University of Leicester
Browse

Health outcome priorities of people with multiple long-term conditions using the outcome prioritisation tool in the UK: A survey study and feasibility assessment

Download (1.23 MB)
Background The outcome prioritisation tool (OPT) is a simple tool to ascertain the health outcome priorities of people with MLTC. Use of this tool in people aged under 65 years with MLTC has not previously been investigated. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of using the OPT in people with MLTC aged 45 years or above, in a multi-ethnic primary-care setting and describe the health outcome priorities of people with MLTC by age, clusters of long-term conditions and demographic factors, and to investigate any differences in prioritisation in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This was a multi-centre cross-sectional study using a questionnaire for online self-completion by people aged 45 years or above with MLTC in 19 primary care settings across the East Midlands, UK. Participants were asked to complete the OPT twice, first from their current perspective and second from their recollection of their priorities prior to COVID-19. Results The questionnaire was completed by 2,454 people with MLTC. The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the OPT was easy to complete, relevant to their healthcare and will be useful in communicating priorities to their doctor. Summary scores for the whole cohort of participants showed Keeping Alive and Maintaining Independence receiving the highest scores. Statistically significant differences in prioritisation by age, clusters of long-term conditions and employment status were observed, with respondents aged over 65 most likely to prioritise Maintaining independence, and respondents aged under 65 most likely to prioritise Keeping alive. There were no differences before or after COVID-19, or by ethnicity. Conclusions The OPT is feasible and acceptable for use to elicit the health outcome priorities of people with MLTC across both middle-aged and older age groups and in a UK setting. Individual factors could influence the priorities of people with MLTC and must be considered by clinicians during consultations.

History

Author affiliation

College of Life Sciences Cardiovascular Sciences Population Health Sciences

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

PLOS ONE

Volume

19

Issue

12

Pagination

e0301740

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

issn

1932-6203

eissn

1932-6203

Copyright date

2024

Available date

2025-03-11

Editors

Prazeres F

Spatial coverage

United States

Language

en

Deposited by

Professor Samuel Seidu

Deposit date

2025-02-01

Data Access Statement

Relevant summarised data are in the manuscript or Supporting information files. Raw data cannot be shared publicly as per data handling restrictions in view of potentially sensitive patient data being collected, set out as part of the ethical approval process. Ethical approval was received from Riverside REC Committee (Reference:20/LO/0570). Data requests may be sent to Riverside REC Committee and their contact email is riverside.rec@hra.nhs.uk.