Quantifying reciprocal relationships between poverty and health: combining a causal loop diagram with longitudinal structural equation modelling.

BACKGROUND: This study takes on the challenge of quantifying a complex causal loop diagram describing how poverty and health affect each other, and does so using longitudinal data from The Netherlands. Furthermore, this paper elaborates on its methodological approach in order to facilitate replication and methodological advancement. METHODS: After adapting a causal loop diagram that was built by stakeholders, a longitudinal structural equation modelling approach was used. A cross-lagged panel model with nine endogenous variables, of which two latent variables, and three time-invariant exogenous variables was constructed. With this model, directional effects are estimated in a Granger-causal manner, using data from 2015 to 2019. Both the direct effects (with a one-year lag) and total effects over multiple (up to eight) years were calculated. Five sensitivity analyses were conducted. Two of these focus on lower-income and lower-wealth individuals. The other three each added one exogenous variable: work status, level of education, and home ownership. RESULTS: The effects of income and financial wealth on health are present, but are relatively weak for the overall population. Sensitivity analyses show that these effects are stronger for those with lower incomes or wealth. Physical capability does seem to have strong positive effects on both income and financial wealth. There are a number of other results as well, as the estimated models are extensive. Many of the estimated effects only become substantial after several years. CONCLUSIONS: Income and financial wealth appear to have limited effects on the health of the overall population of The Netherlands. However, there are indications that these effects may be stronger for individuals who are closer to the poverty threshold. Since the estimated effects of physical capability on income and financial wealth are more substantial, a broad recommendation would be that including physical capability in efforts that are aimed at improving income and financial wealth could be useful and effective. The methodological approach described in this paper could also be applied to other research settings or topics.

The Patient Centered Assessment Method (PCAM) for Action-Based Biopsychosocial Evaluation of Patient Needs: Validation and Perceived Value of the Dutch Translation.

The Patient Centered Assessment Method (PCAM) is an action-based tool that supports professionals to engage in a biopsychosocial assessment with patients and measure their needs. It is a promising tool for person-centered care. As the Netherlands lacks such a tool, a Dutch version was developed. Furthermore, we aimed to contribute to the relatively limited insights into the psychometric properties and value of the tool when used as part of a needs assessment in primary care. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to study construct validity and Cronbach's alpha was computed to assess reliability. Furthermore, we interviewed 15 primary care professionals who used the PCAM. It was confirmed that each PCAM domain measures a separate construct, informed by the biopsychosocial model. The tool showed adequate reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.83). Despite face validity concerns, the tool was mainly valued for measurement of patient needs and to facilitate action planning. Criticism of the PCAM pertained to a limited focus on the patient perspective, which is one of the crucial aspects of person-centered care. These rich, mixed-method insights can help to improve the value of the PCAM, as one of the few multifunctional tools to support professionals in holistic assessments.

Patients' perspectives on a new delivery model in primary care: A propensity score matched analysis of patient-reported outcomes in a Dutch cohort study.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: Primary Care Plus (PC+) focuses on the substitution of hospital-based medical care to the primary care setting without moving hospital facilities. The aim of this study was to examine whether population health and experience of care in PC+ could be maintained. Therefore, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and experienced quality of care from a patient perspective were compared between patients referred to PC+ and to hospital-based outpatient care (HBOC). METHODS: This cohort study included patients from a Dutch region, visiting PC+ or HBOC between December 2014 and April 2018. With patient questionnaires (T0, T1 and T2), the HRQoL and experience of care were measured. One-to-two nearest neighbour calliper propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control for potential selection bias. Outcomes were compared using marginal linear models and Pearson chi-square tests. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred thirteen PC+ patients were matched to 606 HBOC patients with well-balanced baseline characteristics (SMDs <0.1). Regarding HRQoL outcomes, no significant interaction terms between time and group were found (P > .05), indicating no difference in HRQoL development between the groups over time. Regarding experienced quality of care, no differences were found between PC+ and HBOC patients. Only travel time was significantly shorter in the HBOC group (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSION: Results show equal effects on HRQoL outcomes over time between the groups. Regarding experienced quality of care, only differences in travel time were found. Taken as a whole, population health and quality of care were maintained with PC+ and future research should focus more on cost-related outcomes.

