Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36713974›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2023

Alignment of Doctors' Understanding of Treatment Burden Priorities and Chronic Heart Failure Patients' Experiences: A Nominal Group Technique Consultation.

Magnolia Cardona, Adem Sav, Zoe A Michaleff, Sarah T Thomas, Claudia C Dobler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Magnolia CardonaInstitute for Evidence Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6499-2705
Adem SavSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1381-2908
Zoe A MichaleffInstitute for Evidence Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0360-4956
Sarah T ThomasGold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Southport, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0717-2246
Claudia C DoblerInstitute for Evidence Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5460-0189
Bond University · AUGold Coast Hospital · AUQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To identify and rank areas of treatment burden in chronic heart failure (CHF), including solutions, that should be discussed during the clinical encounter from a patient, and doctors' perspective. Patients and Methods: Patients with CHF and clinicians managing heart failure were invited. Nominal group technique sessions held either face to face or online in 2021-2022, with individual identification of priorities and voting on ranking. Results: Four patient groups (N=22) and one doctor group (N=5) were held. For patients with heart failure, in descending order of priority Doctor-patient communication, Inefficiencies of the healthcare system, Healthcare access issues, Cost implications of treatment, Psychosocial impacts on patients and their families, and Impact of treatment work were the most important treatment burdens. Priorities independently identified by the doctors aligned with the patients' but ranking differed. Patient solutions ranged from involvement of nurses or pharmacists to enhance understanding of discharge planning, through to linkage between health information systems, and maintaining strong family or social support networks. Doctors' solutions covered timing medicines with activities of daily living, patient education on the importance of compliance, medication reviews to overcome clinical inertia, and routine clinical audits. Conclusion: The top treatment burden priorities for CHF patients were related to interaction with clinicians and health system inefficiencies, whereas doctors were generally aware of patients' treatment burden but tended to focus on the complexity of the direct treatment work. Addressing the priority issues identified here can commence with clinicians becoming aware of the issues that matter to patients and proactively discussing feasible immediate and longer-term solutions during clinical encounters.

Indexed as

barriersolder adultspatient prioritiesqualitative studies

Identifiers

PMID36713974
PMCPMC9880013
OpenAlexW4318542691

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.