Adherence to pharmacological therapy in patients with hypertension: protocol of a qualitative study by focus groups.

INTRODUCTION: Non-adherence to antihypertensive medication significantly contributes to inadequate blood pressure control. Regarding non-pharmacological interventions to improve medication adherence, the question remains of which interventions yield the highest efficacy.Understanding the complementary perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals can be valuable for designing strategies to enhance medication adherence. Few studies explored the perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals regarding medication adherence. None of them focused specifically on adherence to pharmacological therapy for hypertension in Portugal.Considering the high prevalence of non-adherence and its location-specific aspects, the priority should be identifying its barriers and developing tactics to address them.This study aims to gather the perspectives of patients with hypertension and healthcare professionals such as family doctors, nurses and community pharmacists from Portugal, regarding the most effective strategies to enhance antihypertensive medication adherence and to understand the factors contributing to non-adherence. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will conduct qualitative research through synchronous online focus groups of 6-10 participants. Some groups will involve patients with hypertension, while others will include family doctors, nurses and community pharmacists. The number of focus groups will depend on the achievement of theoretical saturation. A purposive sample will be used. Healthcare participants will be recruited via email, while patients will be recruited through their family doctors.The moderator will maintain neutrality while ensuring interactive contributions from every participant. Participants will be encouraged to express their opinions on the meeting summary. Meetings will be recorded and transcribed.Two researchers will perform content analyses using MAXQDA V.12 through comparative analyses and subsequent consensus. A third researcher will review the analyses. The results will be presented narratively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee of the University of Coimbra has approved this study with the number: CE-026/2021. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

Feasibility and effectiveness of a two-tiered intervention involving training and a new consultation model for patients with palliative care needs in primary care: A before-after study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that involving General Practitioners in the care of patients with palliative care needs may improve patient outcomes. AIM: To evaluate whether a two-tiered intervention involving training in palliative care and a new consultation model in primary care for patients with palliative care needs is feasible and could reduce patients' symptom burden. DESIGN: Before-after study including an internal pilot. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Nine general practitioners working in a health region in Portugal and 53 patients with palliative care needs from their patient lists were recruited. General Practitioners received training in palliative care and used a new primary palliative care consultation model, with medical consultations every 3 weeks for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was physical symptom burden, self-reported using the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) patient version (min.0-max.1000). Secondary outcomes included emotional symptoms (min.0-max.400) and communication/practical issues (min.0-max.300). RESULTS: Of the 35/53 patients completed the 12-week intervention (mean age 72.53 years, SD = 13.45; 54.7% female). All had advanced disease: one third had cancer (n = 13), one third had congestive heart failure (n = 12); others had chronic kidney disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. After the 12 weeks of intervention, there was a reduction in physical symptom burden [mean difference from baseline of 71.42 (95%CI 37.01-105.85) with a medium-large effect size (0.71], and in emotional symptom burden [mean difference 42.86 (95%CI 16.14-69.58), with a medium effect size (0.55)]. No difference was found for communication/practical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention can be effective in reducing patients' physical and emotional symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID - NCT05244590. Registration: 14th February 2022.

Non-pharmacological interventions in primary care to improve the quality of life of older patients with palliative care needs: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Our systematic review aimed to summarise non-pharmacological interventions applicable in primary care that improve the quality of life of older patients with palliative care needs. DESIGN: Systematic review. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was patients' quality of life. Secondary outcomes were symptoms relief and patients' well-being measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane and CINAHL up to October 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also handsearched abstract books of relevant congresses and scientific meetings in the last 5 years. Screening, data extraction and quality evaluation (Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) V.2.0 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)) were done independently by two reviewers, with disagreements solved by a third reviewer. Findings were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: We identified 4 RCTs, including 268 patients. One study used a broad criteria of palliative care needs ('progressive, life-threatening disease'), two studies focused on advanced cancer and one study on heart failure. The non-pharmacological interventions evaluated were advance care planning conducted by general practitioners (GPs); social worker-aided palliative care; online primary palliative care training for GPs and spiritual history taking by nurses and GPs. No intervention showed a statistically significant impact on quality of life and the evidence was low according to GRADE. CONCLUSION: The results highlight a dearth of evidence on what non-pharmacological interventions can be effectively done in primary care to improve the quality of life of older persons with palliative care needs. The results should be interpreted with caution, as the search more comprehensively covers interventions delivered by GPs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020154216.

The role of social support as a moderator between resilience and levels of burden of multimorbidity management among general practitioners: a cross-sectional study in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity management poses significant challenges for general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study is to analyse the role of resilience and social support on the burden experienced by GPs in managing patients with multiple health conditions in Portugal. METHODS: Cross-sectional quantitative study conducted among GPs in Portugal using an online questionnaire that included validated measurement tools: Questionnaire of Evaluation of Burden of Management of Multimorbidity in General and Family Medicine (SoGeMM-MGF), European Portuguese Version of the Resilience Scale (ER14), and the Oslo Social Support Scale-3 (OSSS-3) in Portuguese. A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the factors influencing the burden of managing multimorbidity. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-nine GPs were included, with 76.6% being female and a median age of 35 years. Most participants were specialists (66.9%) and had less than a decade of experience managing multimorbidity. Over 70% had not received specific training in multimorbidity. Female GPs and those with a higher proportion of multimorbid patients in the registries experienced higher burden levels. A multivariate regression model with moderation revealed that the effect of resilience on burden varied depending on the level of social support. Higher resilience was associated with higher burden in the "Poor Social Support" category, while it was associated with lower burden in the "Moderate Social Support" and "Strong Social Support" categories, although not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the importance of GPs' social support and resilience in managing the burden of multimorbidity, with poor social support potentially worsening the effects of high resilience.

