ABSTRACT
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 investigated the feasibility of using the OPT in people with MLTC aged 45 years or above, in a multi-ethnic primary-care setting, to 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.
HIGHLIGHTS
Survey data from 2,454 patients with MLTC showed that keeping alive and maintaining independence were the top first-choice priorities from the health outcome priorities tool (OPT).
The health outcomes priorities differed by socio-demographics and clusters of long-term conditions.
There were no differences in health outcomes priorities before and during COVID-19.
OPT is easy and acceptable to implement in a health care setting in a broad patient group.
Translation of the OPT into different languages is recommended to address any potential language barrier for people with MLTC completing the OPT
Competing Interest Statement
KK is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands (ARC EM), NIHR Global Research Centre for Multiple Long-Term Conditions, MLTC Cross NIHR Collaboration (CNC) and the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). SS, YC, FZ and HS are supported by NIHR ARC EM.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
NHS Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Riverside REC Committee (Reference:20/LO/0570).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
ABBREVIATIONS
- CI
- Confidence Interval
- CRF
- Case Report Form
- CT
- Clinical Trials
- EC
- Ethics Committee (see REC)
- GP
- General Practice
- OPT
- Outcome prioritisation tool
- ICF
- Informed Consent Form
- MLTC
- Multiple long-term conditions
- NHS
- National Health Service
- NRES
- National Research Ethics Service
- PPI
- Patient and Public Involvement
- R&D
- NHS Trust R&D Department
- REC
- Research Ethics Committee
- SD
- Standard Deviation
- UK
- United Kingdom
