Reviews for multimorbidity risk in people with inflammatory conditions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory rheumatological conditions (IRCs) are at high risk of developing other conditions including cardiovascular disease and mood disorders. AIM: To explore perspectives of people with IRCs and healthcare practitioners (HCPs) on the content and delivery of a review consultation aimed at identification and management of multiple long-term conditions. DESIGN & SETTING: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with people with IRCs and HCPs. METHOD: People with IRCs participated in individual semi-structured interviews by telephone or online platform. HCPs (including primary and secondary care clinicians) participated in online focus groups. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: 15 people with IRCs were interviewed; three focus groups with HCPs were conducted. Two main themes were identified: reflecting on the value of review consultations and what would a new review look like. Overall, people with IRCs and HCPs reflected that access to reviews is inequitable, leading to duplication of reviews and fragmentation in care. People with IRCs, at times, had difficulty conceptualising reviews, especially when discussing their future risk of conditions. People suggested that preparation before the healthcare review could align patient and HCP agendas as part of a flexible and person-centred discussion. CONCLUSION: Any review introduced for people with IRCs must move beyond a "tick-box" exercise. To gain maximum value from a review, preparation from both patient and HCP may be required alongside a person-centred approach whilst ensuring they are targeted at people most likely to benefit.

Variation in UK fracture liaison service consultation conduct and content before and during the COVID pandemic: results from the iFraP-D UK survey.

We conducted a survey of FLSs' consultation conduct and content which identified marked variation in whether FLS HCPs discussed osteoporosis medicine with patients. A review of service pro formas showed more content related to 'investigating' and 'intervening' than to 'informing'. We propose an expanded FLS typology and model FLS pro forma. PURPOSE: To investigate the nature of direct patient contact in fracture liaison service (FLS) delivery, examine the use and content of pro formas to guide information eliciting and sharing in FLS consultations, and determine service changes which were implemented as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An electronic survey of UK FLS healthcare practitioners (HCPs) was distributed through clinical networks, social media, and other professional networks. Participants were asked to upload service pro formas used to guide consultation content. Documentary analysis findings were mapped to UK FLS clinical standards. RESULTS: Forty-seven HCPs responded, providing data on 39 UK FLSs, over half of all 74 FLSs reporting to FLS-database. Results showed variation in which HCP made clinical decisions, whether medicines were discussed with patients or not, and in prescribing practice. Services were variably affected by COVID, with most reporting a move to more remote consulting. The documentary analysis of eight service pro formas showed that these contained more content related to 'investigating' and 'intervening', with fewer pro formas prompting the clinician to offer information and support (e.g., about coping with pain). Based on our findings we propose an expanded FLS typology and have developed a model FLS pro forma. CONCLUSION: There is marked variation in the delivery of services and content of consultations in UK FLSs including discussion about osteoporosis medications. Clinical standards for FLSs should clarify the roles of primary and secondary HCPs and the importance of holistic approaches to patient care.

Exploring the treatment burden of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug monitoring in people with rheumatoid arthritis.

Objectives: People with RA taking DMARDs require safety monitoring to identify potential side effects. The aim of this study was to explore the perspectives of patients and family members on DMARD monitoring and how the associated treatment burden could be minimized to optimize concordance and safety. Methods: Thirteen adults with RA on DMARDs and three family members participated in semi-structured telephone interviews between July 2021 and January 2022. Data were analysed using a framework method. Findings were discussed with a group of stakeholders to develop implications for practice. Results: Two main themes were identified: (i) making sense of drug monitoring; and (ii) work involved in drug monitoring. Participants perceived DMARDs as necessary to reduce symptoms, with drug monitoring providing an opportunity for a holistic assessment of wellbeing. Participants expressed a preference for face-to-face consultations, which allowed them to share their concerns, rather than remote, often transactional, care. The limited availability of convenient appointment times, travel requirements and parking increased the work involved for patients and family members. Conclusion: Drug monitoring was accepted as a necessity of DMARD treatment, but increased the work for people with RA related to organizing and attending appointments. The potential for treatment burden needs to be assessed proactively by clinicians when a DMARD is commenced. Where identified, strategies for minimizing the treatment burden can form part of a shared management plan, including the offer of regular contact with health professionals, with an emphasis on person-centred care.

Non-pharmacological interventions for the management of perinatal anxiety in primary care: a meta-review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal anxiety (PNA), anxiety that occurs during pregnancy and/or up to 12 months postpartum, is estimated to affect up to 21% of women, and may impact negatively on mothers, children, and their families. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has called for further research around non-pharmacological interventions in primary care for PNA. AIM: To summarise the available international evidence on non-pharmacological interventions for women with PNA in a primary care population. DESIGN & SETTING: A meta-review of systematic reviews (SRs) with narrative synthesis was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. METHOD: Systematic literature searches were conducted in 11 health-related databases up to June 2022. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were dual-screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria. A variety of study designs were included. Data were extracted about study participants, intervention design, and context. Quality appraisal was performed using the AMSTAR 2 tool (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews). A patient and public involvement group informed and contributed towards this meta-review. RESULTS: Twenty-four SRs were included in the meta-review. Interventions were grouped into the following six categories for analysis purposes: psychological therapies; mind-body activities; emotional support from healthcare professionals (HCPs); peer support; educational activities; and alternative or complementary therapies. CONCLUSION: In addition to pharmacological and psychological therapies, this meta-review has demonstrated that there are many more options available for women to choose from that might be effective to manage their PNA. Evidence gaps are present in several intervention categories. Primary care clinicians and commissioners should endeavour to provide patients with a choice of these management options, promoting individual choice and patient-centred care.

Incorporating FRAX into a nurse-delivered integrated care review: a multi-method qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory rheumatological conditions (IRCs) are at increased risk of common comorbidities including osteoporosis. AIM: To explore the barriers to and facilitators of implementing nurse-delivered fracture risk assessments in primary care, in the context of multimorbidity reviews for people with IRCs. DESIGN & SETTING: A multi-method qualitative study in primary care. METHOD: As part of a process evaluation in a pilot trial, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 patients, two nurses, and three GPs. Twenty-four patient-nurse INCLUDE review consultations were audiorecorded and transcribed. A framework analysis was conducted using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: Nurses reported positive views about the value of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and they felt confident to deliver the assessments following training. Barriers to implementation, as identified by TDF, particularly related to the domains of knowledge, skills, professional roles, and environmental context. GPs reported difficulty keeping up to date with osteoporosis guidelines and voiced differing opinions about whether fracture risk assessment was the role of primary or secondary care. Lack of integration of FRAX into IT systems was a barrier to use. GPs and nurses had differing views about the nurse role in communicating risk and acting on FRAX findings; for example, explanations of the FRAX result and action needed were limited. Patients reported limited understanding of FRAX outcomes. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that, with appropriate training including risk communication, practice nurses are likely to be confident to play a key role in conducting fracture risk assessments, but further work is needed to address the barriers identified.

Acceptability of, and preferences for, remote consulting during COVID-19 among older patients with two common long-term musculoskeletal conditions: findings from three qualitative studies and recommendations for practice.

BACKGROUND: Guidance for choosing face-to-face vs remote consultations (RCs) encourages clinicians to consider patient preferences, however, little is known about acceptability of, and preferences for RCs, particularly amongst patients with musculoskeletal conditions. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of, and preferences for, RC among patients with osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Three UK qualitative studies, exploring patient experiences of accessing and receiving healthcare, undertaken during the pandemic, with people with osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Study team members agreed a consistent approach to conduct rapid deductive analysis using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) on transcripts from each data set relating to RC, facilitated by group meetings to discuss interpretations. Findings from the three studies were pooled. RESULTS: Findings from 1 focus group and 64 interviews with 35 people were included in the analysis. Participants' attitudes to RC, views on fairness (ethicality) and sense-making (intervention coherence) varied according to their needs within the consultation and views of the pandemic. Some participants valued the reduced burden associated with RC, while others highly valued non-verbal communication and physical examination associated with face-to-face consults (opportunity costs). Some participants described low confidence (self-efficacy) in being able to communicate in RCs and others perceived RCs as ineffective, in part due to suboptimal communication. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptability of, and preferences for RC appear to be influenced by societal, healthcare provider and personal factors and in this study, were not condition-dependant. Remote care by default has the potential to exacerbate health inequalities and needs nuanced implementation.

The approach to managing perinatal anxiety: A mini-review.

