Preferences of women with a vulnerable health status towards nudging for adequate pregnancy preparation as investment in health of future generations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Women with a vulnerable health status, as determined by a low socioeconomic status and poor lifestyle behaviours, are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Offering tailored preconception lifestyle care can significantly help to improve pregnancy outcomes. We hypothesize that so-called 'nudges' can be a successful way of increasing the uptake of preconception lifestyle care. A nudge is a behavioural intervention that supports healthy choices by making them easier to choose. Nudging, however, raises many moral questions. Effectiveness and respect for autonomy are, among other criteria, required for a nudge to be morally permissible. In general, the target group knows best what they find permissible and what would motivate them to change their lifestyle. Therefore, this study - conducted in women with a vulnerable health status - aimed to identify their preferences towards a nudge, provided via a mobile application that aims to help them adopt healthy lifestyle behaviours by offering rewards.  METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with twelve women with a vulnerable health status. A framework approach was used to analyse the data. A thematic content analysis was conducted on five themes: (1) "Usefulness of an app as an integral information source", (2) "Permissibility and effects of offering rewards", (3) "Preferences regarding content", (4) "Preferences regarding type of rewards and system of allocation", and (5) "Barriers". RESULTS: Of the 12 participants, 11 deemed an app as integral information source concerning the preconception period useful. None of the participants objected to being nudged i.e., being rewarded for healthy behaviour. All participants stated that they would like the app to contain information on healthy nutrition and 8 participants wanted to know how to get pregnant quickly. Furthermore, participants stated that the freedom to choose the timing and content of the reward would increase the probability of successful behavioural change, and having to pay or contact a healthcare provider to access the app may prevent women using the app. CONCLUSIONS: These insights into the preferences of women with a vulnerable health status towards nudging will inform the design of an effective app-based nudge. This may help to improve prepregnancy health as investment in health of current and future generations.

Facilitators and barriers to the implementation of improved solid fuel cookstoves and clean fuels in low-income and middle-income countries: an umbrella review.

2·6 billion people rely on solid fuels for cooking or heating. Accelerating access to cleaner solutions is crucial to reduce the negative effects of solid fuel use. Despite abundant evidence on how to implement these solutions, previous attempts have been disappointing. An overview of the evidence is missing and the translation of the evidence into practice is poor. We conducted an umbrella review using eight databases to: consolidate evidence on the factors that influence the implementation of improved solid fuel cookstoves and clean fuels in low-income and middle-income countries; weigh the level of confidence in existing evidence; and develop two practical implementation strategy tools. We identified 31 relevant reviews (13 systematic reviews and 18 narrative reviews) that covered over 479 primary studies. We found 15 implementation factors supported by the highest level of evidence. Regarding improved solid fuel cookstoves, these factors included: cost; knowledge and beliefs about the innovation; and compatibility. For clean fuels these factors included: cost; knowledge and beliefs about the innovation; and external policy and incentives. The factors were synthesised into the Cleaner Cookstove Implementation Tool and the Clean Fuel Implementation Tool. These tools can be used to optimise the implementation of cleaner cooking solutions, thereby improving health, environmental, climate, and gender equity outcomes.

Digital tools/eHealth to support CKD self-management: A qualitative study of perceptions, attitudes and needs of patients and health care professionals in China.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence supports the potential effectiveness of electronic health (eHealth) self-management interventions in improving disease self-management skills and health outcomes of patients suffering from chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, current research on CKD eHealth self-management interventions has almost exclusively focused on high-income, western countries. OBJECTIVE: To inform the adaptation of a tailored eHealth self-management intervention for patients with CKD in China based on the Dutch Medical Dashboard (MD) intervention, we examined the perceptions, attitudes and needs of Chinese patients with CKD and health care professionals (HCPs) towards eHealth based (self-management) interventions in general and the Dutch MD intervention in specific. METHODS: We conducted a basic interpretive, cross-sectional qualitative study comprising semi-structured interviews with 11 patients with CKD and 10 HCPs, and 2 focus group discussions with 9 patients with CKD. This study was conducted in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University in China. Data collection continued until data saturation was reached. All data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a framework approach. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: (1) experience with eHealth in CKD (self-management), (2) needs for supporting CKD self-management with the use of eHealth, and (3) adaptation and implementation of the Dutch MD intervention in China. Both patients and HCPs had experience with and solely mentioned eHealth to 'inform, monitor and track' as potentially relevant interventions to support CKD self-management, not those to support 'interaction' and 'data utilization'. Factors reported to influence the implementation of CKD eHealth self-management interventions included information barriers (i.e. quality and consistency of the disease-related information obtained via eHealth), perceived trustworthiness and safety of eHealth sources, clinical compatibility and complexity of eHealth, time constraints and eHealth literacy. Moreover, patients and HCPs expressed that eHealth interventions should support CKD self-management by improving the access to reliable and relevant disease related knowledge and optimizing the timeliness and quality of patient and HCPs interactions. Finally, suggestions to adaptation and implementation of the Dutch MD intervention in China were mainly related to improving the intervention functionalities and content of MD such as addressing the complexity of the platform and compatibility with HCPs' workflows. CONCLUSIONS: The identified perceptions, attitudes and needs towards eHealth self-management interventions in Chinese settings should be considered by researchers and intervention developers to adapt a tailored eHealth self-management intervention for patients with CKD in China. In more detail, future research needs to engage in co-creation processes with vulnerable groups during eHealth development and implementation, increase eHealth literacy and credibility of eHealth (information resource), ensure eHealth to be easy to use and well-integrated into HCPs' workflows.

