Patient Confidence in Long-Term Care Plans for Multimorbidity Management: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

Man Yaoyang; Ali Napiah Nasution; Tri Adi Mylano

doi:10.61919/2afcze46

Authors

Man Yaoyang Universitas Prima Indonesia Author
Ali Napiah Nasution Universitas Prima Indonesia Author
Tri Adi Mylano Universitas Prima Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61919/2afcze46

Keywords:

Multimorbidity, patient confidence, long-term care plan, treatment burden, care coordination, shared decision-making, qualitative study

Abstract

Background: Multimorbidity creates substantial challenges for long-term care because patients must manage multiple medicines, appointments, monitoring tasks, lifestyle recommendations, and disease-specific instructions. Although care plans are intended to improve coordination and continuity, patients may not experience them as understandable, feasible, or trustworthy in daily life. Objective: This study explored how adults with multimorbidity described the factors that strengthened or weakened their confidence in long-term care planning. Methods: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Twelve anonymized participant profiles from adults with two or more chronic conditions and experience of long-term care planning, medication planning, review planning, or coordinated management advice were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The analysis was informed by treatment burden, cumulative complexity, and person-centred integrated care concepts. Results: Six interrelated themes were generated: fragmented care and unclear plan ownership, continuity and relational trust, treatment workload and limited capacity, unclear priorities and competing disease advice, family support and social negotiation, and follow-up reliability as evidence of care commitment. Confidence increased when plans were clear, coordinated, realistic, reviewed, and connected to a named professional or responsible team. Confidence decreased when advice was fragmented, workload was excessive, priorities were unclear, family support became controlling, or follow-up was unreliable. Conclusion: Patient confidence in multimorbidity care planning depends on relational continuity, practical feasibility, coordinated responsibility, explicit prioritization, respectful family involvement, and reliable follow-up. Care planning should be treated as an ongoing patient-centred process rather than a static document

References

1. Skou ST, Mair FS, Fortin M, Guthrie B, Nunes BP, Miranda JJ, et al. Multimorbidity. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2022;8(1):48.

2. World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024.

3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Multimorbidity: clinical assessment and management. NICE guideline NG56. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2016.

4. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Integrating care to prevent and manage chronic diseases: best practices in public health. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2023.

5. Muth C, van den Akker M, Blom JW, Mallen CD, Rochon J, Schellevis FG, et al. The Ariadne principles: how to handle multimorbidity in primary care consultations. BMC Med. 2014;12:223.

6. Salisbury C, Man MS, Bower P, Guthrie B, Chaplin K, Gaunt DM, et al. Management of multimorbidity using a patient-centred care model: a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of the 3D approach. Lancet. 2018;392(10141):41-50.

7. May CR, Eton DT, Boehmer K, Gallacher K, Hunt K, MacDonald S, et al. Rethinking the patient: using burden of treatment theory to understand the changing dynamics of illness. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:281.

8. Shippee ND, Shah ND, May CR, Mair FS, Montori VM. Cumulative complexity: a qualitative analysis of patients with multiple chronic conditions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(10):1041-1051.

9. Eton DT, Ramalho de Oliveira D, Egginton JS, Ridgeway JL, Odell L, May CR, et al. Building a measurement framework of burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions: a qualitative study. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2012;3:39-49.

10. Tran VT, Barnes C, Montori VM, Falissard B, Ravaud P. Taxonomy of the burden of treatment: a multi-country web-based qualitative study of patients with chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2015;13:115.

11. Haggerty JL, Roberge D, Freeman GK, Beaulieu C. Experienced continuity of care when patients see multiple clinicians: a qualitative metasummary. Ann Fam Med. 2013;11(3):262-271.

12. Barker I, Steventon A, Deeny SR. Association between continuity of care in general practice and hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: cross sectional study of routinely collected data. BMJ. 2017;356:j84.

13. Bayliss EA, Bonds DE, Boyd CM, Davis MM, Finke B, Fox MH, et al. Understanding the context of health for persons with multiple chronic conditions: moving from what is the matter to what matters. Ann Fam Med. 2014;12(3):260-269.

14. Coulter A, Entwistle VA, Eccles A, Ryan S, Shepperd S, Perera R. Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(3):CD010523.

15. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Kinnersley P, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(10):1361-1368.

16. Joseph-Williams N, Elwyn G, Edwards A. Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(3):291-309.

17. Tinetti ME, Naik AD, Dindo L, Costello DM, Esterson J, Geda M, et al. Association of patient priorities-aligned decision-making with patient outcomes and ambulatory health care burden among older adults with multiple chronic conditions: a nonrandomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(12):1688-1697.

18. Reeve E, Thompson W, Farrell B. Deprescribing: a narrative review of the evidence and practical recommendations for recognizing opportunities and taking action. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83(7):1339-1352.

19. World Health Organization. Medication safety in polypharmacy: technical report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.

20. Violan C, Foguet-Boreu Q, Flores-Mateo G, Salisbury C, Blom J, Freitag M, et al. Prevalence, determinants and patterns of multimorbidity in primary care: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e102149.

21. Bradshaw C, Atkinson S, Doody O. Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2017;4:2333393617742282.

22. Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2000;23(4):334-340.

23. Kallio H, Pietilä AM, Johnson M, Kangasniemi M. Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. J Adv Nurs. 2016;72(12):2954-2965.

24. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research: a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-357.

25. Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. London: SAGE Publications; 2021.

26. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications; 1985.

27. O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245-1251.

28. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-2194.

29. Smith SM, Wallace E, O’Dowd T, Fortin M. Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;1:CD006560.

30. Mercer SW, Fitzpatrick B, Guthrie B, Fenwick E, Grieve E, Lawson K, et al. The CARE Plus study: a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary care patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. BMC Med. 2016;14:88.