Optimising patient active role with a user-centred eHealth platform (CONCERTO+) in chronic diseases management: a study protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Mame Awa Ndiaye, Alain Larouche, Guylaine Chabot, Christian Chabot, Ronald Buyl, Jean-Paul Fortin, Anik Giguère, Annie Leblanc, France Légaré, Aude Motulsky, Claude Sicotte, Holly O Witteman, Eric Kavanagh, Frédérick Lépinay, Jacynthe Roberge, Carole Délétroz, Samira Abbasgholizadeh-Rahimi, Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Mame Awa Ndiaye, Alain Larouche, Guylaine Chabot, Christian Chabot, Ronald Buyl, Jean-Paul Fortin, Anik Giguère, Annie Leblanc, France Légaré, Aude Motulsky, Claude Sicotte, Holly O Witteman, Eric Kavanagh, Frédérick Lépinay, Jacynthe Roberge, Carole Délétroz, Samira Abbasgholizadeh-Rahimi

Abstract

Introduction: Multimorbidity increases care needs and primary care use among people with chronic diseases. The Concerto Health Program (CHP) has been developed to optimise chronic disease management in primary care services. However, in its current version, the CHP primarily targets clinicians and does not aim to answer directly patients' and their informal caregivers' needs for chronic disease management. Various studies have shown that interventions that increase patient activation level are associated with better health outcomes. Furthermore, educational tools must be adapted to patients and caregivers in terms of health literacy and usability. This project aims to develop, implement and evaluate a user-centred, multifunctional and personalised eHealth platform (CONCERTO+) to promote a more active patient role in chronic disease management and decision-making.

Methods and analysis: This project uses a collaborative research approach, aiming at the personalisation of CHP through three phases: (1) the development of one module of an eHealth platform based on scientific evidence and user-centred design; (2) a feasibility study of CONCERTO+ through a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial where patients with chronic diseases from a primary healthcare practice will receive CONCERTO+ during 6 months and be compared to patients from a control practice receiving usual care and (3) an analysis of CONCERTO+ potential for scaling up. To do so, we will conduct two focus groups with patients and informal caregivers and individual interviews with health professionals at the two study sites, as well as health care managers, information officers and representatives of the Ministry of Health.

Ethics and dissemination: This study received ethical approval from Ethics Committee of Université Laval. The findings will be used to inform the effectiveness of CONCERTO+ to improve management care in chronic diseases. We will disseminate findings through presentations in scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration number: NCT03628963; Pre-results.

Keywords: chronic disease management; ehealth; health literacy; multimorbidity; patient and caregiver engagement; user-centered design.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Embedded healthcare system.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Recruitment flow chart. CHP, Concerto Health Program; FMG, Family Medicine Group.

References

    1. World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases. 2014. .
    1. Roberts KC, Rao DP, Bennett TL, et al. . Prevalence and patterns of chronic disease multimorbidity and associated determinants in Canada. Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can 2015;35:87–94. 10.24095/hpcdp.35.6.01
    1. Health Council of Canada. Helping patients help themselves: are Canadians with chronic conditions getting the Support they need to manage their health? 2010. .
    1. Ruel G. Multimorbidité: Ampleur, impacts et défi 4e Rendez-vous des maladies chroniques. Quebec: Institut national de santé publique du Québec, 2012. (accessed 28 Apr 2017).
    1. Fortin M, Contant E, Savard C, et al. . Canadian guidelines for clinical practice: an analysis of their quality and relevance to the care of adults with comorbidity. BMC Fam Pract 2011;12:74 10.1186/1471-2296-12-74
    1. Bounajm F, Dinh T, Thériault L. Améliorer les habitudes de vie: des retombées importantes pour la santé et l’économie du Québec. 2017. (accessed 29 May 2018).
    1. The Commissaire à la Santé et au Bien-Être. Adopting an integrated approach to chronic disease prevention and management: recommendations, issues and implications. 2010. .
    1. Ministère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux. Cadre de référence pour la prévention et la gestion des maladies chroniques physiques en première ligne. 2012. .
    1. FMOQ, The Fédération des médecins omnipraticiens du Québec. Communiqué de la FMOQ: La FRMOQ lance une nouvelle campagne publicitaire pour rappeler l’urgence d’investir en médecine familiale, 2011. Montréal.
    1. Bates-Eamer N, Ronson JL, shortage P. Perceived shortage, relative surplus: the paradox of Quebec’s Family physician workforce ‐ An Intra‐ and Inter‐Provincial Comparison, U.o.V, Centre for Global Studies Ed 2009.
    1. OCDE, The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: Promoting health, preventing disease, the economic case. The European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Series. 2015. (Accessed 28 Aug 2018).
    1. Adams SG, Smith PK, Allan PF, et al. . Systematic review of the chronic care model in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease prevention and management. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:551–61. 10.1001/archinte.167.6.551
    1. Longtin Y, Sax H, Leape LL, et al. . Patient participation: current knowledge and applicability to patient safety. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:53–62. 10.4065/mcp.2009.0248
    1. Hibbard JH, Greene J. What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff 2013;32:207–14. 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1061
    1. Greene J, Hibbard JH. Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:520–6. 10.1007/s11606-011-1931-2
    1. Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stock R, et al. . Do increases in patient activation result in improved self-management behaviors? Health Serv Res 2007;42:1443–63. 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00669.x
    1. Fowles JB, Terry P, Xi M, et al. . Measuring self-management of patients' and employees' health: further validation of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) based on its relation to employee characteristics. Patient Educ Couns 2009;77:116–22. 10.1016/j.pec.2009.02.018
    1. Mosen DM, Schmittdiel J, Hibbard J, et al. . Is patient activation associated with outcomes of care for adults with chronic conditions? J Ambul Care Manage 2007;30:21–9. 10.1097/00004479-200701000-00005
    1. Becker ER, Roblin DW. Translating primary care practice climate into patient activation: the role of patient trust in physician. Med Care 2008;46:795–805. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817919c0
    1. Hibbard JH, Cunningham PJ. How engaged are consumers in their health and health care, and why does it matter? Res Brief 2008;8:1–9.
    1. Remmers C, Hibbard J, Mosen DM, et al. . Is patient activation associated with future health outcomes and healthcare utilization among patients with diabetes? J Ambul Care Manage 2009;32:320–7. 10.1097/JAC.0b013e3181ba6e77
    1. Donald M, Ware RS, Ozolins IZ, et al. . The role of patient activation in frequent attendance at primary care: a population-based study of people with chronic disease. Patient Educ Couns 2011;83:217–21. 10.1016/j.pec.2010.05.031
    1. Greene J, Hibbard JH, Sacks R, et al. . When patient activation levels change, health outcomes and costs change, too. Health Aff 2015;34:431–7. 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0452
    1. Holmström I, Röing M. The relation between patient-centeredness and patient empowerment: a discussion on concepts. Patient Educ Couns 2010;79:167–72. 10.1016/j.pec.2009.08.008
    1. Pomey M-P, Flora L, Karazivan P, et al. . Le «Montreal model» : enjeux du partenariat relationnel entre patients et professionnels de la santé. Santé Publique 2015;S1:41–50. 10.3917/spub.150.0041
    1. Kickbusch I, Pelikan J, Apfel F, et al. . Health literacy. World Health Organisation. 2013. .
    1. Hart JT. The Autonomous Patient: Ending Paternalism in Medical Care. JRSM 2002;95:623–4. 10.1258/jrsm.95.12.623
    1. Koh HK, Brach C, Harris LM, et al. . A proposed ‘health literate care model’ would constitute a systems approach to improving patients' engagement in care. Health Aff 2013;32:357–67. 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1205
    1. Frosch DL, Elwyn G. Don’t blame patients, engage them: transforming health systems to address health literacy. J Health Commun 2014;19 Suppl 2:10–14. 10.1080/10810730.2014.950548
    1. Monkman H, Andre W. eHealth literacy issues, constructs, models, and methods for health information technology design and evaluation. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal 2015;7:541–9.
    1. Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, et al. . Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:742–52. 10.7326/0003-4819-144-10-200605160-00125
    1. Cummings E, Turner P. Patient self-management and chronic illness: evaluating outcomes and impacts of information technology. Stud Health Technol Inform 2009;143:229–34.
    1. Dorr D, Bonner LM, Cohen AN, et al. . Informatics systems to promote improved care for chronic illness: a literature review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007;14:156–63. 10.1197/jamia.M2255
    1. Häyrinen K, Saranto K, Nykänen P. Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: a review of the research literature. Int J Med Inform 2008;77:291–304. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.09.001
    1. Lau F, Kuziemsky C, Price M, et al. . A review on systematic reviews of health information system studies. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17:637–45. 10.1136/jamia.2010.004838
    1. Rigby M, Georgiou A, Hyppönen H, et al. . Patient Portals as a Means of Information and Communication Technology Support to Patient- Centric Care Coordination - the Missing Evidence and the Challenges of Evaluation. A joint contribution of IMIA WG EVAL and EFMI WG EVAL. Yearb Med Inform 2015;10:148–59. 10.15265/IY-2015-007
    1. Eland-de Kok P, van Os-Medendorp H, Vergouwe-Meijer A, et al. . A systematic review of the effects of e-health on chronically ill patients. J Clin Nurs 2011;20:2997–3010. 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03743.x
    1. Irizarry T, DeVito Dabbs A, Curran CR. Patient portals and patient engagement: A state of the science Review. J Med Internet Res 2015;17:e148 10.2196/jmir.4255
    1. Price M, Bellwood P, Kitson N, et al. . Conditions potentially sensitive to a personal health record (PHR) intervention, a systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2015;15:32 10.1186/s12911-015-0159-1
    1. Ross J, Stevenson F, Lau R, et al. . Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update). Implement Sci 2016;11:146 10.1186/s13012-016-0510-7
    1. Strisland F, Svagård. AH, Reitan J. Meeting end user needs in international research projects aiming to develop medical device technology prototypes for integrated care: A case study. Int J Integr Care 2016:16.
    1. Monkman H, Kushniruic A. Applying usability methods to identify health literacy issues: an example using a Personal Health Record. Stud Health Technol Inform 2013;183:179–85.
    1. Research2Guidance. conomics: The current status and trends of the mHealth app market. 2017. .
    1. Greenhalgh T, Hinder S, Stramer K, et al. . non-adoption, and abandonment of a personal electronic health record: case study of HealthSpace. BMJ 2010;341:c5814.
    1. Garabedian LF, Ross-Degnan D, Wharam JF. Mobile phone and smartphone technologies for diabetes care and self-management. Current diabetes reports 2015;15:109.
    1. Group N. Catalyst insights council monthly report: How to hardwire patient engagement into care delivery processes. 2017. .
    1. Khoja S, Durrani H, Scott RE, et al. . Conceptual framework for development of comprehensive e-health evaluation tool. Telemedicine and e-Health 2013;19:48–53.
    1. Lawani MA, Valéra B, Fortier-Brochu É, et al. . Five shared decision-making tools in 5 months: use of rapid reviews to develop decision boxes for seniors living with dementia and their caregivers. Syst Rev 2017;6:56 10.1186/s13643-017-0446-2
    1. Zanaboni P, Ngangue P, Mbemba GIC, et al. . Methods to Evaluate the Effects of Internet-Based Digital Health Interventions for Citizens: Systematic Review of Reviews. JMIR 2018;20:e10202.
    1. Giguere AM, Labrecque M, Haynes RB, et al. . Evidence summaries (decision boxes) to prepare clinicians for shared decision-making with patients: a mixed methods implementation study. Implement Sci 2014;9:144.
    1. Lemieux V. Pour qu’on se comprenne: guide de littératie en santé. 2014. .
    1. Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, et al. . Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Services Research 2005;40:1918–30.
    1. Health I. Patient Activation Measure. 2014.
    1. Glasgow RE, Wagner EH, Schaefer J, et al. . Development and validation of the patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC). Medical care 2005:436–44.
    1. Davis FD, usefulness P. perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly 1989:319–40.
    1. Solomon M, Wagner SL, Goes J. Effects of a Web-based intervention for adults with chronic conditions on patient activation: online randomized controlled trial. JMIR 2012;14:e32.
    1. Ghandour E, Gagnon M-P, Fortin J-P. Patient adoption of a connected electronic personal health record to support chronic disease management in primary care in Quebec. Submitted for publication.
    1. Ghandour E, Gagnon M-P, Fortin J-P. Conditions d’adoption du dossier de santé électronique personnel par les professionnels de la première ligne au Québec: Perspectives professionnelle et organisationnelle. Revue Santé Publique 2017;29:837–50.
    1. World Health Organization. Beginning with the end in mind planning pilot projects and other programmatic research for successful scaling up. 2014. .
    1. Hendriks M, Rademakers J. Relationships between patient activation, disease-specific knowledge and health outcomes among people with diabetes; a survey study. BMC health serv res 2014;14:393.
    1. Aronson J. A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. Qualitative Report 1994;2:1–3.
    1. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage 2003.
    1. Parry D, Salsberg J, Macaulay AC, et al. . A Guide to Researcher and Knowledge-User Collaboration in Health Research. C.I.o.H.R. (CIHR) Editor 2009:83.
    1. Baumbusch JL, Kirkham SR, Khan KB, et al. . Pursuing common agendas: a collaborative model for knowledge translation between research and practice in clinical settings. Res Nurs Health 2008;31:130–40.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner