A multidisciplinary self-management intervention among patients with multimorbidity and the impact of socioeconomic factors on results.

BACKGROUND: Limited studies exist on successful interventions for patients with multimorbidity. Even more limited is the knowledge on how socioeconomic factors have an impact on these interventions. The objective of this study was to analyze the effect of a multidisciplinary self-management intervention among patients with multimorbidity and the impact of socioeconomic factors on the results. METHODS: Secondary data analysis limited to multimorbid patients from of a pragmatic randomized trial evaluating an intervention that included patients (18 to 75 yrs.) from eight primary care practices in Quebec, Canada. The intervention included self-management support and patient-centred motivational approaches. Self-management was evaluated using the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ) which measures eight different domains. Changes in heiQ were analyzed following the three-month intervention with univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS: Participants with three or more chronic conditions (n = 281), randomized to intervention or control groups, were included in this analysis. The effect of the intervention on the likelihood of an improvement in self-management was significant in six heiQ domains in the univariate analysis (Odd ratio; 95% CI): Health-directed behaviour (2.03; 1.16-3.55), Emotional well-being (1.97; 1.05-3.68), Self-monitoring and insight (2.35; 1.02-5.40), Constructive attitudes and approaches (2.91; 1.45-5.84), Skill and technique acquisition (1.96; 1.13-3.39), and Health services navigation (2.52; 1.21-5.21). After controlling for age and gender the results remained essentially the same. After additional adjustments for family income, education and self-perceived financial status, the likelihood of an improvement was no longer significant in the domains Emotional well-being and Self-monitoring and insight. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention produced significant improvements in multimorbid patients for most domains of self-management. Socioeconomic factors had a minor impact on the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01319656.

Canadian guidelines for clinical practice: an analysis of their quality and relevance to the care of adults with comorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines have been the subject of much criticism in primary care literature partly due to potential conflicts in their implementation among patients with multiple chronic conditions. We assessed the relevance of selected Canadian clinical guidelines on chronic diseases for patients with comorbidity and examined their quality. METHODS: We selected 16 chronic medical conditions according to their frequency of occurrence, complexity of treatment, and pertinence to primary care. Recent Canadian clinical guidelines (2004 - 2009) on these conditions, published in English or French, were retrieved. We assessed guideline relevance to the care of patients with comorbidity with a tool developed by Boyd and colleagues. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. RESULTS: Regarding relevance, 56.2% of guidelines addressed treatment for patients with multiple chronic conditions and 18.8% addressed the issue for older patients. Fifteen guidelines (93.8%) included specific recommendations for patients with one concurrent condition; only three guidelines (18.8%) addressed specific recommendations for patients with two comorbid conditions and one for more than two concurrent comorbid conditions. Quality of the evaluated guidelines was good to very good in four out of the six domains measured using the AGREE instrument. The domains with lower mean scores were Stakeholder Involvement and Applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the Canadian guidelines examined is generally good, yet their relevance for patients with two or more chronic conditions is very limited and there is room for improvement in this respect.