BackgroundPrevalences of multimorbidity vary between European studies and several methods and definitions are used. In this study we examine the prevalence of multimorbidity in relation to age, gender and educational attainment and the association between physical and mental health conditions and educational attainment in a Danish population.MethodsA cross-sectional design was used to study the prevalence of multimorbidity, defined as two or more chronic conditions, and of comorbid physical and mental health conditions across age groups and educational attainment levels among 1,397,173 individuals aged 16 years and older who lived in the Capital Region of Denmark on January 1st, 2012. After calculating prevalence, odds ratios for multimorbidity and mental health conditions were derived from logistic regression on gender, age, age squared, education and number of physical conditions (only for odds ratios for mental health conditions). Odds ratios for having multimorbidity and mental health conditions for each variable were adjusted for all other variables.ResultsMultimorbidity prevalence was 21.6%. Half of the population aged 65 and above had multimorbidity, and prevalence was inversely related to educational attainment: 26.9% (95% CI, 26.8–26.9) among those with lower secondary education versus 13.5% (95% CI, 13.5–13.6) among people with postgraduate education. Adjusted odds ratios for multimorbidity were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49–0.51) for people with postgraduate education, compared to people with lower secondary education. Among all population members, 4.9% (95% CI, 4.9–4.9) had both a physical and a mental health condition, a proportion that increased to 22.6% of people with multimorbidity. Physical and mental health comorbidity was more prevalent in women (6.33%; 95% CI, 6.3–6.4) than men (3.34%; 95% CI, 3.3–3.4) and approximately 50 times more prevalent among older persons than younger ones. Physical and mental health comorbidity was also twice as prevalent among people with lower secondary education than among those with postgraduate education. The presence of a mental health condition was strongly associated with the number of physical conditions; those with five or more physical conditions had an adjusted odds ratio for a mental health condition of 3.93 (95% CI, 3.8–4.1), compared to those with no physical conditions.ConclusionMultimorbidity prevalence and patterns in the Danish population are comparable to those of other European populations. The high prevalence of mental and physical health conditions highlights the need to ensure that healthcare systems deliver care that takes physical and mental comorbidity into account. Further, the higher prevalence of multimorbidity among persons with low educational attainment emphasizes the importance of having a health care system providing care that is beneficial to all regardless of socioeconomic status.

There was no clinical difference between the three treatments. All three treatment interventions demonstrated meaningful improvement in all primary effect parameters. Improvements were maintained at 4- and 12-month follow-up. However, whether this was a result of the treatments or simply a result of time is unknown. Future studies will be necessary to delineate ideal treatment strategies.

BackgroundDisease management programmes have been developed for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to facilitate the integration of care across healthcare settings. The purpose of the present study was to examine the experiences of COPD patients and their relatives of integrated care after implementation of a COPD disease management programme.MethodsSeven focus groups and five individual interviews were held with 34 patients with severe or very severe COPD and two focus groups were held with eight of their relatives. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis.ResultsFour main categories of experiences of integrated care emerged: 1) a flexible system that provides access to appropriate healthcare and social services and furthers patient involvement; 2) the responsibility of health professionals to both take the initiative and follow up; 3) communication and providing information to patients and relatives; 4) coordination and professional cooperation. Most patients were satisfied with their care and raised few criticisms. However, patients with more unstable and severe disease tended to experience more problems.ConclusionsParticipant suggestions for optimizing the integration of healthcare included assigning patients a care coordinator, telehealth solutions for housebound patients and better information technology to support interprofessional cooperation. Further studies are needed to explore these and other possible solutions to problems with integrated care among COPD patients. A future effort in this field should be informed by detailed knowledge of the extent and relative importance of the identified problems. It should also be designed to address variable levels of severity of COPD and relevant comorbidities and to deliver care in ways appropriate to the respective healthcare setting. Future studies should also take health professionals’ views into account so that interventions may be planned in the light of the experiences of all those involved in the treatment of COPD patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-471) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction: Although several measurement instruments have been developed to measure the level of integrated health care delivery, no standardised, validated instrument exists covering all aspects of integrated care. The purpose of this review is to identify the instruments concerning how to measure the level of integration across health-care sectors and to assess and evaluate the organisational elements within the instruments identified.Methods: An extensive, systematic literature review in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science for the years 1980-2011. Selected abstracts were independently reviewed by two investigators. Results:We identified 23 measurement instruments and, within these, eight organisational elements were found. No measurement instrument covered all organisational elements, but almost all studies include well-defined structural and process aspects and six include cultural aspects; 14 explicitly stated using a theoretical framework. Conclusion and discussion:This review did not identify any measurement instrument covering all aspects of integrated care. Further, a lack of uniform use of the eight organisational elements across the studies was prevalent. It is uncertain whether development of a single 'all-inclusive' model for assessing integrated care is desirable. We emphasise the continuing need for validated instruments embedded in theoretical contexts.