Revisiting the four core functions (4Cs) of primary care: operational definitions and complexities.

BACKGROUND: The four primary care (PC) core functions (the '4Cs', ie, first contact, comprehensiveness, coordination and continuity) are essential for good quality primary healthcare and their achievement leads to lower costs, less inequality and better population health. However, their broad definitions have led to variations in their assessment, in the innovations implemented to improve these functions and ultimately in their performance. OBJECTIVES: To update and operationalise the 4Cs' definitions by using a literature review and analysis of enhancement strategies, and to identify innovations that may lead to their enhancement. METHODS: Narrative, descriptive analysis of the 4Cs definitions, coming from PC international reports and organisations, to identify measurable features for each of these functions. Additionally, we performed an electronic search and analysis of enhancement strategies to improve these four Cs, to explore how the 4Cs inter-relate. RESULTS: Specific operational elements for first contact include modality of contact, and conditions for which PC should be approached; for comprehensiveness, scope of services and spectrum of population needs; for coordination, links between PC and higher levels of care and social/community-based services, and workforce managing transitions and for continuity, type, level and context of continuity. Several innovations like enrolment, digital health technologies and new or enhanced PC provider's roles, simultaneously influenced two or more of the 4Cs. CONCLUSION: Providing clear, well-defined operational elements for these 4Cs to measure their achievement and improve the way they function, and identifying the complex network of interactions among them, should contribute to the field in a way that supports efforts at practice innovation to optimise the processes and outcomes in PC.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 2: Exploring the ethical implications of its application in primary care practice.

Background: eHealth promises to increase self-management and personalised medicine and improve cost-effectiveness in primary care. Paired with these promises are ethical implications, as eHealth will affect patients' and primary care professionals' (PCPs) experiences, values, norms, and relationships.Objectives: We argue what ethical implications related to the impact of eHealth on four vital aspects of primary care could (and should) be anticipated.Discussion: (1) EHealth influences dealing with predictive and diagnostic uncertainty. Machine-learning based clinical decision support systems offer (seemingly) objective, quantified, and personalised outcomes. However, they also introduce new loci of uncertainty and subjectivity. The decision-making process becomes opaque, and algorithms can be invalid, biased, or even discriminatory. This has implications for professional responsibilities and judgments, justice, autonomy, and trust. (2) EHealth affects the roles and responsibilities of patients because it can stimulate self-management and autonomy. However, autonomy can also be compromised, e.g. in cases of persuasive technologies and eHealth can increase existing health disparities. (3) The delegation of tasks to a network of technologies and stakeholders requires attention for responsibility gaps and new responsibilities. (4) The triangulate relationship: patient-eHealth-PCP requires a reconsideration of the role of human interaction and 'humanness' in primary care as well as of shaping Shared Decision Making.Conclusion: Our analysis is an essential first step towards setting up a dedicated ethics research agenda that should be examined in parallel to the development and implementation of eHealth. The ultimate goal is to inspire the development of practice-specific ethical recommendations.

The socioeconomic burden of chronic lung disease in low-resource settings across the globe - an observational FRESH AIR study.

BACKGROUND: Low-resource settings are disproportionally burdened by chronic lung disease due to early childhood disadvantages and indoor/outdoor air pollution. However, data on the socioeconomic impact of respiratory diseases in these settings are largely lacking. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the chronic lung disease-related socioeconomic burden in diverse low-resource settings across the globe. To inform governmental and health policy, we focused on work productivity and activity impairment and its modifiable clinical and environmental risk factors. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional, observational FRESH AIR study in Uganda, Vietnam, Kyrgyzstan, and Greece. We assessed the chronic lung disease-related socioeconomic burden using validated questionnaires among spirometry-diagnosed COPD and/or asthma patients (total N = 1040). Predictors for a higher burden were studied using multivariable linear regression models including demographics (e.g. age, gender), health parameters (breathlessness, comorbidities), and risk factors for chronic lung disease (smoking, solid fuel use). We applied identical models per country, which we subsequently meta-analyzed. RESULTS: Employed patients reported a median [IQR] overall work impairment due to chronic lung disease of 30% [1.8-51.7] and decreased productivity (presenteeism) of 20.0% [0.0-40.0]. Remarkably, work time missed (absenteeism) was 0.0% [0.0-16.7]. The total population reported 40.0% [20.0-60.0] impairment in daily activities. Breathlessness severity (MRC-scale) (B = 8.92, 95%CI = 7.47-10.36), smoking (B = 5.97, 95%CI = 1.73-10.22), and solid fuel use (B = 3.94, 95%CI = 0.56-7.31) were potentially modifiable risk factors for impairment. CONCLUSIONS: In low-resource settings, chronic lung disease-related absenteeism is relatively low compared to the substantial presenteeism and activity impairment. Possibly, given the lack of social security systems, relatively few people take days off work at the expense of decreased productivity. Breathlessness (MRC-score), smoking, and solid fuel use are potentially modifiable predictors for higher impairment. Results warrant increased awareness, preventive actions and clinical management of lung diseases in low-resource settings from health policymakers and healthcare workers.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 1: Concepts, conditions and challenges.

Primary care is challenged to provide high quality, accessible and affordable care for an increasingly ageing, complex, and multimorbid population. To counter these challenges, primary care professionals need to take up new and innovative practices, including eHealth. eHealth applications hold the promise to overcome some difficulties encountered in the care of people with complex medical and social needs in primary care. However, many unanswered questions regarding (cost) effectiveness, integration with healthcare, and acceptability to patients, caregivers, and professionals remain to be elucidated. What conditions need to be met? What challenges need to be overcome? What downsides must be dealt with? This first paper in a series on eHealth in primary care introduces basic concepts and examines opportunities for the uptake of eHealth in primary care. We illustrate that although the potential of eHealth in primary care is high, several conditions need to be met to ensure that safe and high-quality eHealth is developed for and implemented in primary care. eHealth research needs to be optimized; ensuring evidence-based eHealth is available. Blended care, i.e. combining face-to-face care with remote options, personalized to the individual patient should be considered. Stakeholders need to be involved in the development and implementation of eHealth via co-creation processes, and design should be mindful of vulnerable groups and eHealth illiteracy. Furthermore, a global perspective on eHealth should be adopted, and eHealth ethics, patients' safety and privacy considered.

The role of context in implementation research for non-communicable diseases: Answering the 'how-to' dilemma.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding context and how this can be systematically assessed and incorporated is crucial to successful implementation. We describe how context has been assessed (including exploration or evaluation) in Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) implementation research projects focused on improving health in people with or at risk of chronic disease and how contextual lessons were incorporated into the intervention or the implementation process. METHODS: Using a web-based semi-structured questionnaire, we conducted a cross-sectional survey to collect quantitative and qualitative data across GACD projects (n = 20) focusing on hypertension, diabetes and lung diseases. The use of context-specific data from project planning to evaluation was analyzed using mixed methods and a multi-layered context framework across five levels; 1) individual and family, 2) community, 3) healthcare setting, 4) local or district level, and 5) state or national level. RESULTS: Project teams used both qualitative and mixed methods to assess multiple levels of context (avg. = 4). Methodological approaches to assess context were identified as formal and informal assessments, engagement of stakeholders, use of locally adapted resources and materials, and use of diverse data sources. Contextual lessons were incorporated directly into the intervention by informing or adapting the intervention, improving intervention participation or improving communication with participants/stakeholders. Provision of services, equipment or information, continuous engagement with stakeholders, feedback for personnel to address gaps, and promoting institutionalization were themes identified to describe how contextual lessons are incorporated into the implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: Context is regarded as critical and influenced the design and implementation of the GACD funded chronic disease interventions. There are different approaches to assess and incorporate context as demonstrated by this study and further research is required to systematically evaluate contextual approaches in terms of how they contribute to effectiveness or implementation outcomes.

Deprescribing Potentially Inappropriate Preventive Cardiovascular Medication: Barriers and Enablers for Patients and General Practitioners.

BACKGROUND: The use of preventive cardiovascular medication by patients with low cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is potentially inappropriate. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and enablers of deprescribing potentially inappropriate preventive cardiovascular medication experienced by patients and general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: A total of 10 GPs participating in the ECSTATIC trial (Evaluating Cessation of STatins and Antihypertensive Treatment In primary Care) audiotaped deprescribing consultations with low-CVD-risk patients. After initial conventional content analysis, 2 researchers separately coded all barriers to and enablers of deprescribing medication using framework analysis. We performed a within-case and cross-case analysis to explore barriers and enablers among both patients and GPs. RESULTS: Patients (n = 49) and GPs (n = 10) expressed barriers and enablers with regard to the appropriateness of the medication and the deprescribing process. A family history for CVD was identified as a barrier to deprescribing medication for both patients and GPs. Patients feared possible consequences of deprescribing and were influenced by the opinion of their GP. Additionally, a presumed disapproving opinion from specialists influenced the GPs' willingness to deprescribe medication. CONCLUSIONS: Patients appreciated discussing their doubts regarding deprescribing potentially inappropriate preventive cardiovascular medication. Furthermore, they acknowledged their GP's expertise and took their opinion toward deprescribing into consideration. The GPs' decisions to deprescribe were influenced by the low CVD risk of the patients, additional risk factors, and the alleged specialist's opinion toward deprescribing. We recommend deprescribing consultations to be patient centered, with GPs addressing relevant themes and probable consequences of deprescribing preventive cardiovascular medication.