Perinatal Anxiety (PNA) is defined as anxiety occurring during pregnancy and up to 12 months post-partum and is estimated to affect up to 20% of women. Risk factors for PNA are multiple and can be classed as psychological, social and biological. PNA negatively impacts on the mother, child and family. PNA is not well-recognized and diagnosis of PNA can be challenging for clinicians. There is currently no validated case-finding or diagnostic test available for PNA. PNA has been less extensively researched than perinatal depression (PND). Clinical guidance currently recommends pharmacological and psychological therapies for the management of women with PNA, however the limited research available suggests that other intervention types may also be effective with some evidence on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in primary care for PNA. This article provides a mini-review of PNA, summarizing current evidence around PNA including risk factors, the impact of PNA, the process of diagnosis of PNA and focussing predominantly on available management options for PNA.

Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments: a protocol for Development of a consultation intervention (iFraP-D).

INTRODUCTION: Prevention of fragility fractures, a source of significant economic and personal burden, is hindered by poor uptake of fracture prevention medicines. Enhancing communication of scientific evidence and elicitation of patient medication-related beliefs has the potential to increase patient commitment to treatment. The Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) programme aims to develop and evaluate a theoretically informed, complex intervention consisting of a computerised web-based decision support tool, training package and information resources, to facilitate informed decision-making about fracture prevention treatment, with a long-term aim of improving informed treatment adherence. This protocol focuses on the iFraP Development (iFraP-D) work. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The approach to iFraP-D is informed by the Medical Research Council complex intervention development and evaluation framework and the three-step implementation of change model. The context for the study is UK fracture liaison services (FLS), which enact secondary fracture prevention. An evidence synthesis of clinical guidelines and Delphi exercise will be conducted to identify content for the intervention. Focus groups with patients, FLS clinicians and general practitioners and a usual care survey will facilitate understanding of current practice, and investigate barriers and facilitators to change. Design of the iFraP intervention will be informed by decision aid development standards and theories of implementation, behaviour change, acceptability and medicines adherence. The principles of co-design will underpin all elements of the study through a dedicated iFraP community of practice including key stakeholders and patient advisory groups. In-practice testing of the prototype intervention will inform revisions ready for further testing in a subsequent pilot and feasibility randomised trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from North West-Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (19/NW/0559). Dissemination and knowledge mobilisation will be facilitated through national bodies and networks, publications and presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: researchregistry5041.

Comparative differences in musculoskeletal pain consultation and analgesic prescription for people with dementia: a UK-wide matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Painful musculoskeletal conditions are common in older adults; however, pain identification, assessment, and management are reported to be suboptimal for people with dementia. Adequate pain management is an integral aspect of care for people with dementia to prevent or delay negative outcomes, such as behavioural and psychological changes, emergency department attendance, and premature nursing home admission. This study aims to examine musculoskeletal consultations and analgesic prescriptions for people with dementia compared with those for people without dementia. A dementia cohort (n = 36,582) and matched cohort were identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (a UK-wide primary care database). Period prevalence for musculoskeletal consultations and analgesic prescriptions was described, and logistic regression applied to estimate associations between dementia and musculoskeletal consultation or analgesic prescription from the time of dementia diagnosis to 5 years after diagnosis. People with dementia had a consistently (over time) lower prevalence and odds of musculoskeletal consultation and analgesic prescription compared with people without dementia. The evidence suggests that pain management may be suboptimal for people with dementia. These results highlight the need to increase awareness of pain and use better methods of pain assessment, evaluation of treatment response, and acceptable and effective management for people with dementia, in primary care.

Developing a model Fracture Liaison Service consultation with patients, carers and clinicians: a Delphi survey to inform content of the iFraP complex consultation intervention.

Fracture Liaison Services are recommended to deliver best practice in secondary fracture prevention. This modified Delphi survey, as part of the iFraP (Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug Treatments) study, provides consensus regarding tasks for clinicians in a model Fracture Liaison Service consultation. PURPOSE: The clinical consultation is of pivotal importance in addressing barriers to treatment adherence. The aim of this study was to agree to the content of the 'model Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) consultation' within the iFraP (Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug Treatments) study. METHODS: A Delphi survey was co-designed with patients and clinical stakeholders using an evidence synthesis of current guidelines and content from frameworks and theories of shared decision-making, communication and medicine adherence. Patients with osteoporosis and/or fragility fractures, their carers, FLS clinicians and osteoporosis specialists were sent three rounds of the Delphi survey. Participants were presented with potential consultation content and asked to rate their perception of the importance of each statement on a 5-point Likert scale and to suggest new statements (Round 1). Lowest rated statements were removed or amended after Rounds 1 and 2. In Round 3, participants were asked whether each statement was 'essential' and percentage agreement calculated; the study team subsequently determined the threshold for essential content. RESULTS: Seventy-two, 49 and 52 patients, carers and clinicians responded to Rounds 1, 2 and 3 respectively. One hundred twenty-two statements were considered. By Round 3, consensus was reached, with 81 statements deemed essential within FLS consultations, relating to greeting/introductions; gathering information; considering therapeutic options; eliciting patient perceptions; establishing shared decision-making preferences; sharing information about osteoporosis and treatments; checking understanding/summarising; and signposting next steps. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi consensus exercise has summarised for the first time patient/carer and clinician consensus regarding clearly defined tasks for clinicians in a model FLS consultation.

Public priorities for osteoporosis and fracture research: results from a focus group study.

Four focus groups were conducted with members of the public to identify important areas for future osteoporosis research. Participants identified priorities to increase public awareness of osteoporosis, reduce delays in diagnosis, improve communication between healthcare providers and to improve follow-up and information provision about causes of osteoporosis, medication harms and prognosis. PURPOSE: Patients and the public must be involved in setting research agendas to ensure relevant and impactful questions are prioritised. This study aimed to understand what people living with osteoporosis and fragility fractures felt was important to research, to inform the content of a national survey on research priorities in this area. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with members of the public with experience of osteoporosis or fragility fractures. The topic guide was co-developed with a patient and public involvement research user group, and explored participants' experiences of osteoporosis including diagnosis, management and effect upon their lives, what aspects of their ongoing care was most important to them and what about their care or condition could be improved. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: A total of twenty-three participants were recruited to four focus groups. Analysis identified two main themes: challenges in living with osteoporosis and healthcare services for osteoporosis. Information needs was a further cross-cutting theme. Participants called for increased public awareness of osteoporosis and wanted healthcare services to address conflicting messages about diet, exercise and medication. Participants described long delays in diagnosis, poor communication between primary and secondary care and the need for structured follow-up as important areas for future research to address. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study provide an understanding of research priorities from the perspective of patients and the public, have informed the content of a national survey and have implications for patient education, health services research and policy.

The challenge of pain identification, assessment, and management in people with dementia: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Painful conditions are common in older adults, including people with dementia. The symptoms associated with dementia (for example, diminished language capacity, memory impairment, and behavioural changes), however, may lead to the suboptimal identification, assessment, and management of pain. Research has yet to qualitatively explore pain management for community-dwelling people with dementia. AIM: To explore pain identification, assessment, and management for community-dwelling people with dementia. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study was undertaken, set in England. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews took place with people with dementia, family caregivers, GPs, and old-age psychiatrists. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with eight people with dementia, nine family caregivers, nine GPs, and five old-age psychiatrists. Three themes were identified that related to pain identification and assessment: gathering information to identify pain; the importance of knowing the person; and the use of pain assessment tools. A further three themes were identified that related to pain management: non-drug strategies; concerns related to analgesic medications; and responsibility of the caregiver to manage pain. CONCLUSION: Identifying and assessing the pain experienced by people with dementia was challenging. Most people with dementia, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals supported non-drug strategies to manage pain. The minimal concerns associated with non-drug strategies contrasted the multifactorial concerns associated with analgesic treatment for people with dementia. Given the complexity of pain identification, assessment, and management, primary care should work together with family caregivers and community services, with case finding for pain being considered in all assessment and management plans.

Pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the current literature on pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia. METHOD: A comprehensive systematic search of the literature with narrative synthesis was conducted. Eight major bibliographic databases were searched in October 2018. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were sequentially screened. Standardised data extraction and quality appraisal exercises were conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included in the review, 11 reporting findings on pain assessment tools or methods and 27 reporting findings on treatments for pain. In regard to pain assessment, a large proportion of people with moderate to severe dementia were unable to complete a self-report pain instrument. Pain was more commonly reported by informal caregivers than the person with dementia themselves. Limited evidence was available for pain-focused behavioural observation assessment. In regard to pain treatment, paracetamol use was more common in community-dwelling people with dementia compared with people without dementia. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used less. For stronger analgesics, community-dwelling people with dementia were more likely to receive strong opioids (eg, fentanyl) than people without dementia. CONCLUSION: This review identifies a dearth of high-quality studies exploring pain assessment and/or treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia, not least into non-pharmacological interventions. The consequences of this lack of evidence, given the current and projected prevalence of the disease, are very serious and require urgent redress. In the meantime, clinicians should adopt a patient- and caregiver-centred, multi-dimensional, longitudinal approach to pain assessment and pain treatment for this population.