPC were explored through semi-structured interviews, which were then coded and analyzed for themes.

Results

During the pilot phase, a total of 109 PPC conversations were conducted by telephone (48%), video (35%) and in-person (17%) across the four clinical settings. Participants were on average 80 ± 9 years old, white (89%), and male (94%). Multimorbidity (17 ± 8 chronic conditions per patient), cognitive impairment (39% of participants), and polypharmacy (15 ± 7 prescriptions per patient) were prevalent. During the evaluation phase, a total of 46 documented PPC conversations were reviewed. Clarifying preferences for life-sustaining treatment, modifying medications, and ordering durable medical equipment were the most common care alignment outcomes resulting from health priorities identification. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians responsible for continuing care alignment, and seven emergent themes were described, highlighting perceived barriers and promoters to utilizing the PPC framework.

Conclusion

PPC is an Age-Friendly approach to addressing ‘what matters’ that is feasible to implement in various clinical settings and through multiple modalities, including telehealth. Continuing to expand the delivery of conversations about ‘what matters’ is essential for developing and scaling Age-Friendly care.

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
解决什么是重要的:一个试点研究和混合方法评估患者优先护理在四个临床设置。
背景:患有多种慢性疾病的老年人面临着健康方面的重大挑战。患者优先护理(PPC)是一种年龄友好型方法,通过确定价值观、护理偏好和健康优先事项,并根据患者的健康结果目标调整医疗保健,探索“什么是重要的”。方法:在一个大型学术附属退伍军人事务医院系统内的四个临床环境中实施患者优先护理(家庭医院,过渡性护理病例管理计划和专业护理环境中的两个嵌入式诊所)。在试点阶段,在包括远程保健在内的专业实践中通过多种方式部署了结构化的PPC方法,并对描述性措施进行了评估。在评估阶段,评估了与护理一致性相关的临床过程措施,并通过半结构化访谈探讨了临床医生对PPC的看法,然后对主题进行了编码和分析。结果:在试点阶段,在四个临床环境中,通过电话(48%)、视频(35%)和面对面(17%)共进行了109次PPC对话。参与者平均年龄为80±9岁,白人(89%),男性(94%)。多病(每名患者17±8种慢性病)、认知障碍(39%的参与者)和多药(每名患者15±7种处方)普遍存在。在评估阶段,共审查了46个记录在案的PPC对话。明确对维持生命治疗的偏好、修改药物和订购耐用医疗设备是确定卫生优先事项后最常见的护理调整结果。与负责持续护理协调的临床医生进行了九次半结构化访谈,并描述了七个紧急主题,强调了利用PPC框架的感知障碍和促进因素。结论:PPC是一种对老年人友好的解决“重要问题”的方法,可以在各种临床环境中通过多种方式实施,包括远程医疗。继续扩大关于“什么是重要的”的对话,对于发展和扩大“老龄友好型”护理至关重要。
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
10.00
自引率
6.30%
发文量
504
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) is the go-to journal for clinical aging research. We provide a diverse, interprofessional community of healthcare professionals with the latest insights on geriatrics education, clinical practice, and public policy—all supporting the high-quality, person-centered care essential to our well-being as we age. Since the publication of our first edition in 1953, JAGS has remained one of the oldest and most impactful journals dedicated exclusively to gerontology and geriatrics.
期刊最新文献
NOTICES Issue Information Cover A Thank You to JAGS Reviewers The Role of Brain Structure in Explaining Physical Functioning in Male Veterans With Impaired Kidney Function
×
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