IntroductionAbout 50% of patients do not take their long-term therapy for chronic conditions as prescribed. Many studies have centered on patients’ adherence to a specific treatment or single conditions, but few have taken all chronic conditions into consideration from a patient’s perspective. This study aims to explore factors that impact on drug compliance and to identify strategies to improve this from the perspective of patients with at least one chronic condition.MethodsPatients were recruited by healthcare professionals from a hospital pharmacy, four community pharmacies, patient associations, and a primary care center in Barcelona. Five focus groups were conducted (N = 36). Conversations were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim to allow qualitative analysis.ResultsStudy subjects were aged 39–90 years (mean 65 years) and the mean number of comorbidities per patient was 2.3 (range 1–7). The main modifiers of therapeutic conduct were: patients’ health beliefs, patient–prescriber relationships, and patients’ motivation and perception of illness control. Study participants wanted greater participation in decision-making concerning their health and increased education about their illness and medication. They also wanted individualized healthcare that took their preferences and personal and emotional issues into account.ConclusionOur results highlight how the patient–prescriber’s relationship and factors such as health beliefs, motivation and perception of illness control impact on medication adherence in chronic patients. Future interventions to optimize adherence to treatment should focus on shared decision-making and more extensive health education.FundingCelgene Corporation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-016-0394-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Evidence is scarce on how to promote health and decrease cumulative inequalities for disadvantaged older people. Downstream complex interventions focusing on intermediate factors (self-management, health literacy and social capital) may have the potential to mitigate the inequitable impacts of social determinants in health. The aim of the AEQUALIS study was to assess the effectiveness of a group-based intervention to improve self-perceived health as indicator of health inequality. Methods Pragmatic randomised clinical trial addressed to older adults (≥ 60 years) living in urban disadvantaged areas with low self-perceived health. The intervention was delivered in primary care settings and community assets between 2015 and 2017 and consisted in 12 weekly sessions. The primary outcome was self-perceived health assessed in two ways: with the first item of the SF-12 questionnaire, and with the EQ-5D visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, social capital, self-management, mental health and use of health services. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, post intervention and follow-up at 9 months after the end of the intervention. Results 390 people were allocated to the intervention group (IG) or the control group (CG) and 194 participants and 164 were included in the data analysis, respectively. Self perceived health as primary outcome assessed with SF-12-1 was not specifically affected by the intervention, but with the EQ-5D visual analog scale showed a significant increase at one-year follow-up only in the IG (MD=4.80, 95%CI [1.09, 8.52]). IG group improved health literacy in terms of a better understanding of medical information (− 0.62 [− 1.10, − 0.13]). The mental component of SF-12 improved (3.77 [1.82, 5.73]), and depressive symptoms decreased at post-intervention (− 1.26 [− 1.90, − 0.63]), and at follow-up (− 0.95 [− 1.62, − 0.27]). The use of antidepressants increased in CG at the follow-up (1.59 [0.33, 2.86]), while it remained stable in the IG. Conclusions This study indicates that a group intervention with a strong social component, conducted in primary health care and community assets, shows promising effects on mental health and can be used as a strategy for health promotion among older adults in urban disadvantaged areas. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02733523. Registered 11 April 2016 - Retrospectively registered

Background: Evidence suggests that sedentary behaviour (SB) is associated with poor health outcomes. SB at any age may have significant consequences for health and well-being and interventions targeting SB are accumulating. Therefore, the need to review the effects of multicomponent, complex interventions that incorporate effective strategies to reduce SB are essential. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted investigating the impact of interventions targeting SB across the lifespan. Six databases were searched and two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, completed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias and complexity of each of the included studies. Results: A total of 77 adult studies (n=62, RCTs) and 84 studies (n=62, RCTs) in children were included. The findings demonstrated that interventions in adults when compared to active controls resulted in non-significant reductions in SB, although when compared to inactive controls significant reductions were found in both the short (MD-56.86; 95%CI-74.10,-39.63; n=4632; I 2 83%) and medium-to-long term (MD-20.14; 95%CI-34.13,-6.16; n=4537; I 2 65%). The findings demonstrated that interventions in children when compared to active controls may lead to relevant reductions in daily sedentary time in the short-term (MD-59.90; 95%CI-102.16,-17.65; n=267; I 2 86%), while interventions in children when compared to inactive controls may lead to relevant reductions in the short-term (MD-25.86; 95%CI-40.77,-10.96; n=9480; I 2 98%) and medium-to-long term (MD-14.02; 95%CI-19.49,-8.55; n=41, 138; I 2 98%). The assessment of complexity suggested that interventions may need to be suitably complex to address the challenges of a complex behaviour such as SB, but demonstrated that a higher complexity score is not necessarily associated with better outcomes in terms of sustained long-term changes.

