Marjan van den Akker

Multimorbidity in General Practice: Prevalence, Incidence, and Determinants of Co-Occurring Chronic and Recurrent Diseases

Increasing numbers of people are found to have two or more diseases at the same time, which is termed multimorbidity. We studied the prevalence, incidence, and determinants of multimorbidity and the statistical clustering of chronic and recurrent diseases in a general practice setting. Prevalence of multimorbidity increased with all age groups from 10% in the 0-19-year-old age group up to 78% in subjects aged 80 and over. Increasing age, lower level of education, and public health insurance were related to the occurrence of morbidity, but even more strongly to the occurrence and degree of multimorbidity. The one-year incidence of multimorbidity (the new occurrence of two or more diseases in one year) was related to increasing age, public health insurance, and the presence of prevalent diseases at baseline. Statistical clustering of diseases was stronger than expected, especially among the younger subjects.

Comorbidity or multimorbidity: what's in a name? A review of literature

Aim: Comorbidity is increasingly prevalent. Moreover, many different definitions and interpretations of this phenomenon are used. Because of its social and clinical significance, it is important th...

Multimorbidity's many challenges

Time to focus on the needs of this vulnerable and growing population

Higher incidence of depression preceding the onset of Parkinson's disease: a register study.

Although case histories of depression preceding Parkinsons disease (PD) point to a possible pathophysiological relationship between these two disorders, there is as yet no epidemiological evidence to support this view. We compared the incidence of depression in patients later diagnosed with PD with that of a matched control population. Using data from an ongoing general practice‐based register study, the lifetime incidence of depressive disorder was calculated for patients until their diagnosis of PD and compared with that of a matched control population from the same register. At the time of analysis, the register held information on 105,416 people. At the time of their diagnosis of PD, 9.2% of the patients had a history of depression, compared with 4.0% of the control population (χ2 = 22.388, df = 1, P < 0.001). The odds ratio for a history of depression for these patients was 2.4 (95% CI: 2.1–2.7). We concluded that the higher incidence of depression in patients who were later diagnosed with PD supports the hypothesis of there being a biological risk factor for depression in these patients.

Multimorbidity patterns: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to identify studies on patterns of associative multimorbidity, defined as the nonrandom association between diseases, focusing on the main methodological features of the studies and the similarities among the detected patterns. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Studies were identified through MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic database searches from their inception to June 2012 and bibliographies. RESULTS The final 14 articles exhibited methodological heterogeneity in terms of the sample size, age and recruitment of study participants, the data source, the number of baseline diseases considered, and the statistical procedure used. A total of 97 patterns composed of two or more diseases were identified. Among these, 63 patterns were composed of three or more diseases. Despite the methodological variability among studies, this review demonstrated relevant similarities for three groups of patterns. The first one comprised a combination of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, the second one was related with mental health problems, and the third one with musculoskeletal disorders. CONCLUSION The existence of associations beyond chance among the different diseases that comprise these patterns should be considered with the aim of directing future lines of research that measure their intensity, clarify their nature, and highlight the possible causal underlying mechanisms.

Problems in determining occurrence rates of multimorbidity

This article describes methodological decisions that have to be made when studying multiple pathology and presents appropriate analytical techniques. The main question of this article is: how can comorbidity and multimorbidity be operationalized with respect to the number and type of diseases studied, and which analytic approaches are available for the evaluation of multiple pathology? Choices regarding the number and type of diseases studied have great impact on the observed incidence and prevalence rates of comorbidity and multimorbidity. These rates are largely dependent on age, sex, and other determinants. In addition to crude descriptive measures, odds ratios and relative risks can be used to study comorbidity, whereas multimorbidity can be studied using observed/expected ratios. While basic analyses of comorbidity can be performed using standard statistical packages, two additional programs were developed for the analysis of the distribution of multimorbidity and statistically unexpected comorbidity, respectively. As some analyses are addressing multicomparisons, external validity testing is recommended.

The Ariadne principles: how to handle multimorbidity in primary care consultations

Multimorbidity is a health issue mostly dealt with in primary care practice. As a result of their generalist and patient-centered approach, long-lasting relationships with patients, and responsibility for continuity and coordination of care, family physicians are particularly well placed to manage patients with multimorbidity. However, conflicts arising from the application of multiple disease oriented guidelines and the burden of diseases and treatments often make consultations challenging. To provide orientation in decision making in multimorbidity during primary care consultations, we developed guiding principles and named them after the Greek mythological figure Ariadne. For this purpose, we convened a two-day expert workshop accompanied by an international symposium in October 2012 in Frankfurt, Germany. Against the background of the current state of knowledge presented and discussed at the symposium, 19 experts from North America, Europe, and Australia identified the key issues of concern in the management of multimorbidity in primary care in panel and small group sessions and agreed upon making use of formal and informal consensus methods. The proposed preliminary principles were refined during a multistage feedback process and discussed using a case example. The sharing of realistic treatment goals by physicians and patients is at the core of the Ariadne principles. These result from i) a thorough interaction assessment of the patient’s conditions, treatments, constitution, and context; ii) the prioritization of health problems that take into account the patient’s preferences – his or her most and least desired outcomes; and iii) individualized management realizes the best options of care in diagnostics, treatment, and prevention to achieve the goals. Goal attainment is followed-up in accordance with a re-assessment in planned visits. The occurrence of new or changed conditions, such as an increase in severity, or a changed context may trigger the (re-)start of the process. Further work is needed on the implementation of the formulated principles, but they were recognized and appreciated as important by family physicians and primary care researchers.Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/222.

