Diagnostic uncertainty and decision-making in home-based primary care: A qualitative study of antibiotic prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating infection in home-based primary care is challenging, and these challenges may impact antibiotic prescribing. A refined understanding of antibiotic decision-making in this setting can inform strategies to promote antibiotic stewardship. This study investigated antibiotic decision-making by exploring the perspectives of clinicians in home-based primary care. METHODS: Clinicians from the Department of Veterans Affairs Home-Based Primary Care Program were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from June 2022 through September 2022 using a discussion guide. Transcripts were analyzed using grounded theory. The constant comparative method was used to develop a coding structure and to identify themes. RESULTS: Theoretical saturation was reached after 22 clinicians (physicians, n = 7; physician assistants, n = 2, advanced practice registered nurses, n = 13) from 19 programs were interviewed. Mean age was 48.5 ± 9.3 years, 91% were female, and 59% had ≥6 years of experience in home-based primary care. Participants reported uncertainty about the diagnosis of infection due to the characteristics of homebound patients (atypical presentations of disease, presence of multiple chronic conditions, presence of cognitive impairment) and the challenges of delivering medical care in the home (limited access to diagnostic testing, suboptimal quality of microbiological specimens, barriers to establishing remote access to the electronic health record). When faced with diagnostic uncertainty about infection, participants described many factors that influenced the decision to prescribe antibiotics, including those that promoted prescribing (desire to avoid hospitalization, pressure from caregivers, unreliable plans for follow-up) and those that inhibited prescribing (perceptions of antibiotic-associated harms, willingness to trial non-pharmacological interventions first, presence of caregivers who were trusted by clinicians to monitor symptoms). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians face the difficult task of balancing diagnostic uncertainty with many competing considerations during the treatment of infection in home-based primary care. Recognizing these issues provides insight into strategies to promote antibiotic stewardship in home care settings.

Acceptability and use of an online health priorities self-identification tool for older adults: A qualitative investigation.

Objective: To examine the use of a web-based, self-directed health priorities identification tool for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Methods: We recruited a gender- and racially-diverse, highly educated sample of older adults with MCCs to engage with our My Health Priorities tool, then complete a semi-structured interview. Thematic analysis was used to examine interview transcripts. Results: Twenty-one participants shared perspectives on the acceptability and use of the tool. Three themes (with eleven subthemes) were generated to describe: website user experience feedback, the content of the health priorities identification process, and the tool's capacity to empower communication and decision making. Conclusion: Participants found this tool acceptable and easy to use, describing a variety of benefits of the priorities self-identification process and offered suggestions for refinement and broader implementation. Older adults with limited internet navigation abilities or misconceptions about the self-directed process may benefit from clinicians clarifying the purpose of the process or initiating priorities-aligned discussions. Innovation: This novel tool can help older adults with MCCs define what matters most for their health and healthcare, informing a variety of health decisions. This tool may enable and motivate patients to lead health priorities decision-making discussions with clinicians and care partners.

Outcome Goals and Health Care Preferences of Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Importance: Older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) vary in their health outcome goals and the health care that they prefer to receive to achieve these goals. Objective: To describe the outcome goals and health care preferences of this population with MCCs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included participants in the Patient Priorities Care study who underwent health priorities identification from February 1, 2017, to August 31, 2018, in a primary care practice. Patients eligible to participate were 65 years or older, English speaking, and had at least 3 chronic conditions; in addition, they used at least 10 medications, saw at least 2 specialists, or had at least 2 emergency department visits or 1 hospitalization during the past year. Of 236 eligible patients, 163 (69%) agreed to participate in this study. Data were analyzed from August 1 to October 31, 2020. Exposures: Guided by facilitators, participants identified their core values, as many as 3 actionable and realistic outcome goals, health-related barriers to these goals, and as many as 3 helpful and 3 bothersome health care activities. Main Outcomes and Measures: Frequencies were ascertained for outcome goals and health care preferences. Preferences included health care activities (medications, health care visits, procedures, diagnostic tests, and self-management) reported as either helpful or bothersome. Results: Most of the 163 participants were White (158 [96.9%]) and women (109 [66.9%]), with a mean (SD) age of 77.6 (7.6) years. Of 459 goals, the most common encompassed meals and other activities with family and friends (111 [24.2%]), shopping (28 [6.1%]), and exercising (21 [4.6%]). Twenty individuals (12.3%) desired to live independently without specifying necessary activities. Of 312 barriers identified, the most common were pain (128 [41.0%]), fatigue (45 [14.4%]), unsteadiness (42 [13.5%]), and dyspnea (19 [6.1%]). Similar proportions of patients identified at least 1 medication that was helpful (130 [79.8%]) or bothersome (128 [78.5%]). Medications most commonly cited as helpful were pain medications, including nonopiods (36 of 55 users [65.5%]) and opioids (15 of 27 users [55.6%]); sleep medications (27 of 51 users [52.9%]); and respiratory inhalants (19 of 45 [42.2%]). Most often mentioned as bothersome were statins (25 of 97 users [25.8%]) and antidepressants (13 of 40 users [32.5%]). Thirty-two participants (19.6%) reported using too many medications. Health care visits were identified as helpful by 43 participants (26.4%); 15 (9.2%) reported too many visits. Procedures were named helpful by 38 participants (23.3%); 24 (14.7%) cited unwanted procedures. Among 48 participants with diabetes, monitoring of glucose levels was doable for 18 (37.5%) and too bothersome for 9 (18.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: Participants identified realistic and actionable goals while varying in health care activities deemed helpful or bothersome. The goals and health care preferences of more diverse populations must be explored. Previous work suggests that clinicians can use this information in decision-making.

