对初级保健中多病的复杂干预:可行性研究。

Journal of comorbidity Pub Date : 2020-07-30 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2235042X20935312
Hanne Birke, Ramune Jacobsen, Alexandra Br Jønsson, Ann Dorrit Kristiane Guassora, Marie Walther, Thomas Saxild, Jannie T Laursen, Maria Helena Dominquez Vall-Lamora, Anne Frølich
{"title":"对初级保健中多病的复杂干预:可行性研究。","authors":"Hanne Birke,&nbsp;Ramune Jacobsen,&nbsp;Alexandra Br Jønsson,&nbsp;Ann Dorrit Kristiane Guassora,&nbsp;Marie Walther,&nbsp;Thomas Saxild,&nbsp;Jannie T Laursen,&nbsp;Maria Helena Dominquez Vall-Lamora,&nbsp;Anne Frølich","doi":"10.1177/2235042X20935312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the feasibility of a patient-centered complex intervention for multimorbidity (CIM) based on general practice in collaboration with community health-care centers and outpatient clinics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, diagnoses of two or more of three chronic conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic heart conditions), and a hospital contact during the previous year. The CIM included extended consultations and nurse care manager support in general practice and intensified cross-sectorial collaboration. Elements included a structured care plan based on patients' care goals, coordination of services, and, if appropriate, shifting outpatient clinic visits to general practice, medication review, referral to rehabilitation, and home care. The acceptability dimension of feasibility was assessed with validated questionnaires, observations, and focus groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight patients were included (mean age 72.2 (standard deviation (SD) 9.5, range 52-89); 23 (48%) were men. Thirty-seven patients had two diseases; most commonly COPD and cardiovascular disease (46%), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular disease (23%), and COPD and diabetes (15%). Eleven (23%) patients had all three conditions. Focus group interviews with patients with multimorbidity identified three main themes: (1) lack of care coordination existed across health-care sectors before the CIM, (2) extended consultations provided better care coordination, and (3) patients want to be involved in planning their treatment and care. In focus groups, health-care professionals discussed two main themes: (1) patient-centered care and (2) culture and organizational change. Completion rates for questionnaires were 98% (47/48).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients and health-care professionals found the CIM acceptable.</p>","PeriodicalId":92071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comorbidity","volume":"10 ","pages":"2235042X20935312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2235042X20935312","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A complex intervention for multimorbidity in primary care: A feasibility study.\",\"authors\":\"Hanne Birke,&nbsp;Ramune Jacobsen,&nbsp;Alexandra Br Jønsson,&nbsp;Ann Dorrit Kristiane Guassora,&nbsp;Marie Walther,&nbsp;Thomas Saxild,&nbsp;Jannie T Laursen,&nbsp;Maria Helena Dominquez Vall-Lamora,&nbsp;Anne Frølich\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2235042X20935312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the feasibility of a patient-centered complex intervention for multimorbidity (CIM) based on general practice in collaboration with community health-care centers and outpatient clinics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, diagnoses of two or more of three chronic conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic heart conditions), and a hospital contact during the previous year. The CIM included extended consultations and nurse care manager support in general practice and intensified cross-sectorial collaboration. Elements included a structured care plan based on patients' care goals, coordination of services, and, if appropriate, shifting outpatient clinic visits to general practice, medication review, referral to rehabilitation, and home care. The acceptability dimension of feasibility was assessed with validated questionnaires, observations, and focus groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight patients were included (mean age 72.2 (standard deviation (SD) 9.5, range 52-89); 23 (48%) were men. Thirty-seven patients had two diseases; most commonly COPD and cardiovascular disease (46%), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular disease (23%), and COPD and diabetes (15%). Eleven (23%) patients had all three conditions. Focus group interviews with patients with multimorbidity identified three main themes: (1) lack of care coordination existed across health-care sectors before the CIM, (2) extended consultations provided better care coordination, and (3) patients want to be involved in planning their treatment and care. In focus groups, health-care professionals discussed two main themes: (1) patient-centered care and (2) culture and organizational change. Completion rates for questionnaires were 98% (47/48).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients and health-care professionals found the CIM acceptable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":92071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of comorbidity\",\"volume\":\"10 \",\"pages\":\"2235042X20935312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2235042X20935312\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of comorbidity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2235042X20935312\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comorbidity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2235042X20935312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的:评估与社区卫生保健中心和门诊诊所合作,以患者为中心的多病综合干预(CIM)的可行性。方法:纳入标准为年龄≥18岁,诊断为三种慢性疾病(糖尿病、慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)和慢性心脏病)中的两种或两种以上,并且在过去一年中与医院有过接触。国际监测中心包括在全科实践中扩大咨询和护理管理人员支持,并加强跨部门合作。要素包括基于患者护理目标的结构化护理计划,服务协调,如果适当的话,将门诊改为全科门诊,药物审查,转介到康复和家庭护理。可行性的可接受性维度通过有效的问卷调查、观察和焦点小组进行评估。结果:纳入48例患者,平均年龄72.2岁(标准差(SD) 9.5,范围52-89);23例(48%)为男性。37名患者同时患有两种疾病;最常见的是慢性阻塞性肺病和心血管疾病(46%),其次是糖尿病和心血管疾病(23%),以及慢性阻塞性肺病和糖尿病(15%)。11例(23%)患者同时存在这三种情况。对多重疾病患者的焦点小组访谈确定了三个主要主题:(1)在CIM之前,各个卫生保健部门之间缺乏护理协调;(2)扩展咨询提供了更好的护理协调;(3)患者希望参与规划他们的治疗和护理。在焦点小组中,卫生保健专业人员讨论了两个主要主题:(1)以患者为中心的护理和(2)文化和组织变革。问卷完成率为98%(47/48)。结论:患者和卫生保健专业人员认为CIM是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
A complex intervention for multimorbidity in primary care: A feasibility study.

