Managing Multiple Chronic Conditions during COVID-19 Among Patients with Social Health Risks.

BACKGROUND: Optimal care for persons with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) requires primary and specialty care continuity, access to multiple providers, social risk assessment, and self-management support. The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly changed primary care delivery to increase reliance on telehealth and virtual care. We report on the experiences of individuals with MCC and their family caregivers on managing their health and receiving health care during the initial pandemic. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews with 30 patients (19 English speaking, 11 Spanish speaking) plus 9 accompanying care partners, who had 2+ primary care encounters between March 1, 2020, and November 30, 2020, 2+ chronic conditions, and 1 or more self-reported social risks. Questions focused on access to and experiences with care, roles for care partners, and self-management during the first 6 months of the pandemic. RESULTS: Participants experienced substantial changes in care delivery. The most commonly reported changes were a shift to more virtual relative to in-person care and shifting roles for care partners. Changes fostered new perspectives on self-management and an appreciation of personal resilience and self-reliance. Virtual care was an acceptable complement to in-person care, though not a substitute for periodic in-person visits. It was more acceptable for English speakers and with a usual provider. CONCLUSION: New models of care delivery that recognize patient and family resilience and resourcefulness, emphasize provider continuity, and combine virtual and in-person care may support self-management for individuals with MCC and social needs.

Supporting collaborative reflection on personal values and health.

People with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) need support to identify and articulate how their personal values relate to their health. We drew on previous research involving people with MCC to develop three prototypes for supporting reflection on relationships between values and health. We tested these prototypes in a qualitative study involving 12 people with MCC. We identified benefits and limitations to building on patients' existing visit-preparation practices; revealed varying levels of comfort with deep, exploratory reflection involving a facilitator; and found that reflection oriented toward the future could elicit hopeful attitudes and plans for change, while reflection on the past elicited strong resistance. We discuss these findings in relation to previous literature on designing for reflection in three areas: shifting between self-guided and facilitator-guided reflection, balancing between outcome-oriented and exploratory reflection, and exploring temporality in reflection.