Esteban de Manuel Keenoy

Healthcare has shifted from paternalistic model of care to patient-centered care where shared decision making is key. The need to share and manage contributions and expertise of different healthcare professionals underlines the relevance of collaborative knowledge management (CKM). However, CKM in healthcare requires one to understand the complexities in integrating multiple aspects of care and the challenges associated with interdisciplinary collaboration and knowledge sharing among healthcare providers. In this study, we use a system modeling approach to understand the complexities in collaborative management of knowledge on advance care planning for multi-morbid patients, within personalized integrated care. To achieve this, focus group discussions (FGD) with 11 participants from Basque Public Health System (Osakidetza) in Spain were involved in identifying the key challenges and developing a systemic thinking model. As a result, three key challenges were identified, i.e., (1) culture, where citizens are not willing to talk about death; (2) healthcare professionals, whose attitude and perspectives need to change; and (3) the current system, that has to change its care model towards a holistic and a shared care model. From the developed causal loop diagrams (CLDs), it is noted that perpetuation of fragmented and paternalistic care is likely to get worse without recognition of the advance care plan (ACP) as a social need and as a crucial part of the clinical practice change.

The absence of a coordinated approach to health and social care compromises the ability of health systems to provide universal, equitable, high-quality, and financially sustainable care. Transferring evidence-based practices focused on digitally-enabled integrated care to new contexts can overcome this challenge if implementation is satisfactory. This paper presents the scaling-out methodology that JADECARE has designed to spread effective innovative practices across Europe. The scaling-out methodology pretends to guide the Next Adopters in the transfer and adoption of practices, whereas increasing their implementation capacity and providing an evaluation framework to assess impact and success. JADECARE scaling-out effort is based on guiding principles found in the literature such as the balance between fidelity to the original practice and the degree of adaptation required to fit the new context, the need for capacity building in implementation to bridge the gap between research and routine practice and the focus on explaining why, for whom and in what circumstances an intervention works. The JADECARE scaling-out methodology is theory-driven and pragmatic and aims to facilitate the transfer of complex interventions across different contexts.

Due to population ageing and medical advances, people with advanced chronic diseases (ACD) live longer. Such patients are even more likely to face either temporary or permanent reduced functional reserve, which typically further increases their healthcare resource use and the burden of care on their caregiver(s). Accordingly, these patients and their caregiver(s) may benefit from integrated supportive care provided via digitally supported interventions. This approach may either maintain or improve their quality of life, increase their independence, and optimize the healthcare resource use from early stages. ADLIFE is an EU-funded project, aiming to improve the quality of life of older people with ACD by providing integrated personalized care via a digitally enabled toolbox. Indeed, the ADLIFE toolbox is a digital solution which provides patients, caregivers, and health professionals with digitally enabled, integrated, and personalized care, supporting clinical decisions, and encouraging independence and self-management. Here we present the protocol of the ADLIFE study, which is designed to provide robust scientific evidence on the assessment of the effectiveness, socio-economic, implementation, and technology acceptance aspects of the ADLIFE intervention compared to the current standard of care (SoC) when applied in real-life settings of seven different pilot sites across six countries. A quasi-experimental trial following a multicenter, non-randomized, non-concurrent, unblinded, and controlled design will be implemented. Patients in the intervention group will receive the ADLIFE intervention, while patients in the control group will receive SoC. The assessment of the ADLIFE intervention will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Chronic diseases introduce challenges for the patients to continuously be involved in their care activities and manage the changing requirements of their disease. Patient empowerment activities are a critical component to assist patients in their long-term care journey. In the ADLIFE project (H2020, SC1-DTH-11-2019, 875209), an integrated care planning approach is used where patients are assigned various care plan activities by multidisciplinary care teams. To increase patients’ adherence to the care plan, a continuous behavioral monitoring architecture is developed for delivering digital personalised, just-in time adaptive interventions.