Aim: To assess the feasibility of a patient-centered complex intervention for multimorbidity (CIM) based on general practice in collaboration with community health-care centers and outpatient clinics.

Methods: Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, diagnoses of two or more of three chronic conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic heart conditions), and a hospital contact during the previous year. The CIM included extended consultations and nurse care manager support in general practice and intensified cross-sectorial collaboration. Elements included a structured care plan based on patients' care goals, coordination of services, and, if appropriate, shifting outpatient clinic visits to general practice, medication review, referral to rehabilitation, and home care. The acceptability dimension of feasibility was assessed with validated questionnaires, observations, and focus groups.

Results: Forty-eight patients were included (mean age 72.2 (standard deviation (SD) 9.5, range 52-89); 23 (48%) were men. Thirty-seven patients had two diseases; most commonly COPD and cardiovascular disease (46%), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular disease (23%), and COPD and diabetes (15%). Eleven (23%) patients had all three conditions. Focus group interviews with patients with multimorbidity identified three main themes: (1) lack of care coordination existed across health-care sectors before the CIM, (2) extended consultations provided better care coordination, and (3) patients want to be involved in planning their treatment and care. In focus groups, health-care professionals discussed two main themes: (1) patient-centered care and (2) culture and organizational change. Completion rates for questionnaires were 98% (47/48).

Conclusions: Patients and health-care professionals found the CIM acceptable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Experiences of older primary care patients with multimorbidity and their caregivers in navigating the healthcare system: A qualitative study protocol. Bi-directional association between depression and HF: An electronic health records-based cohort study. The association between clusters of chronic conditions and psychological well-being in younger and older people-A cross-sectional, population-based study from the Lolland-Falster Health Study, Denmark. The complexity of caregiving for community-living older adults with multiple chronic conditions: A qualitative study. Synergistic effects of hip/knee osteoarthritis and comorbidities on mobility and self-care limitations among older adults: Cross-sectional analysis of the Oxford pain, Activity and Lifestyle study.
×
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:481959085
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