Perspectives of Patients in Identifying Their Values-Based Health Priorities.

OBJECTIVES: Patient Health Priorities Identification (PHPI) is a values-based process in which trained facilitators assist older adults with multiple chronic conditions identify their health priorities. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients' perceptions of PHPI. DESIGN: Qualitative study using thematic analysis. SETTING: In-depth semistructured telephone and in-person interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two older adults who participated in the PHPI process. MEASUREMENTS: Open-ended questions about patient perceptions of the PHPI process, perceived benefits of the process, enablers and barriers to PHPI, and recommendations for process enhancement. RESULTS: Patient interviews ranged from 9 to 63 minutes (median = 20 min; interquartile range = 15-26). The mean age was 80 years (standard deviation = 7.96), 64% were female, and all patients identified themselves as white. Of the sample, 73% reported no caregiver involvement in their healthcare; 36% lived alone. Most patients felt able to complete the PHPI process with ease. Perceived benefits included increased knowledge and insight into disease processes and treatment options, patient activation, and enhanced communication with family and clinicians. Patients identified several factors that were both enablers and barriers to PHPI including facilitator characteristics, patient demographic and clinical characteristics, social support, relationships between the patient and their primary care provider, and the changing health priorities of the patient. Recommendations for process enhancement included more frequent and flexible facilitator contacts, selection of patients for participation based on specific patient characteristics, clarification of process aims and expectations, involvement of family, written reminders of established health priorities, short duration between facilitation and primary care provider follow-up, and the inclusion of health-related tasks in facilitation visits. CONCLUSIONS: Patients found the PHPI process valuable in identifying actionable health priorities and healthcare goals leading to enhanced knowledge, activation, and communication regarding their treatment options and preferences. PHPI may be useful for aligning the healthcare that patients receive with their values-based priorities.

Perspectives of Patients, Clinicians, and Health System Leaders on Changes Needed to Improve the Health Care and Outcomes of Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain perspectives of multiple stakeholders on contributors to inappropriate care for older adults with multiple chronic conditions. METHOD: Perspectives of 36 purposively sampled patients, clinicians, health systems, and payers were elicited. Data analysis followed a constant comparative method. RESULTS: Structural factors triggering burden and fragmentation include disease-based quality metrics and need to interact with multiple clinicians. The key cultural barrier identified is the assumption that "physicians know best." Inappropriate decision making may result from inattention to trade-offs and adherence to multiple disease guidelines. Stakeholders recommended changes in culture, structure, and decision making. Care options and quality metrics should reflect a focus on patients' priorities. Clinician-patient partnerships should reflect patients knowing their health goals and clinicians knowing how to achieve them. Access to specialty expertise should not require visits. DISCUSSION: Stakeholders' recommendations suggest health care redesigns that incorporate patients' health priorities into care decisions and realign relationships across patients and clinicians.

Perceptions of Hospital-Dependent Patients on Their Needs for Hospitalization.

In the United States, older adults account for a significant proportion of hospitalizations, and a subset become hospital-dependent, for reasons that are unclear. We conducted a qualitative study to explore these individuals' perspectives on their need for hospitalizations. Twenty patients hospitalized at an academic medical center underwent semistructured qualitative interviews. Criteria for selection included age 65 and older, at least three hospitalizations over six months, admission to the medical service at the time of the study, did not meet criteria for chronic critical illness, was not comfort measures only, and did not have a conservator. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and inductively analyzed. The major themes derived were the necessity and inevitability of hospitalizations ("You have to bring me in here"), feeling safe in the hospital ("It makes me feel more secure"), patients hospitalized despite having outside medical and social support ("I have everything"), and inadequate goals-of-care discussions ("It just doesn't occur to me"). Results suggested that candid discussions about health trajectories are needed to ensure hospitalization is consistent with the patient's realistic health priorities. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:450-453.