An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the lived experience of people with multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries.

People living with multimorbidity (PLWMM) have multiple needs and require long-term personalised care, which necessitates an integrated people-centred approach to healthcare. However, people-centred care may risk being a buzzword in global health and cannot be achieved unless we consider and prioritise the lived experience of the people themselves. This study captures the lived experiences of PLWMM in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by exploring their perspectives, experiences, and aspirations.We analysed 50 semi-structured interview responses from 10 LMICs across three regions-South Asia, Latin America, and Western Africa-using an interpretative phenomenological analysis approach.The bodily, social, and system experiences of illness by respondents were multidirectional and interactive, and largely captured the complexity of living with multimorbidity. Despite expensive treatments, many experienced little improvements in their conditions and felt that healthcare was not tailored to their needs. Disease management involved multiple and fragmented healthcare providers with lack of guidance, resulting in repetitive procedures, loss of time, confusion, and frustration. Financial burden was exacerbated by lost productivity and extreme finance coping strategies, creating a vicious cycle. Against the backdrop of uncertainty and disruption due to illness, many demonstrated an ability to cope with their conditions and navigate the healthcare system. Respondents' priorities were reflective of their desire to return to a pre-illness way of life-resuming work, caring for family, and maintaining a sense of independence and normalcy despite illness. Respondents had a wide range of needs that required financial, health education, integrated care, and mental health support.In discussion with respondents on outcomes, it appeared that many have complementary views about what is important and relevant, which may differ from the outcomes established by clinicians and researchers. This knowledge needs to complement and be incorporated into existing research and treatment models to ensure healthcare remains focused on the human and our evolving needs.

Core outcome sets for trials of interventions to prevent and to treat multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries: the COSMOS study.

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. A core outcome set (COS) appropriate for the study of multimorbidity in LMIC contexts does not presently exist. This is 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 the prevention and treatment of multimorbidity 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 with representation from 33 countries (people with multimorbidity/caregivers, multimorbidity researchers, healthcare professionals, and policy makers). 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 six treatment outcomes were added from Delphi round one. Delphi round two surveys were completed by 95 of 132 round one 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 LMIC contexts. We recommend their inclusion in future trials to meaningfully advance the field of multimorbidity research in LMICs.

Prevalence of Overweight and Obesity in People With Severe Mental Illness: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Aims: 1) To determine the pooled prevalence of overweight and obesity in people with severe mental illness (SMI), overall and by type of SMI, geographical region, and year of data collection; and 2) to assess the likelihood of overweight and obesity, in people with SMI compared with the general population. Methods: PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify observational studies assessing the prevalence of obesity in adults with SMI. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed independently by two co-authors. Random effect estimates for the pooled prevalence of overweight and obesity and the pooled odds of obesity in people with SMI compared with the general population were calculated. Subgroup analyses were conducted for types of SMI, setting, antipsychotic medication, region of the world, country income classification, date of data collection and sex. We assessed publication bias and performed a series of sensitivity analyses, excluding studies with high risk of bias, with low sample size and those not reporting obesity according to WHO classification. Result: 120 studies from 43 countries were included, the majority were from high income countries. The pooled prevalence of obesity in people with SMI was 25.9% (95% C.I. = 23.3-29.1) and the combined pooled prevalence of overweight and obesity was 60.1% (95% C.I. = 55.8-63.1). Sub-Saharan Africa (13.0%, 95%C.I. = 6.7-25.1) and South Asia (17.7%, 95%C.I. = 10.5-28.5) had the lowest prevalence of obesity whilst North Africa and the Middle East (35.8%, 95%C.I. = 23.8-44.8) reported the highest prevalence. People with SMI were 3.04 more likely (95% C.I. = 2.42-3.82) to have obesity than the general population, but there was no difference in the prevalence of overweight. Women with schizophrenia were 1.44 (95% C.I. = 1.25-1.67) times more likely than men with schizophrenia to live with obesity; however, no gender differences were found among those with bipolar disorder. Conclusion: People with SMI have a markedly high prevalence and higher odds of obesity than the general population. This may contribute to the very high prevalence of physical health conditions and mortality in this group. People with SMI around the world would likely benefit from interventions to reduce and prevent obesity.