Background: There is an increasing need to organize the care around the patient and not the disease, while considering the complex realities of multiple physical and psychosocial conditions, and polypharmacy. Integrated patient-centered care delivery platforms have been developed for both patients and clinicians. These platforms could provide a promising way to achieve a collaborative environment that improves the provision of integrated care for patients via enhanced information and communication technology solutions for semiautomated clinical decision support. Objective: The Collaborative Care and Cure Cloud project (C3-Cloud) has developed 2 collaborative computer platforms for patients and members of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and deployed these in 3 different European settings. The objective of this study is to pilot test the platforms and evaluate their impact on patients with 2 or more chronic conditions (diabetes mellitus type 2, heart failure, kidney failure, depression), their informal caregivers, health care professionals, and, to some extent, health care systems. Methods: This paper describes the protocol for conducting an evaluation of user experience, acceptability, and usefulness of the platforms. For this, 2 “testing and evaluation” phases have been defined, involving multiple qualitative methods (focus groups and surveys) and advanced impact modeling (predictive modeling and cost-benefit analysis). Patients and health care professionals were identified and recruited from 3 partnering regions in Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom via electronic health record screening. Results: The technology trial in this 4-year funded project (2016-2020) concluded in April 2020. The pilot technology trial for evaluation phases 3 and 4 was launched in November 2019 and carried out until April 2020. Data collection for these phases is completed with promising results on platform acceptance and socioeconomic impact. We believe that the phased, iterative approach taken is useful as it involves relevant stakeholders at crucial stages in the platform development and allows for a sound user acceptance assessment of the final product. Conclusions: Patients with multiple chronic conditions often experience shortcomings in the care they receive. It is hoped that personalized care plan platforms for patients and collaboration platforms for members of MDTs can help tackle the specific challenges of clinical guideline reconciliation for patients with multimorbidity and improve the management of polypharmacy. The initial evaluative phases have indicated promising results of platform usability. Results of phases 3 and 4 were methodologically useful, yet limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03834207; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03834207 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/21994

Purpose: The existing evidence suggests that a complete evaluation of mental health should incorporate both psychopathology and mental well-being indicators. However, few studies categorize European adolescents into subgroups based on such complete mental health data. This study used the data on mental well-being and symptoms of mental and behavioral disorders to explore the mental health profiles of adolescents in Europe.Methods: Data collected from adolescents (N = 3767; mean age 12.4 [SD = 0.9]) from five European countries supplied the information on their mental well-being (personal resilience, school resilience, quality of life, and mental well-being) and mental and behavioral disorder symptoms (anxiety, depression, stress, bullying, cyber-bullying, and use of tobacco, alcohol, or cannabis). Multiple correspondence analysis and cluster analysis were combined to classify the youths into mental health profiles.Results: Adolescents were categorized into three mental health profiles. The "poor mental health" profile (6%) was characterized by low levels of well-being and moderate symptoms of mental disorders. The "good mental health" profile group (26%) showed high well-being and few symptoms of mental disorders, and the "intermediate mental health" profile (68%) was characterized by average well-being and mild-to-moderate symptoms of mental disorders. Groups with higher levels of well-being and fewer symptoms of mental disorders showed lower rates of behavioral problems. Mental well-being indicators strongly contributed to this classification.Conclusion: Adolescents with the "intermediate" or "poor" mental health profiles may benefit from interventions to improve mental health. Implications for school-based interventions are discussed.Trial registration number (TRN) and date of registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03951376. Registered 15 May 2019.

BACKGROUND There is an increasing need to organize the care around the patient and not the disease, while considering the complex realities of multiple physical and psychosocial conditions, and polypharmacy. Integrated patient-centered care delivery platforms have been developed for both patients and clinicians. These platforms could provide a promising way to achieve a collaborative environment that improves the provision of integrated care for patients via enhanced information and communication technology solutions for semiautomated clinical decision support. OBJECTIVE The Collaborative Care and Cure Cloud project (C3-Cloud) has developed 2 collaborative computer platforms for patients and members of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and deployed these in 3 different European settings. The objective of this study is to pilot test the platforms and evaluate their impact on patients with 2 or more chronic conditions (diabetes mellitus type 2, heart failure, kidney failure, depression), their informal caregivers, health care professionals, and, to some extent, health care systems. METHODS This paper describes the protocol for conducting an evaluation of user experience, acceptability, and usefulness of the platforms. For this, 2 “testing and evaluation” phases have been defined, involving multiple qualitative methods (focus groups and surveys) and advanced impact modeling (predictive modeling and cost-benefit analysis). Patients and health care professionals were identified and recruited from 3 partnering regions in Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom via electronic health record screening. RESULTS The technology trial in this 4-year funded project (2016-2020) concluded in April 2020. The pilot technology trial for evaluation phases 3 and 4 was launched in November 2019 and carried out until April 2020. Data collection for these phases is completed with promising results on platform acceptance and socioeconomic impact. We believe that the phased, iterative approach taken is useful as it involves relevant stakeholders at crucial stages in the platform development and allows for a sound user acceptance assessment of the final product. CONCLUSIONS Patients with multiple chronic conditions often experience shortcomings in the care they receive. It is hoped that personalized care plan platforms for patients and collaboration platforms for members of MDTs can help tackle the specific challenges of clinical guideline reconciliation for patients with multimorbidity and improve the management of polypharmacy. The initial evaluative phases have indicated promising results of platform usability. Results of phases 3 and 4 were methodologically useful, yet limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03834207; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03834207 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR1-10.2196/21994