BackgroundThe prevalence of multiple comorbid chronic conditions, or multimorbidity, is increasing. Care provided to people with multimorbidity is often fragmented, incomplete, inefficient, and ineffective. As part of a research and development project focusing on improving care, we sought to involve patients with multimorbidity in the planning process.ObjectiveTo identify opportunities for improving care by understanding how patients from a Danish University Hospital experience care coordination.DesignQualitative semi-structured interviews with 14 patients with multimorbidity.ResultsPatients with multimorbidity described important concerns about care that included: (1) disease-centered, rather than patient-centered, care; (2) lack of attention to comorbidities and patient preferences and needs; and (3) involvement of numerous healthcare providers with limited care coordination. Poor continuity of care resulted in lack of treatment for complex problems, such as pain and mental health issues, medication errors, adverse events, and a feeling of being lost in the system. Receiving care from generalists (e.g. general practitioners and healthcare professionals at prevention centers) and having a care coordinator seemed to improve patients’ experience of continuity and coordination of care. Suggestions for service improvements when providing care for people with multimorbidity included using care coordinators, longer consultation times, consultations specifically addressing follow-up on prescribed medications, and shifting the focus of care from disease states to patients’ overall health status.ConclusionsA need exists for a reorganization of care delivery for people with multimorbidity that focuses on improved care coordination and puts patient preferences at the center of care.

Future fall-prevention programmes must target older people's needs and acknowledge that there are many ways of perceiving falling. Moreover, elderly individuals' coping strategies are not necessarily productive. Social networks and general practitioners can actively encourage older people to participate in fall-prevention programmes. Such programmes must support older people's need for autonomy, competence and social relations.

IntroductionAlthough several measurement instruments have been developed to measure the level of integrated health care delivery, no standardised, validated instrument exists covering all aspects of integrated care. The purpose of this review is to identify the instruments concerning how to measure the level of integration across health-care sectors and to assess and evaluate the organisational elements within the instruments identified.MethodsAn extensive, systematic literature review in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science for the years 1980–2011. Selected abstracts were independently reviewed by two investigators.ResultsWe identified 23 measurement instruments and, within these, eight organisational elements were found. No measurement instrument covered all organisational elements, but almost all studies include well-defined structural and process aspects and six include cultural aspects; 14 explicitly stated using a theoretical framework.Conclusion and discussionThis review did not identify any measurement instrument covering all aspects of integrated care. Further, a lack of uniform use of the eight organisational elements across the studies was prevalent. It is uncertain whether development of a single ‘all-inclusive’ model for assessing integrated care is desirable. We emphasise the continuing need for validated instruments embedded in theoretical contexts.

BackgroundMultimorbidity is becoming increasingly prevalent and presents challenges for healthcare providers and systems. Studies examining the relationship between multimorbidity and quality of care report mixed findings. The purpose of this study was to investigate quality of care for people with multimorbidity in the publicly funded healthcare system in Denmark.MethodsTo investigate the quality of care for people with multimorbidity different groups of clinicians from the hospital, general practice and the municipality reviewed records from 23 persons with multimorbidity and discussed them in three focus groups. Before each focus group, clinicians were asked to review patients’ medical records and assess their care by responding to a questionnaire. Medical records from 2013 from hospitals, general practice, and health centers in the local municipality were collected and linked for the 23 patients. Further, two clinical pharmacologists reviewed the appropriateness of medications listed in patient records.ResultsThe review of the patients’ records conducted by three groups of clinicians revealed that around half of the patients received adequate care for the single condition which prompted the episode of care such as a hospitalization, a visit to an outpatient clinic or the general practitioner. Further, the care provided to approximately two-thirds of the patients did not take comorbidities into account and insufficiently addressed more diffuse symptoms or problems. The review of the medication lists revealed that the majority of the medication lists contained inappropriate medications and that there were incongruity in medication listed in the primary and secondary care sector. Several barriers for providing high quality care were identified. These included relative short consultation times in general practice and outpatient clinics, lack of care coordinators, and lack of shared IT-system proving an overview of the treatment.ConclusionsOur findings reveal quality of care deficiencies for people with multimorbidity. Suggestions for care improvement for people with multimorbidity includes formally assigned responsibility for care coordination, a change in the financial incentive structure towards a system rewarding high quality care and care focusing on prevention of disease exacerbation, as well as implementing shared medical record systems.