How to Improve Healthcare for Patients with Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy in Primary Care: A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial of the MULTIPAP Intervention.

(1) Purpose: To investigate a complex MULTIPAP intervention that implements the Ariadne principles in a primary care population of young-elderly patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy and to evaluate its effectiveness for improving the appropriateness of prescriptions. (2) Methods: A pragmatic cluster-randomized clinical trial was conducted involving 38 family practices in Spain. Patients aged 65-74 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy were recruited. Family physicians (FPs) were randomly allocated to continue usual care or to provide the MULTIPAP intervention based on the Ariadne principles with two components: FP training (eMULTIPAP) and FP patient interviews. The primary outcome was the appropriateness of prescribing, measured as the between-group difference in the mean Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) score change from the baseline to the 6-month follow-up. The secondary outcomes were quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L), patient perceptions of shared decision making (collaboRATE), use of health services, treatment adherence, and incidence of drug adverse events (all at 1 year), using multi-level regression models, with FP as a random effect. (3) Results: We recruited 117 FPs and 593 of their patients. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the between-group difference for the mean MAI score change after a 6-month follow-up was -2.42 (95% CI from -4.27 to -0.59) and, between baseline and a 12-month follow-up was -3.40 (95% CI from -5.45 to -1.34). There were no significant differences in any other secondary outcomes. (4) Conclusions: The MULTIPAP intervention improved medication appropriateness sustainably over the follow-up time. The small magnitude of the effect, however, advises caution in the interpretation of the results given the paucity of evidence for the clinical benefit of the observed change in the MAI. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02866799.

Multimorbidity clusters among long-term breast cancer survivors in Spain: Results of the SURBCAN study.

The disease management of long-term breast cancer survivors (BCS) is hampered by the scarce knowledge of multimorbidity patterns. The aim of our study was to identify multimorbidity clusters among long-term BCS and assess their impact on mortality and health services use. We conducted a retrospective study using electronic health records of 6512 BCS from Spain surviving at least 5 years. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to identify groups of similar patients based on their chronic diagnoses, which were assessed using the Clinical Classifications Software. As a result, multimorbidity clusters were obtained, clinically defined and named according to the comorbidities with higher observed/expected prevalence ratios. Multivariable Cox and negative binomial regression models were fitted to estimate overall mortality risk and probability of contacting health services according to the clusters identified. 83.7% of BCS presented multimorbidity, essential hypertension (34.5%) and obesity and other metabolic disorders (27.4%) being the most prevalent chronic diseases at the beginning of follow-up. Five multimorbidity clusters were identified: C1-unspecific (29.9%), C2-metabolic and neurodegenerative (28.3%), C3-anxiety and fractures (9.7%), C4-musculoskeletal and cardiovascular (9.6%) and C5-thyroid disorders (5.3%). All clusters except C5-thyroid disorders were associated with higher mortality compared to BCS without comorbidities. The risk of mortality in C4 was increased by 64% (adjusted hazard ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.52-2.07). Stratified analysis showed an increased risk of death among BCS with 5 to 10 years of survival in all clusters. These results help to identify subgroups of long-term BCS with specific needs and mortality risks and to guide BCS clinical practice regarding multimorbidity.

Correction: Use of an Electronic Clinical Decision Support System in Primary Care to Assess Inappropriate Polypharmacy in Young Seniors With Multimorbidity: Observational, Descriptive, Cross-Sectional Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/14130.].

Use of real-world data to study health services utilisation and comorbidities in long-term breast cancer survivors (the SURBCAN study): study protocol for a longitudinal population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer has become a chronic disease due to survival improvement and the need to monitor the side effects of treatment and the disease itself. The aim of the SURBCAN study is to describe comorbidity, healthcare services use and adherence to preventive recommendations in long-term breast cancer survivors and to compare them with those in women without this diagnosis in order to improve and adapt the care response to this group of survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Population-based retrospective cohort study using real-world data from cancer registries and linked electronic medical records in five Spanish regions. Long-term breast cancer survivors diagnosed between 2000 and 2006 will be identified and matched by age and administrative health area with women without this diagnosis. Sociodemographic and clinical variables including comorbidities and variables on the use of health services between 2012 and 2016 will be obtained from databases in primary and hospital care. Health services use will be assessed through the annual number of visits to primary care professionals and to specialists and through annual imaging and laboratory tests. Factors associated with healthcare utilisation and comorbidities will be analysed using multilevel logistic regression models. Recruitment started in December 2018. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Parc de Salut Mar. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at national and international scientific conferences and at patient associations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This protocol is registered in Clinical Trials.gov (identifier: NCT03846999).

Use of an Electronic Clinical Decision Support System in Primary Care to Assess Inappropriate Polypharmacy in Young Seniors With Multimorbidity: Observational, Descriptive, Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is a global health problem that is usually associated with polypharmacy, which increases the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). PIP entails higher hospitalization rates and mortality and increased usage of services provided by the health system. Tools exist to improve prescription practices and decrease PIP, including screening tools and explicit criteria that can be applied in an automated manner. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the prevalence of PIP in primary care consultations among patients aged 65-75 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, detected by an electronic clinical decision support system (ECDSS) following the 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria, the European Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescription (STOPP), and the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START). METHODS: This was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. The sample included 593 community-dwelling adults aged 65-75 years (henceforth called young seniors), with multimorbidity (≥3 diseases) and polypharmacy (≥5 medications), who had visited their primary care doctor at least once over the last year at 1 of the 38 health care centers participating in the Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy in Primary Care (Multi-PAP) trial. Sociodemographic data, clinical and pharmacological treatment variables, and PIP, as detected by 1 ECDSS, were recorded. A multivariate logistic regression model with robust estimators was built to assess the factors affecting PIP according to the STOPP criteria. RESULTS: PIP was detected in 57.0% (338/593; 95% CI 53-61) and 72.8% (432/593; 95% CI 69.3-76.4) of the patients according to the STOPP criteria and the Beers Criteria, respectively, whereas 42.8% (254/593; 95% CI 38.9-46.8) of the patients partially met the START criteria. The most frequently detected PIPs were benzodiazepines (BZD) intake for more than 4 weeks (217/593, 36.6%) using the STOPP version 2 and the prolonged use of proton pump inhibitors (269/593, 45.4%) using the 2015 Beers Criteria. Being a woman (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% CI 1.01-2.01; P=.04), taking a greater number of medicines (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14-1.37; P<.04), working in the primary sector (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.25-2.93; P=.003), and being prescribed drugs for the central nervous system (OR 3.75, 95% CI 2.45-5.76; P<.001) were related to a higher frequency of PIP. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of PIP in primary care as detected by an ECDSS in community-dwelling young seniors with comorbidity and polypharmacy. The specific PIP criteria defined by this study are consistent with the current literature. This ECDSS can be useful for supervising prescriptions in primary health care consultations.

Use of an Electronic Clinical Decision Support System in Primary Care to Assess Inappropriate Polypharmacy in Young Seniors With Multimorbidity: Observational, Descriptive, Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is a global health problem that is usually associated with polypharmacy, which increases the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). PIP entails higher hospitalization rates and mortality and increased usage of services provided by the health system. Tools exist to improve prescription practices and decrease PIP, including screening tools and explicit criteria that can be applied in an automated manner. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the prevalence of PIP in primary care consultations among patients aged 65-75 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, detected by an electronic clinical decision support system (ECDSS) following the 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria, the European Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescription (STOPP), and the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START). METHODS: This was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. The sample included 593 community-dwelling adults aged 65-75 years (henceforth called young seniors), with multimorbidity (≥3 diseases) and polypharmacy (≥5 medications), who had visited their primary care doctor at least once over the last year at 1 of the 38 health care centers participating in the Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy in Primary Care (Multi-PAP) trial. Sociodemographic data, clinical and pharmacological treatment variables, and PIP, as detected by 1 ECDSS, were recorded. A multivariate logistic regression model with robust estimators was built to assess the factors affecting PIP according to the STOPP criteria. RESULTS: PIP was detected in 57.0% (338/593; 95% CI 53-61) and 72.8% (432/593; 95% CI 69.3-76.4) of the patients according to the STOPP criteria and the Beers Criteria, respectively, whereas 42.8% (254/593; 95% CI 38.9-46.8) of the patients partially met the START criteria. The most frequently detected PIPs were benzodiazepines (BZD) intake for more than 4 weeks (217/593, 36.6%) using the STOPP version 2 and the prolonged use of proton pump inhibitors (269/593, 45.4%) using the 2015 Beers Criteria. Being a woman (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% CI 1.01-2.01; P=.04), taking a greater number of medicines (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14-1.37; P<.001), working in the primary sector (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.25-2.93; P=.003), and being prescribed drugs for the central nervous system (OR 3.75, 95% CI 2.45-5.76; P<.001) were related to a higher frequency of PIP. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of PIP in primary care as detected by an ECDSS in community-dwelling young seniors with comorbidity and polypharmacy. The specific PIP criteria defined by this study are consistent with the current literature. This ECDSS can be useful for supervising prescriptions in primary health care consultations.