Objectives: To evaluate the impact in terms of use of health services, clinical outcomes, functional status, and patient´s satisfaction of an integrated care program, the CareWell program, for complex patients with multimorbidity, supported by information and communication technology platforms in six European regions.Data Sources: Primary data were used and the follow-up period ranged between 8 and 12 months.Study design: A quasi-experimental study, targeting chronic patients aged 65 or older, with 2 or more conditions – one of them necessarily being diabetes, congestive heart failure or congestive obstructive pulmonary disease. The intervention group received the integrated care program and the control group received usual care. Generalized mixed regression models were used.Data collection: Data were obtained from individual interviews and electronic clinical records.Principal Findings: Overall, 856 patients were recruited (475 intervention and 381 control). In the intervention group, the number of visits to emergency rooms was significantly lower, and the number of visits to the general practitioners and primary care nurses was higher than in the control group.Conclusion: The CareWell program resulted in improvements in the use of health services, strengthening the role of PC as the cornerstone of care provision for complex patients with multimorbidity.

Patients with multimorbidity (defined as the co-occurrence of multiple chronic diseases) frequently experience fragmented care, which increases the risk of negative outcomes. A recently proposed Integrated Multimorbidity Care Model aims to overcome many issues related to fragmented care. In the context of Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS, an implementation methodology was developed for the care model, which is being piloted in five sites. We aim to (1) explain the methodology used to implement the care model and (2) describe how the pilot sites have adapted and applied the proposed methodology. The model is being implemented in Spain (Andalusia and Aragon), Lithuania (Vilnius and Kaunas), and Italy (Rome). Local implementation working groups at each site adapted the model to local needs, goals, and resources using the same methodological steps: (1) Scope analysis; (2) situation analysis—“strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats” (SWOT) analysis; (3) development and improvement of implementation methodology; and (4) final development of an action plan. This common implementation strategy shows how care models can be adapted according to local and regional specificities. Analysis of the common key outcome indicators at the post-implementation phase will help to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness, as well as highlight any difficulties in adapting a common Integrated Multimorbidity Care Model in different countries and clinical settings.

Purpose: To ensure that more people will benefit from integrated care initiatives, scaling-up of successful initiatives is the way forward. However, new challenges present themselves as knowledge on how to achieve successful large-scale implementation is scarce. The EU-funded project SCIROCCO uses a step-based scaling-up strategy to explore what to scale-up, and how to scale-up integrated care initiatives by matching the complementary strengths and weaknesses of five European regions involved in integrated care. The purpose of this paper is to describe a multi-method evaluation protocol designed to understand what factors influence the implementation of the SCIROCCO strategy to support the scaling-up of integrated care. Design/methodology/approach: The first part of the protocol focuses on the assessment of the implementation fidelity of the SCIROCCO step-based strategy. The objective is to gain insight in whether the step-based strategy is implemented as it was designed to explore what works and does not work when implementing the scaling-up strategy. The second part concerns a realist evaluation to examine what it is about the SCIROCCO’s strategy that works for whom, why, how and in which circumstances when scaling-up integrated care. Findings: The intended study will provide valuable information on the implementation of the scaling-up strategy which will help to explain for what specific reasons the implementation succeeds and will facilitate further improvement of project outcomes. Originality/value: The expected insights could be useful to guide the development, implementation and evaluation of future scaling-up strategies to advance the change towards more sustainable health and care systems.