COVID-19 or threat of a nuclear war in Europe? A cross-sectional study of anxiety levels in adults living in Portugal.

Background: Since 2019, Europe has experienced ongoing stressors with the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian-Ukrainian War, which have had social, financial, physical, and psychological impacts. Studies suggest that anxiety, fear, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and other psychological disorders are common in such situations, and there is a need for more research on the impact of the war on mental health in Portugal. The main goal of the present study was to assess the impact of the fear of COVID-19 and anxiety related to nuclear war on the general anxiety levels of adult individuals living in Portugal. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from May to July 2022 using an online questionnaire built on the Google Forms platform. Portuguese-speaking male and female individuals aged 18 years or older, who provided informed consent and agreed to participate, were included. The outcome variable was defined using the Portuguese version of the GAD-7 scale, while the main predictors were the FCV-19S and the NWA Scale in Portuguese. Linear and logistic regression models were used to test associations between predictors and outcome variable. Results: The study included 1,182 participants, with a mean age of 46.5 (±11.7) years, mostly women (80.6%). The global mean GAD-7 score was 5.8 (±4.5) points, and 17.9% of the participants scored above the 10-point cutoff. Higher scores were found in both the FCV-19S and the NWA scale among participants with anxiety, as measured by both a 10-point cutoff (p < 0.001), and GAD-7 scale mean scores (p < 0.001). The study showed that fear of COVID-19 [OR of 1.133 (95%CI: 1.097-1.170)] and, at a lesser extent, nuclear war anxiety [OR of 1.020 (95%CI, 1.009-1.031)] contribute to anxiety in the general population. This is also true for those with a personal history of anxiety, revealed by multiple regression. Discussion: This study contributes to the research on COVID-19's impact on anxiety and provides the first comprehensive assessment of nuclear war anxiety in Portugal. Results highlight the need for long-term care for anxiety, as prevalence is expected to increase due to the pandemic and war, even in non-conflict areas like Portugal.

Association of lifestyle and sociodemographic factors on multimorbidity: a cross-sectional study in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors are widely recognized as modifiers and major risk factors for non-communicable diseases. Previous studies on the prevalence of multimorbidity in Portugal predict an unfavourable reality. The aim of the present study was to analyse 1) the prevalence of multimorbidity in Portugal and 2) the association of individuals' lifestyles and sociodemographic factors with multimorbidity. METHODS: A cross-sectional, population-wide study was conducted on a representative sample of the general population of Portuguese adults aged ≥ 20 years. Categorical variables were described by their respective absolute and relative frequencies (n (%)). All variables with a p-value < 20% were included in the multiple logistic regression model. The variables were removed one by one in descending order of p-value (p) until the model contained only significant variables. The results are presented using the odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals. P-values ​​ < 5% were considered significant. RESULTS: The prevalence of multimorbidity was 48.9% (n = 436), and the odds of multimorbidity increased 4% (p < 0.001) for each year of increase in age. Participants with reasonable general health status had higher odds of multimorbidity (Odds ratio (OR) = 3.04; p < 0.001), and those with poor or very poor general health status had even higher odds (OR = 9.14; p < 0.001). Compared to those who never smoked, participants who quit smoking ≥ 1 year presented an increase of 91% (p = 0.005) in the odds of multimorbidity. Individuals with no good-quality sleep, non-moderate screen time, or non-moderate stress level had higher odds of multimorbidity (OR = 1.98; OR = 1.88; OR = 2.22, respectively. p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study presented a new approach to multimorbidity in Portugal. Population-based, multidimensional lifestyle interventions are needed. It seems necessary to optimize and adjust measures to prevent non-communicable diseases to improve health in Portugal. In the future, longitudinal studies will be an asset to reinforce and clarify these conclusions.

The impact on health-related quality of life of mixed mental and physical multimorbidity in adults aged 60 years and older: secondary analysis of primary care data.

Introduction: Given the number of patients with mental conditions who receive treatment within the primary care (PC) context, and the high prevalence of multimorbidity (especially in older people), there is a need to study mental-physical multimorbidity (MPM) in this population and context. This study sought to identify the impact on health-related quality of life (QoL) of MPM in adults aged 60 years and older. Material and methods: Secondary analysis of data derived from 251 primary health individuals. Data were collected via a sociodemographic and clinical questionnaire. Health-related QoL was assessed using the SF-12 instrument. Multiple linear regressions were performed for physical and mental health in MPM patients and in patients with physical-only multimorbidity. Results: Mean age of participants was 70.6 years; 57.8% were female. Quality of life was lower in MPM patients than in those with physical-only multimorbidity. Regarding MPM patients, female sex, 75 years and over, and low income were associated with worse physical health. Female sex was also associated with worse mental health. Conclusions: This study contributes to the global knowledge of MPM in older people, illuminates health-related QoL differences among MPM and physical-only multimorbidity patients, and highlights the importance of non-modifiable characteristics associated with deterioration of health-related QoL. Team collaboration between primary care physicians, psychiatrists (and other mental health providers), and social workers may be necessary to assess psychiatric and physical symptoms and provide for the care needs of older people with MPM.