A primary healthcare information intervention for communicating cardiovascular risk to patients with poorly controlled hypertension: The Education and Coronary Risk Evaluation (Educore) study-A pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Uncertainty exists regarding the best way to communicate cardiovascular risk (CVR) to patients, and it is unclear whether the comprehension and perception of CVR varies according to the format used. The aim of the present work was to determine whether a strategy designed for communicating CVR information to patients with poorly controlled high blood pressure (HBP), but with no background of cardiovascular disease, was more effective than usual care in the control of blood pressure (BP) over the course of a year. METHODS: A pragmatic, two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled trial was performed. Consecutive patients aged 40-65 years, all diagnosed with HBP in the last 12 months, and all of whom showed poor control of their condition (systolic BP ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg), were recruited at 22 primary healthcare centres. Eleven centres were randomly assigned to the usual care arm, and 11 to the informative intervention arm (Educore arm). At the start of the study, the Educore arm subjects were shown the "low risk SCORE table", along with impacting images and information pamphlets encouraging the maintenance of good cardiovascular health. The main outcome variable measured was the control of HBP; the secondary outcome variables were SCORE table score, total plasma cholesterol concentration, use of tobacco, adherence to prescribed treatment, and quality of life. RESULTS: The study participants were 411 patients (185 in the Educore arm and 226 in the usual care arm). Multilevel logistic regression showed that, at 12 months, the Educore intervention achieved better control of HBP (OR = 1.57; 1.02 to 2.41). No statistically significant differences were seen between the two arms at 12 months with respect to the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, the Educore intervention was associated with better control of HBP after adjusting for age, baseline SBP and plasma cholesterol, at 12 months.

Effectiveness of an educational group intervention in primary healthcare for continued exclusive breast-feeding: PROLACT study.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization leads a global strategy to promote the initiation and maintenance of breast-feeding. Existing literature shows that education and supportive interventions, both for breast-feeding mothers as well as for healthcare professionals, can increase the proportion of women that use exclusive breast-feeding, however, more evidence is needed on the effectiveness of group interventions. METHODS: This study involves a community-based cluster randomised trial conducted at Primary Healthcare Centres in the Community of Madrid (Spain). The project aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an educational group intervention performed by primary healthcare professionals in increasing the proportion of mother-infant pairs using exclusive breastfeeding at six months compared to routine practice. The number of patients required will be 432 (216 in each arm). All mother-infant pairs using exclusive breastfeeding that seek care or information at healthcare centres will be included, as long as the infant is not older than four weeks, and the mother has used exclusive breastfeeding in the last 24 h and who gives consent to participate. The main response variable is mother-infant pairs using exclusive breast-feeding at six months. Main effectiveness will be analysed by comparing the proportion of mother-infant pairs using exclusive breast-feeding at six months between the intervention group and the control group. All statistical tests will be performed with intention-to-treat. The estimation will be adjusted using an explanatory logistic regression model. A survival analysis will be used to compare the two groups using the log-rank test to assess the effect of the intervention on the duration of breastfeeding. The control of potential confounding variables will be performed through the construction of Cox regression models. DISCUSSION: We must implement strategies with scientific evidence to improve the percentage of exclusive breast-feeding at six months in our environment as established by the WHO. Group education is an instrument used by professionals in Primary Care that favours the acquisition of skills and modification of already-acquired behaviour, all making it a potential method of choice to improve rates of exclusive breast-feeding in this period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under code number NCT01869920 (Date of registration: June 3, 2013).

Effectiveness of an intervention for improving drug prescription in primary care patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: study protocol of a cluster randomized clinical trial (Multi-PAP project).

