RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Falls are a major and growing health care problem in older adults. A patient portal has the potential to provide older adults with fall-prevention advice to reduce fall-risk. However, to date, the needs and preferences regarding a patient portal in older people who have experienced falls have not been explored. This study assesses content preferences, potential barriers and facilitators with regard to using a patient portal, as perceived by older people who have experienced falls, and explores regional differences between European participants. METHODS: We conducted a survey of older adults attending an outpatient clinic due to a fall or fall-related injury, to explore their content preferences, perceived barriers, and facilitators with respect to a fall-prevention patient portal. Older adults (N = 121, 69.4% female, mean age: 77.9) were recruited from seven European countries. RESULTS: Almost two-thirds of respondents indicated they would use a fall-prevention patient portal. The portal would preferably include information on Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs (FRIDs), and ways to manage other related/relevant medical conditions. Facilitators included a user-friendly portal, with easily accessible information and physician recommendations to use the portal. The most-commonly-selected barriers were privacy issues and usage fees. A family member's recommendation to use the portal was seemingly more important for Southern and Eastern European participants compared to the other regions. CONCLUSION: The majority of older people with lived falls experience expressed an interest in a fall-prevention patient portal providing personalized treatment advice to prevent further falls. The results will be used to inform the development of a fall-prevention patient portal. The fall-prevention patient portal is intended to be used in addition to a consultation with a physician. Future research is needed to explore how to prevent falls in older patients who are not interested in a fall-prevention patient portal.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the contribution of implicit attitudes and associations towards conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs), alongside explicit measures, on medication-taking behaviour and clinical outcomes in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In this observational study, implicit attitudes (positive-negative) and health-related associations (health-sickness) were measured with Single Category Implicit Association Tests, whereas explicit outcomes were measured with a bipolar evaluative adjective scale and the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire Specific. The primary outcome of this study was medication-taking behaviour subjectively measured by self-report (i.e. validated Compliance Questionnaire on Rheumatology) and objectively measured with electronic drug monitors over a 3 month period. Spearman rank correlations were used to describe correlations between implicit and explicit outcomes. Nested linear regression models were used to assess the additional value of implicit measures over explicit measures and patient-, clinical-, and treatment-related characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1659 initially-invited patients, 254 patients with RA agreed to participate in this study. Implicit attitudes correlated significantly with necessity-concerns differential (NCD) scores (ρ = 0.13, P = 0.05) and disease activity scores (ρ = -0.17, P = 0.04), whereas implicit health-related associations correlated significantly with mean scores for explicitly reported health-related associations (ρ = 0.18, P = 0.004). Significant differences in age, number of DMARDs, biologic DMARD use, NCD-scores, and self-reported correct dosing were found between the four attitudinal profiles. Nested linear regression models revealed no additional value of implicit measures in explaining self-reported medication-taking behaviour and clinical outcomes, over and above all other variables. CONCLUSION: Implicit attitudes and associations had no additional value in explaining medication-taking behaviour and clinical outcomes over and above often used explicitly measured characteristics, attitudes and outcomes in the studied population. Only age and NCD scores contributed significantly when the dependent variable was correct dosing measured with self-report.