Effect of Sustained-Release Morphine for Refractory Breathlessness in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease on Health Status: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Morphine is used as palliative treatment of chronic breathlessness in patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Evidence on respiratory adverse effects and health status is scarce and conflicting. Objective: To assess the effects of regular, low-dose, oral sustained-release morphine on disease-specific health status (COPD Assessment Test; CAT), respiratory outcomes, and breathlessness in patients with COPD. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to 10 mg of regular, oral sustained-release morphine or placebo twice daily for 4 weeks, with the possibility to increase to 3 times daily after 1 or 2 weeks. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Morphine for Treatment of Dyspnea in Patients With COPD (MORDYC) study was a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled study of a 4-week intervention. Patients were enrolled between November 1, 2016, and January 24, 2019. Participants were recruited in a pulmonary rehabilitation center and 2 general hospitals after completion of a pulmonary rehabilitation program. Outpatients with COPD and moderate to very severe chronic breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] breathlessness grades 2-4) despite optimal pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment were included. A total of 1380 patients were screened, 916 were ineligible, and 340 declined to participate. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were CAT score (higher scores represent worse health status) and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Paco2). Secondary outcome was breathlessness in the previous 24 hours (numeric rating scale). Data were analyzed by intention to treat. Subgroup analyses in participants with mMRC grades 3 to 4 were performed. Results: A total of 111 of 124 included participants were analyzed (mean [SD] age, 65.4 [8.0] years; 60 men [54%]). Difference in CAT score was 2.18 points lower in the morphine group (95% CI, -4.14 to -0.22 points; P = .03). Difference in Paco2 was 1.19 mm Hg higher in the morphine group (95% CI, -2.70 to 5.07 mm Hg; P = .55). Breathlessness remained unchanged. Worst breathlessness improved in participants with mMRC grades 3 to 4 (1.33 points lower in the morphine group; 95% CI, -2.50 to -0.16 points; P = .03). Five participants of 54 in the morphine group (9%) and 1 participant of 57 in the placebo group (2%) withdrew because of adverse effects. No morphine-related hospital admissions or deaths occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, regular, low-dose, oral sustained-release morphine for 4 weeks improved disease-specific health status in patients with COPD without affecting Paco2 or causing serious adverse effects. The worst breathlessness improved in participants with mMRC grades 3 to 4. A larger randomized clinical trial with longer follow-up in patients with mMRC grades 3 to 4 is warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02429050.

Person-centred and efficient care delivery for high-need, high-cost patients: primary care professionals' experiences.

BACKGROUND: High-need, high-cost (HNHC) patients, who typically have complex and long-term care demands, contribute considerably to the high work pressure of primary care professionals (PCPs). To improve patient as well as provider experiences, it is crucial to take into account the PCPs' perspective in designing health care strategies for HNHC patients. Therefore, this study aimed to create insight into PCPs' experienced barriers and possible solutions with regards to person-centred, efficient care delivery to HNHC patients. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using focus group interviews with PCPs at a Dutch primary care group. A semi-structured interview guide was developed for the interviews. Qualitative content analysis was employed deductively by means of a categorisation matrix. The matrix was based on the components retrieved from the SELFIE framework for integrated care for multi-morbidity. RESULTS: Forty-two PCPs participated in five focus group interviews. Discussed barriers and solutions were related to the core of the SELFIE framework (i.e. the individual and environment), and particularly four of the six health system components in the framework: service delivery, leadership & governance, workforce, and technologies & medical products. Many discussed barriers revolved around the complex biopsychosocial needs of HNHC patients: PCPs reported a lack of time (service delivery), insufficiently skilled PCPs (workforce), and inefficient patient information retrieval and sharing (technologies & medical products) as barriers to adequately meet the biopsychosocial needs of HNHC patients. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study suggests that primary care is currently insufficiently equipped to accommodate the complex biopsychosocial needs of HNHC patients. Therefore, it is firstly important to strengthen primary care internally, taking into account the experienced lack of time, the insufficient number of equipped PCPs and lack of inter-professional information retrieval and sharing. Secondly, PCPs should be supported in cooperating and communicating more efficiently with health services outside primary care to adequately deliver person-centred, efficient care. As a prerequisite, it is crucial to direct policy efforts at the design of a strong system of social and community services. In terms of future research, it is important to assess the feasibility and effects of re-designing primary care based on the provided recommendations.

Identifying subgroups of high-need, high-cost, chronically ill patients in primary care: A latent class analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Segmentation of the high-need, high-cost (HNHC) population is required for reorganizing care to accommodate person-centered, integrated care delivery. Therefore, we aimed to identify and characterize relevant subgroups of the HNHC population in primary care by using demographic, biomedical, and socioeconomic patient characteristics. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study within a Dutch primary care group, with a follow-up period from September 1, 2014 to August 31, 2017. Chronically ill patients were included in the HNHC population if they belonged to the top 10% of care utilizers and/or suffered from multimorbidity and had an above-average care utilization. In a latent class analysis, forty-one patient characteristics were initially used as potential indicators of heterogeneity in HNHC patients' needs. RESULTS: Patient data from 12 602 HNHC patients was used. A 4-class model was considered statistically and clinically superior. The classes were named according to the characteristics that were most dominantly present and distinctive between the classes (i.e. mainly age, household position, and source of income). Class 1 ('older adults living with partner') included 39.3% of patients, class 2 ('older adults living alone') included 25.5% of patients, class 3 ('middle-aged, employed adults with family') included 23.3% of patients, and class 4 ('middle-aged adults with social welfare dependency') included 11.9% of patients. Diabetes was the most common condition in all classes; the second most prevalent condition differed between osteoarthritis in class 1 (21.7%) and 2 (23.8%), asthma in class 3 (25.3%), and mood disorders in class 4 (23.1%). Furthermore, while general practitioner (GP) care utilization increased during the follow-up period in the classes of older adults, it remained relatively stable in the middle-aged classes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the HNHC population is heterogeneous, distinct subgroups with relatively homogeneous patterns of mainly demographic and socioeconomic characteristics can be identified. This calls for tailoring care and increased attention for social determinants of health.