Learning and Caring in Communities of Practice: Using Relationships and Collective Learning to Improve Primary Care for Patients with Multimorbidity

We introduce a primary care practice model for caring for patients with multimorbidity. Primary care for these patients requires flexibility and ongoing coordination, and it often must be tailored to individual circumstances. Such complex and flexible care could be accomplished within communities of practice, whose participants are willing to learn from their shared practice, further each other’s goals, share their stories of success and failure, and promote the continued evolution of collective learning. Primary care in these communities would be conceived as a complex adaptive process in which the participants use an iterative approach to care improvement that integrates what they learn and do collectively over time. Clinicians in these communities would define common goals, cocreate care plans, and engage in reflective case-based learning. As community members manage their knowledge, gain insights, and develop new care strategies, they can improve care for patients with multiple conditions. Using a mix of methods, future research should explore the conditions that are necessary for collective learning within communities of clinicians who care for patients with multimorbidity and who develop new knowledge in practice. By understanding these conditions, we can foster the development of collective learning and improve primary care for these patients.

Integrated disease management improves one-year quality of life in primary care COPD patients: a controlled clinical trial

UNLABELLED AIMD: To assess the long-term effectiveness of an integrated disease management (IDM) program (consisting of optimal medication, reactivation, education, and exacerbation management) in primary care patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHOD Controlled trial comparing the effects of IDM on quality of life--assessed by the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)--in primary care COPD patients. The minimal clinically important change on the SGRQ was accepted as being -4 points. Baseline and one year differences were compared using paired sample T-tests. The differential effects of an FEV1/FVC ratio <0.7 and dyspnoea as assessed by the Medical Research Council (MRC) Dyspnoea scale were investigated. RESULTS The average age of subjects was 63 years, with an average post-bronchodilator FEV1 of 67% predicted, average FEV1/FVC ratio of 0.65, a mean of 35 pack-years smoking, and 63% were male. No significant differences existed between groups at baseline. After one year of IDM, SGRQ had improved by -4.6 points (95% CI, -7.2 to -2.0; p=0.001) in the intervention group, versus -0.7 points (95% CI, - 3.0 to 1.6; p=0.6) in the usual care group. In patients with an FEV1/FVC ratio <0.7, SGRQ improved by -5.9 points (95% CI, -9.6 to -2.2; p=0.002) in the IDM group, while in the usual care group SGRQ improved by -0.8 points (95% CI, -4.1 to 2.4; p=0.6). In patients with an MRC Dyspnoea score >2 and FEV1/FVC <0.7, SGRQ improved by -13.4 points (95% CI, -20.8 to -6.1; p=0.002) in the IDM group, versus -0.3 points (95% CI, -5.5 to 4.9; p=0.9) in the usual care group. CONCLUSION In this study, IDM improved one-year quality of life in primary care COPD patients, compared to usual care. The improvement in SGRQ was both clinically relevant and statistically significant, and was greatest in patients with FEV1/FVC <0.7 and MRC Dyspnoea score >2.

A meta-analysis on depression and subsequent cancer risk

BackgroundThe authors tested the hypothesis that depression is a possible factor influencing the course of cancer by reviewing prospective epidemiological studies and calculating summary relative risks.MethodsStudies were identified by computerized searches of Medline, Embase and PsycINFO. as well as manual searches of reference lists of selected publications. Inclusion criteria were cohort design, population-based sample, structured measurement of depression and outcome of cancer known for depressed and non-depressed subjectsResultsThirteen eligible studies were identified. Based on eight studies with complete crude data on overall cancer, our summary relative risk (95% confidence interval) was 1.19 (1.06–1.32). After adjustment for confounders we pooled a summary relative risk of 1.12 (0.99–1.26).No significant association was found between depression and subsequent breast cancer risk, based on seven heterogeneous studies, with or without adjustment for possible confounders. Subgroup analysis of studies with a follow-up of ten years or more, however, resulted in a statistically significant summary relative risk of 2.50 (1.06–5.91).No significant associations were found for lung, colon or prostate cancer.ConclusionThis review suggests a tendency towards a small and marginally significant association between depression and subsequent overall cancer risk and towards a stronger increase of breast cancer risk emerging many years after a previous depression.