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is associated with negative effects both on people's health and on healthcare systems. A key problem linked to multimorbidity is polypharmacy, which in turn is associated with increased risk of partly preventable adverse effects, including mortality. The Ariadne principles describe a model of care based on a thorough assessment of diseases, treatments (and potential interactions), clinical status, context and preferences of patients with multimorbidity, with the aim of prioritizing and sharing realistic treatment goals that guide an individualized management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention that implements the Ariadne principles in a population of young-old patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The intervention seeks to improve the appropriateness of prescribing in primary care (PC), as measured by the medication appropriateness index (MAI) score at 6 and 12 months, as compared with usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: Design: pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial. Unit of randomization: family physician (FP). Unit of analysis: patient. SCOPE: PC health centres in three autonomous communities: Aragon, Madrid, and Andalusia (Spain). POPULATION: patients aged 65-74 years with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic diseases) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs prescribed in ≥3 months). SAMPLE SIZE: n = 400 (200 per study arm). INTERVENTION: complex intervention based on the implementation of the Ariadne principles with two components: (1) FP training and (2) FP-patient interview. OUTCOMES: MAI score, health services use, quality of life (Euroqol 5D-5L), pharmacotherapy and adherence to treatment (Morisky-Green, Haynes-Sackett), and clinical and socio-demographic variables. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: primary outcome is the difference in MAI score between T0 and T1 and corresponding 95% confidence interval. Adjustment for confounding factors will be performed by multilevel analysis. All analyses will be carried out in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: It is essential to provide evidence concerning interventions on PC patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity, conducted in the context of routine clinical practice, and involving young-old patients with significant potential for preventing negative health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02866799.

The use of clinical guidelines for referral of patients with lesions suspicious for oral cancer may ease early diagnosis and improve education of healthcare professionals.

UNLABELLED: Early diagnosis and referral of oral cancer is essential. Successful implementation of clinical guidelines must include current practitioners and students. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of students at oral cancer screening and to assess the effectiveness of clinical referral guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: Fifth year dental students were randomly allocated to either control (n=19) or experimental groups (n = 18). Both received the customary training in oral diagnosis. The experimental group underwent a 2 hour workshop where the guidelines for the referral of suspicious lesions were discussed. Three months later, a set of 51 clinical cases including benign, malignant, and precancerous conditions/lesions were used to assess the screening ability of each subject. RESULTS: All 37 students entered the study. Sensitivity (control group) ranged from 16.7% to 66.7%; the experimental group scored from 16.7% to 83.3%. Fifty percent of the experimental students reached sensitivity values ≥ 62.5% (p = 0.01). Diagnostic specificity (control group) spanned from 80% to 93.3% (median = 50%); amongst experimental group it ranged from 82.2% to 97.8% (median = 92.8%); (p = 0.003). Concordance -control group- was X = 82.5 (SD = 3.2), and X = 88.2 (SD = 4.3) for the experimental, (p > 0.001). Cohen's kappa test was poor (K < 0.40) for the controls and moderate for the experimental group. The experimental group referred more oral cancers urgently (p = 0.002) and left less unreferred cancers (0.04). This group also referred more precancerous lesions/conditions urgently (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a clinical referral guideline at undergraduate level has proved valuable, under experimental conditions, to significantly increase diagnostic abilities of the examiners and thus to improve screening for oral cancer.

[Usefulness of a glaucoma and ocular hypertension screening strategy in primary care]. / Utilidad de una estrategia de cribado de hipertensión ocular y glaucoma en atención primaria.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of a glaucoma and intraocular hypertension screening strategy for new cases detected. To evaluate the acceptability of taking intra-ocular pressure (IOP) and the appearance of side effects. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, descriptive study. SETTING: An urban health centre and the ophthalmology clinic of its main hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2044 patients aged over 40, 63.5% women and 36.5% men, with a mean age of 61.23 (SD, 11.42). They were selected by consecutive sampling from patients who visited the health centre over a 9-month period. Subjects diagnosed with glaucoma, ocular hypertension (OH), conjunctivitis, or corneal pathology were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Taking of IOP with Tonopen XL in primary care. Subjects with IOP > or = 21 mm Hg were referred to ophthalmology. In these patients, IOP was measured with Goldmann, and patients with confirmed OH received ophthalmoscopy and campimetry. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of subjects with glaucoma, suspected glaucoma, and OH confirmed in ophthalmology. Positive predictive value (PPV) for OH. RESULTS: One hundred subjects with OH were detected (4.89%; 95% CI, 3.93%-5.85%), of whom 21 were diagnosed with glaucoma (1.04%; 95% CI, 0.57-1.49) and 10 with suspected glaucoma (0.49%; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82). The PPV for OH was 44.27%. The acceptability of the test was 98.09%. No patients presented with side-effects following the taking of their IOP. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy evaluated is useful in terms of the number of subjects with glaucoma and OH detected. The acceptability of taking IOP with Tonopen XL was high.