University of Leicester
Browse
e033445.full.pdf (513.6 kB)

Priorities of patients with multimorbidity and of clinicians regarding treatment and health outcomes: a systematic mixed studies review

Download (513.6 kB)
Version 2 2020-05-04, 13:52
Version 1 2020-05-04, 13:50
journal contribution
posted on 2020-05-04, 13:52 authored by H Sathanapally, M Sidhu, R Fahami, C Gillies, U Kadam, Melanie Davies, K Khunti, S Seidu

Objectives To identify studies that have investigated the health outcome and treatment priorities of patients with multimorbidity, clinicians or both, in order to assess whether the priorities of the two groups are in alignment, or whether a disparity exists between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians.

Design Systematic review.

Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2019 using a predefined search strategy, as well as reference lists containing any relevant articles, as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines.

Eligibility criteria We included studies reporting health outcome and treatment priorities of adult patients with multimorbidity, defined as suffering from two or more chronic conditions, or of clinicians in the context of multimorbidity or both. There was no restriction by study design, and studies using quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies were included.

Data synthesis We used a narrative synthesis approach to synthesise the quantitative findings, and a meta-ethnography approach to synthesise the qualitative findings.

Results Our search identified 24 studies for inclusion, which comprised 12 quantitative studies, 10 qualitative studies and 2 mixed-methods studies. Twelve studies reported the priorities of both patients and clinicians, 10 studies reported the priorities of patients and 2 studies reported the priorities of clinicians alone. Our findings have shown a mostly low level of agreement between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians. We found that prioritisation by patients was mainly driven by their illness experiences, while clinicians focused on longer-term risks. Preserving functional ability emerged as a key priority for patients from across our quantitative and qualitative analyses.

Conclusion Recognising that there may be a disparity in prioritisation and understanding the reasons for why this might occur, can facilitate clinicians in accurately eliciting the priorities that are most important to their patients and delivering patient-centred care.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42018076076.

Funding

HS is funded by the NIHR academic clinical fellowship award.

History

Citation

Sathanapally H, Sidhu M, Fahami R, et alPriorities of patients with multimorbidity and of clinicians regarding treatment and health outcomes: a systematic mixed studies reviewBMJ Open 2020;10:e033445. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033445

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

BMJ Open

Volume

10

Pagination

e033445

Publisher

BMJ Journals

issn

2044-6055

Acceptance date

2019-12-17

Copyright date

2020

Available date

2020-02-12

Publisher version

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/2/e033445

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC