May, Carl

AbstractBackground. The field of implementation research has recently seen considerable, and long overdue, interest in equity, with a strong emphasis on recognizing and responding to disparities in care. The COMPLETE (COMPLEx inTErventions and service innovation)framework is intended to support inclusive intervention and service design. The aim is the development of a patient-centered and justice-informed framework for the design of complex healthcare interventions and innovations in service design.Methods. We undertook three studies. (1) We operationalized constructs from sociological theories of inequality, implementation processes, social roles and expectations, to build a Matrix Model of mechanisms that drive the embedding of disparities in complex healthcare interventions and service innovations. (2) We developed patient-centered and justice-informed principles for design that form a Theory of Change that can be applied in intervention and service design. (3) We then linked the Matrix Model and the Theory of Change together with core elements of theories of prefigurative design and research justice, to build a Transformational Design Cycle for complex interventions and service innovations around a set of critical questions about the implications.Results. The COMPLETE framework focuses on the ways health inequalities and inequities are brought into being by systemic mechanisms within health services; are then propagated and normalized through implementation mechanisms; and are then realized and normalized in practice through institutionalized expectations of patients and caregivers. The framework provides tools to resist the naturalization of inequities and inequalities.Conclusion. We developed a framework for intervention and service design that consists of three components: a conceptual model of the translation of social determinants of health through organizational mechanisms that shape patient and caregivers’ lived experience of disparities in health and healthcare; a transformational theory of change; and a set of principles for design that seeks to place restitution for disparities at its center.

Objectives To summarise and synthesise published qualitative studies to characterise factors that shape patient and caregiver experiences of chronic heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Design Meta-review of qualitative systematic reviews and metasyntheses. Papers analysed using content analysis. Data sources CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 to April 2015. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Systematic reviews and qualitative metasyntheses where the participants were patients, caregivers and which described experiences of care for CHF, COPD and CKD in primary and secondary care who were aged ≥18 years. Results Searches identified 5420 articles, 53 of which met inclusion criteria. Reviews showed that patients' and caregivers' help seeking and decision-making were shaped by their degree of structural advantage (socioeconomic status, spatial location, health service quality); their degree of interactional advantage (cognitive advantage, affective state and interaction quality) and their degree of structural resilience (adaptation to adversity, competence in managing care and caregiver response to demands). Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first synthesis of qualitative systematic reviews in the field. An important outcome of this overview is an emphasis on what patients and caregivers value and on attributes of healthcare systems, relationships and practices that affect the distressing effects and consequences of pathophysiological deterioration in CHF, COPD and CKD. Interventions that seek to empower individual patients may have limited effectiveness for those who are most affected by the combined weight of structural, relational and practical disadvantage identified in this overview. We identify potential targets for interventions that could address these disadvantages. Systematic review registration number PROSPERO CRD42014014547.

OBJECTIVE Patients with diabetes may experience high burden of treatment (BOT), including treatment-related effects and self-care demands. We examined whether patients with type 2 diabetes and their clinicians discuss BOT, the characteristics of their discussions, and their attempts to address BOT during visits. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Two coders independently reviewed videos of 46 primary care visits obtained during a practice-based trial and identified utterances concerning BOT, classifying them by topic and by whether BOT was addressed (i.e., whether statements emerged aimed at alleviating BOT). RESULTS Of the 46 visits, 43 (93.5%) contained BOT discussions. Both coders identified 83 discussions: 12 involving monitoring, 28 treatment administration, 19 access, and 24 treatment effects. BOT was unambiguously addressed only 30% of the time. CONCLUSIONS BOT discussions usually arise during visits but rarely beget problem-solving efforts. These discussions represent missed opportunities for reducing treatment-related disruptions in the lives of patients with diabetes, which may affect adherence and well-being.