25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Multimorbidity and Patient Safety Incidents in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Multimorbidity is increasingly prevalent and represents a major challenge in primary care. Patients with multimorbidity are potentially more likely to experience safety incidents due to the complexity of their needs and frequency of their interactions with health services. However, rigorous syntheses of the link between patient safety incidents and multimorbidity are not available. This review examined the relationship between multimorbidity and patient safety incidents in primary care.

          Methods

          We followed our published protocol (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007434). Medline, Embase and CINAHL were searched up to May 2015. Study design and quality were assessed. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for the associations between multimorbidity and two categories of patient safety outcomes: ‘active patient safety incidents’ (such as adverse drug events and medical complications) and ‘precursors of safety incidents’ (such as prescription errors, medication non-adherence, poor quality of care and diagnostic errors). Meta-analyses using random effects models were undertaken.

          Results

          Eighty six relevant comparisons from 75 studies were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated that physical-mental multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for ‘active patient safety incidents’ (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.40 to 3.38) and ‘precursors of safety incidents’ (OR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.36 to 2.03). Physical multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for active safety incidents (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.45 to 1.80) but was not associated with precursors of safety incidents (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.13). Statistical heterogeneity was high and the methodological quality of the studies was generally low.

          Conclusions

          The association between multimorbidity and patient safety is complex, and varies by type of multimorbidity and type of safety incident. Our analyses suggest that multimorbidity involving mental health may be a key driver of safety incidents, which has important implication for the design and targeting of interventions to improve safety. High quality studies examining the mechanisms of patient safety incidents in patients with multimorbidity are needed, with the goal of promoting effective service delivery and ameliorating threats to safety in this group of patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The prevalence of comorbid depression in adults with diabetes: a meta-analysis.

          To estimate the odds and prevalence of clinically relevant depression in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Depression is associated with hyperglycemia and an increased risk for diabetic complications; relief of depression is associated with improved glycemic control. A more accurate estimate of depression prevalence than what is currently available is needed to gauge the potential impact of depression management in diabetes. MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases and published references were used to identify studies that reported the prevalence of depression in diabetes. Prevalence was calculated as an aggregate mean weighted by the combined number of subjects in the included studies. We used chi(2) statistics and odds ratios (ORs) to assess the rate and likelihood of depression as a function of type of diabetes, sex, subject source, depression assessment method, and study design. A total of 42 eligible studies were identified; 20 (48%) included a nondiabetic comparison group. In the controlled studies, the odds of depression in the diabetic group were twice that of the nondiabetic comparison group (OR = 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.2) and did not differ by sex, type of diabetes, subject source, or assessment method. The prevalence of comorbid depression was significantly higher in diabetic women (28%) than in diabetic men (18%), in uncontrolled (30%) than in controlled studies (21%), in clinical (32%) than in community (20%) samples, and when assessed by self-report questionnaires (31%) than by standardized diagnostic interviews (11%). The presence of diabetes doubles the odds of comorbid depression. Prevalence estimates are affected by several clinical and methodological variables that do not affect the stability of the ORs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Primary care clinicians' experiences with treatment decision making for older persons with multiple conditions.

            Clinicians are caring for an increasing number of older patients with multiple diseases in the face of uncertainty concerning the benefits and harms associated with guideline-directed interventions. Understanding how primary care clinicians approach treatment decision making for these patients is critical to the design of interventions to improve the decision-making process. Focus groups were conducted with 40 primary care clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) in academic, community, and Veterans Affairs-affiliated primary care practices. Participants were given open-ended questions about their approach to treatment decision making for older persons with multiple medical conditions. Responses were organized into themes using qualitative content analysis. The participants were concerned about their patients' ability to adhere to complex regimens derived from guideline-directed care. There was variability in beliefs regarding, and approaches to balancing, the benefits and harms of guideline-directed care. There was also variability regarding how the participants involved patients in the process of decision making, with clinicians describing conflicts between their own and their patients' goals. The participants listed a number of barriers to making good treatment decisions, including the lack of outcome data, the role of specialists, patient and family expectations, and insufficient time and reimbursement. The experiences of practicing clinicians suggest that they struggle with the uncertainties of applying disease-specific guidelines to their older patients with multiple conditions. To improve decision making, they need more data, alternative guidelines, approaches to reconciling their own and their patients' priorities, the support of their subspecialist colleagues, and an altered reimbursement system.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Potentially inappropriate prescribing and adverse health outcomes in community dwelling older patients.

              This study aimed to determine the association between potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and health related outcomes [adverse drug events (ADEs), health related quality of life (HRQOL) and hospital accident and emergency (A&E) visits] in older community dwelling patients. A retrospective cohort study of 931 community dwelling patients aged ≥70 years in 15 general practices in Ireland in 2010. PIP was defined by the Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP). ADEs were measured by patient self-report and medical record for the previous 6 months and reviewed by two independent clinicians. HRQOL was measured by the EQ-5D. A&E visits were measured by patients' medical records and self-report. Multilevel logistic, linear and Poisson regression examined how ADEs, HRQOL and A&E visits varied by PIP after adjusting for patient and practice level covariates: socioeconomic status, co-morbidity, number of drug classes and adherence. The overall prevalence of PIP was 42% (n = 377). Patients with ≥2 PIP indicators were twice as likely to have an ADE (adjusted OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.02, 4.83, P < 0.05), have a significantly lower mean HRQOL utility (adjusted coefficient -0.09, SE 0.02, P < 0.001) and nearly a two-fold increased risk in the expected rate of A&E visits (adjusted IRR 1.85; 95% CI 1.32, 2.58, P < 0.001). The number of drug classes and adherence were also significantly associated with these same adverse health outcomes. Reducing PIP in primary care may help lower the burden of ADEs, its associated health care use and costs and enhance quality of life in older patients. © 2013 The British Pharmacological Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                28 August 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 8
                : e0135947
                Affiliations
                [1 ]NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
                [2 ]NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (Greater Manchester PSTRC), Manchester Academic Health Science Centre University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
                [3 ]NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care—Greater Manchester and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
                Institute of Tropical Medicine (NEKKEN), Nagasaki University, JAPAN
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The project outlined in this article may be considered to be affiliated to the work of the NIHR CLAHRC Greater Manchester. The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR or the Department of Health.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: MP PB AE. Performed the experiments: MP JS SCS RA PB. Analyzed the data: MP PB PC. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: MP JS AE PC SCS RA PB. Wrote the paper: MP PB PC.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-09262
                10.1371/journal.pone.0135947
                4552710
                26317435
                67d1ca3f-022d-4c46-b455-f4974e348738
                Copyright @ 2015

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                : 2 March 2015
                : 29 July 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 13, Tables: 2, Pages: 30
                Funding
                This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GM PSTRC) http://www.population-health.manchester.ac.uk/primary-care-patient-safety/ and the National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research (NIHR SPCR) http://www.spcr.nihr.ac.uk/. Peter Coventry was partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (NIHR CLAHRC) Greater Manchester. The funders had no role in the design of the study, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article