No abstract

BackgroundOlder people living in socio-economic deprived urban areas especially suffer the effects of health inequalities but have been insufficiently targeted. Strategies promoted by local primary health care agents might influence health and social behaviours as intermediate social determinants that are modifiable and thus can potentially mitigate health inequalities.Therefore, we aim to develop and assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention based on a community programme that promotes self-management, health literacy and social capital targeting older people from urban socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in order to improve their self-perceived health as an indicator of health inequality reduction.Methods/designDesign: A pragmatic multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial will be implemented in 16 primary health care centres from six urban areas in neighbourhoods with low-socioeconomic level. Target: community-dwelling aged 60 years or above who perceive their health as fair or poor.The programme is called “Sentir-nos Bé” (“Feeling well”) and comprises 12 two-hour sessions held once a week in groups of 12–15 people. Group dynamics are designed to promote mutual support, social participation and new knowledge on health literacy and self-management, resulting in meaningful changes in their daily life that positively affect their health and wellbeing.A sample size of 390 participants, randomised to the intervention or the control group, will be needed to detect a clinically relevant benefit in the primary outcome self-perceived health after 3-month intervention. A follow-up will be conducted at 9 months post-intervention. Participants in the control group will receive usual care and remain in a waiting-list to join the programme once the trial ends. A process evaluation will provide greater confidence in the conclusions about the effectiveness of the intervention. Ethics approval: Clinical Investigation Ethics Committee of the IDIAP Jordi Gol (P15/031). Dissemination: Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and open-access journals.DiscussionThe project will promote the implementation of evidence-based intervention procedures in future health policy strategies targeting older people while considering the social aspects of inequality.Trial registrationNCT02733523. Retrospectively registered. Date of registration: April 11, 2016.

The aim of the study was to evaluate quality of cancer care in Spain through patient's views, experiences and perceptions; with the purpose of making recommendations to improve cancer care. A modified citizen's jury was organised with the participation of 30 members and four experts as witnesses. For 1 day jurors representing 13 of 17 Spanish Autonomous Communities were met to make recommendations for improving the quality of cancer care in Spain. Concerns were identified regarding care fragmentation, test delays, duplications and poor social and emotional support. Some recommendations highlighted the need to improve the access to psycho-oncology care as well as support in social care and counselling, addressing patients to specific care. Some strategies proposed by the jury included a 24-h call centre, continuity in palliative care and appropriate follow-up and support after the end of therapy. In conclusion, the experience of cancer should include access to multiple specialists, effective coordination of care, accurate information about the disease and treatment options, and timely attention to symptoms and psychosocial needs.

Purpose To explore quality of life related with intermediate vision of patients before and after cataract surgery, and to make patients’ experience available for the design of future scales that assess visual function related with intermediate distance. Patients and Methods A qualitative research methodology based on thematic content analysis was used to explore vision-related quality of life based on the experiences of patients with cataract. Patients were recruited at the Service of Ophthalmology of the Hospital de Sant Pau (Barcelona, Spain). Data were collected through nineteen semi-structured interviews conducted with patients diagnosed with cataract and implanted with a standard aspheric monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) (Tecnis ® ZA9003) (n = 6), an enhanced monofocal IOL (Tecnis ® Eyhance ICB000) (n = 6), and patients from the waiting list (n = 7). The data analysis consisted in coding, aggregation, and theme development of the transcribed audios. Results Patients on waiting lists reported difficulty and insecurity in performing daily and meaningful tasks related to near visual ranges (eg: threading a needle, reading price tags), intermediate (eg: using a computer or dialling numbers on a smartphone), and distant (eg: recognizing faces, walking on uneven surfaces). Patients after surgery with the standard IOL reported improvement in performing activities mainly in the distant visual range, but also the need for a better communication with clinical staff to adjust their own expectations on the results of the surgery. Finally, patients implanted with the enhanced IOL reported satisfaction and improved visual function in performing daily activities, especially those related to the intermediate visual range. Conclusion Our exploratory study found that patients after cataract surgery with the enhanced IOL reported a better performance in activities that require the intermediate vision. These results will inform the development of scales to assess vision-related quality of life in the intermediate visual range prioritizing outcomes according to patients’ daily and meaningful activities.

IntroductionSITLESS is a randomised controlled trial determining whether exercise referral schemes can be enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity in the long term, in community-dwelling older citizens. The intervention is complex and requires a process evaluation to understand how implementation, causal mechanisms and context shape outcomes. The specific aims are to assess fidelity and reach of the implementation, understand the contextual aspects of each intervention site, evaluate the mechanisms of impact, and explore perceived effects.Methods and analysisFollowing the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions, a combination of qualitative and quantitative procedures is applied, including observational checklists and attendance registries, standardised scales (ie, Marcus’s Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale and the Lubben Social Network Scale) at baseline, postintervention and follow-up assessments, semistructured questionnaires gathering contextual characteristics, and participant observations of the sessions. Semistructured interviews and focus groups with the participants and trainers are conducted at postintervention and during the follow-up to explore their experiences. Outcomes from the standardised scales are analysed as moderators within the impact evaluation. Descriptive results on context and perceived effects complement results on impact. The qualitative and quantitative findings will help to refine the logic model to finally support the interpretation of the results on the effectiveness of the intervention.Ethics and disseminationThe study design was approved by the respective Ethical Committee of Ramon Llull University, Southern Denmark, Northern Ireland and Ulm University. Participation is voluntary, and all participants are asked to sign informed consent before starting the study. A dissemination plan operationalises how to achieve a social impact by reaching academic and non-academic stakeholders. A data management plan describes the specific data sets and regulates its deposition and curation. All publications will be open access.Trial registration numberNCT02629666; Pre-results.