Design, implementation and usability analysis of patient empowerment in ADLIFE project via patient reported outcome measures and shared decision making.

INTRODUCTION: This paper outlines the design, implementation, and usability study results of the patient empowerment process for chronic disease management, using Patient Reported Outcome Measurements and Shared Decision-Making Processes. BACKGROUND: The ADLIFE project aims to develop innovative, digital health solutions to support personalized, integrated care for patients with severe long-term conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and/or Chronic Heart Failure. Successful long-term management of patients with chronic conditions requires active patient self-management and a proactive involvement of patients in their healthcare and treatment. This calls for a patient-provider partnership within an integrated system of collaborative care, supporting self-management, shared-decision making, collection of patient reported outcome measures, education, and follow-up. METHODS: ADLIFE follows an outcome-based and patient-centered approach where PROMs represent an especially valuable tool to evaluate the outcomes of the care delivered. We have selected 11 standardized PROMs for evaluating the most recent patients' clinical context, enabling the decision-making process, and personalized care planning. The ADLIFE project implements the "SHARE approach' for enabling shared decision-making via two digital platforms for healthcare professionals and patients. We have successfully integrated PROMs and shared decision-making processes into our digital toolbox, based on an international interoperability standard, namely HL7 FHIR. A usability study was conducted with 3 clinical sites with 20 users in total to gather feedback and to subsequently prioritize updates to the ADLIFE toolbox. RESULTS: User satisfaction is measured in the QUIS7 questionnaire on a 9-point scale in the following aspects: overall reaction, screen, terminology and tool feedback, learning, multimedia, training material and system capabilities. With all the average scores above 6 in all categories, most respondents have a positive reaction to the ADLIFE PEP platform and find it easy to use. We have identified shortcomings and have prioritized updates to the platform before clinical pilot studies are initiated. CONCLUSIONS: Having finalized design, implementation, and pre-deployment usability studies, and updated the tool based on further feedback, our patient empowerment mechanisms enabled via PROMs and shared decision-making processes are ready to be piloted in clinal settings. Clinical studies will be conducted based at six healthcare settings across Spain, UK, Germany, Denmark, and Israel.

Evaluation of integrated care services in Catalonia: population-based and service-based real-life deployment protocols.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive assessment of integrated care deployment constitutes a major challenge to ensure quality, sustainability and transferability of both healthcare policies and services in the transition toward a coordinated service delivery scenario. To this end, the manuscript articulates four different protocols aiming at assessing large-scale implementation of integrated care, which are being developed within the umbrella of the regional project Nextcare (2016-2019), undertaken to foster innovation in technologically-supported services for chronic multimorbid patients in Catalonia (ES) (7.5 M inhabitants). Whereas one of the assessment protocols is designed to evaluate population-based deployment of care coordination at regional level during the period 2011-2017, the other three are service-based protocols addressing: i) Home hospitalization; ii) Prehabilitation for major surgery; and, iii) Community-based interventions for frail elderly chronic patients. All three services have demonstrated efficacy and potential for health value generation. They reflect different implementation maturity levels. While full coverage of the entire urban health district of Barcelona-Esquerra (520 k inhabitants) is the main aim of home hospitalization, demonstration of sustainability at Hospital Clinic of Barcelona constitutes the core goal of the prehabilitation service. Likewise, full coverage of integrated care services addressed to frail chronic patients is aimed at the city of Badalona (216 k inhabitants). METHODS: The population-based analysis, as well as the three service-based protocols, follow observational and experimental study designs using a non-randomized intervention group (integrated care) compared with a control group (usual care) with a propensity score matching method. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness of the interventions using a Quadruple aim approach is a central outcome in all protocols. Moreover, multi-criteria decision analysis is explored as an innovative method for health delivery assessment. The following additional dimensions will also be addressed: i) Determinants of sustainability and scalability of the services; ii) Assessment of the technological support; iii) Enhanced health risk assessment; and, iv) Factors modulating service transferability. DISCUSSION: The current study offers a unique opportunity to undertake a comprehensive assessment of integrated care fostering deployment of services at regional level. The study outcomes will contribute refining service workflows, improving health risk assessment and generating recommendations for service selection. TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03130283 (date released 04/06/2018), NCT03768050 (date released 12/05/2018), NCT03767387 (date released 12/05/2018).

Assessment of the Effectiveness, Socio-Economic Impact and Implementation of a Digital Solution for Patients with Advanced Chronic Diseases: The ADLIFE Study Protocol.

Due to population ageing and medical advances, people with advanced chronic diseases (ACD) live longer. Such patients are even more likely to face either temporary or permanent reduced functional reserve, which typically further increases their healthcare resource use and the burden of care on their caregiver(s). Accordingly, these patients and their caregiver(s) may benefit from integrated supportive care provided via digitally supported interventions. This approach may either maintain or improve their quality of life, increase their independence, and optimize the healthcare resource use from early stages. ADLIFE is an EU-funded project, aiming to improve the quality of life of older people with ACD by providing integrated personalized care via a digitally enabled toolbox. Indeed, the ADLIFE toolbox is a digital solution which provides patients, caregivers, and health professionals with digitally enabled, integrated, and personalized care, supporting clinical decisions, and encouraging independence and self-management. Here we present the protocol of the ADLIFE study, which is designed to provide robust scientific evidence on the assessment of the effectiveness, socio-economic, implementation, and technology acceptance aspects of the ADLIFE intervention compared to the current standard of care (SoC) when applied in real-life settings of seven different pilot sites across six countries. A quasi-experimental trial following a multicenter, non-randomized, non-concurrent, unblinded, and controlled design will be implemented. Patients in the intervention group will receive the ADLIFE intervention, while patients in the control group will receive SoC. The assessment of the ADLIFE intervention will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Digitally-Enabled Remote Care for Cancer Patients: Here to Stay.

OBJECTIVE: Digital Technology has become a pervasive, even ubiquitous part of our daily lives, affecting almost every aspect of our lives. Although the uptake of digital technology in health care has lagged behind other sectors, today, digital health is already becoming a cornerstone of developed health systems all over the world. Hence, the question is not whether we should adopt digital technology in health care, but how to do it most effectively. Digitally enabled remote care, or telemedicine has been available for many years but large-scale adoption has been slow. COVID-19 has caused a quantum leap in this area and particularly in the area of chronic disease and cancer care. The objective of this article is to briefly review the literature on the use of digitally enabled remote health care, in general and in cancer care specifically, with a focus on nursing practice, and to define the questions that need to be asked to guide effective implementation. DATA SOURCES: Review of the literature and the experience of the authors. CONCLUSION: There is increasing uptake of digitally enabled remote care. A growing body of evidence suggests that care delivered via telemedicine can be both safe and effective, in some cases with better outcomes than conventional face-to-face care. However, tele-oncology has not yet become standard practice. Digital health solutions need to be integrated into the patient pathway and in health care team practices for optimal supportive care in oncology in line with appropriate guidelines. Training education and formative evaluation are required to guide effective implementation. Formulating the right questions to ask is a critical starting point. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: There is very little debate today about the centrality of the role of the oncology nurse in coordinating care, guiding the patient, and providing ongoing support. Mobile technology provides an opportunity for monitoring and support through a minimally burdensome, maximally accessible approach. Moreover, smartphones and applications allow for repeated evaluation of adherence and symptoms in real time, ideally enhancing care for patients. However, even with the growing acceptance of "nursing telepractice", there are challenges and barriers to overcome to mainstream digital health into oncology nursing practice. Telemedicine services go much further than simply digitizing traditionally analogue health care processes and services, they fundamentally reorganize processes, procedures, and services. Thus, in addition to training and education, nursing tele-oncology demands a service transformation.

Proposals for enhanced health risk assessment and stratification in an integrated care scenario.

OBJECTIVES: Population-based health risk assessment and stratification are considered highly relevant for large-scale implementation of integrated care by facilitating services design and case identification. The principal objective of the study was to analyse five health-risk assessment strategies and health indicators used in the five regions participating in the Advancing Care Coordination and Telehealth Deployment (ACT) programme (http://www.act-programme.eu). The second purpose was to elaborate on strategies toward enhanced health risk predictive modelling in the clinical scenario. SETTINGS: The five ACT regions: Scotland (UK), Basque Country (ES), Catalonia (ES), Lombardy (I) and Groningen (NL). PARTICIPANTS: Responsible teams for regional data management in the five ACT regions. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We characterised and compared risk assessment strategies among ACT regions by analysing operational health risk predictive modelling tools for population-based stratification, as well as available health indicators at regional level. The analysis of the risk assessment tool deployed in Catalonia in 2015 (GMAs, Adjusted Morbidity Groups) was used as a basis to propose how population-based analytics could contribute to clinical risk prediction. RESULTS: There was consensus on the need for a population health approach to generate health risk predictive modelling. However, this strategy was fully in place only in two ACT regions: Basque Country and Catalonia. We found marked differences among regions in health risk predictive modelling tools and health indicators, and identified key factors constraining their comparability. The research proposes means to overcome current limitations and the use of population-based health risk prediction for enhanced clinical risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate the need for further efforts to improve both comparability and flexibility of current population-based health risk predictive modelling approaches. Applicability and impact of the proposals for enhanced clinical risk assessment require prospective evaluation.