Integrating general practitioners' and patients' perspectives in the development of a digital tool supporting primary care for older patients with multimorbidity: a focus group study.

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2025-01-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333
Ingmar Schäfer, Vivienne Jahns, Valentina Paucke, Dagmar Lühmann, Martin Scherer, Julia Nothacker
{"title":"Integrating general practitioners' and patients' perspectives in the development of a digital tool supporting primary care for older patients with multimorbidity: a focus group study.","authors":"Ingmar Schäfer, Vivienne Jahns, Valentina Paucke, Dagmar Lühmann, Martin Scherer, Julia Nothacker","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The web application gp-multitool.de is based on the German clinical practice guideline \"multimorbidity\" and supports mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs (general practitioners) and patients. The application facilitates sending hyperlinks to standardized assessments by email, which can be completed by patients on any suitable digital device. GPs can document clinical decisions. The tool also supports a structured medication review. Aims of this study were to consider needs and wants of the target groups in implementing the \"multimorbidity\" clinical practice guideline in a digital tool, and to examine themes of discussions in order to identify which aspects were considered most important for customising a digital tool.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted six focus groups with 32 GPs and six focus groups with 33 patients. Eight groups were conducted alongside the programming of the web application and four after finishing a prototype. GPs were recruited by mail and asked to invite up to six eligible patients from their practice to participate. Focus groups were based on semi-structured interview guides and discussed assessments, functionalities, usability and reliability of gp-multitool.de. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPs wanted to avoid unnecessary and time-consuming functions and did not want to explore problems that they could not provide solutions for. For some assessments, GPs suggested simplifying scales or including residual categories. GPs and patients also addressed possible misunderstandings due to wording and discussed if some items might be too intimate or overtax patients intellectually. In most cases, participants confirmed usability, but they suggested changes in default settings and pointed out a few minor bugs that needed to be fixed. While some GPs considered data security an important topic, most patients were unconcerned with this issue and open to share their data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates that focus groups can be used to customize a digital tool according to the needs and wants of target groups and thus, improve content, functionality, usability, and reliability of digital tools. However, digital tools still need to be piloted and evaluated in everyday care. In our focus groups, study participants confirmed that gp-multitool.de can be a relevant approach for overcoming deficits in the information needed for mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":"7 ","pages":"1499333"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11790651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The web application gp-multitool.de is based on the German clinical practice guideline "multimorbidity" and supports mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs (general practitioners) and patients. The application facilitates sending hyperlinks to standardized assessments by email, which can be completed by patients on any suitable digital device. GPs can document clinical decisions. The tool also supports a structured medication review. Aims of this study were to consider needs and wants of the target groups in implementing the "multimorbidity" clinical practice guideline in a digital tool, and to examine themes of discussions in order to identify which aspects were considered most important for customising a digital tool.

Materials and methods: We conducted six focus groups with 32 GPs and six focus groups with 33 patients. Eight groups were conducted alongside the programming of the web application and four after finishing a prototype. GPs were recruited by mail and asked to invite up to six eligible patients from their practice to participate. Focus groups were based on semi-structured interview guides and discussed assessments, functionalities, usability and reliability of gp-multitool.de. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis.

Results: GPs wanted to avoid unnecessary and time-consuming functions and did not want to explore problems that they could not provide solutions for. For some assessments, GPs suggested simplifying scales or including residual categories. GPs and patients also addressed possible misunderstandings due to wording and discussed if some items might be too intimate or overtax patients intellectually. In most cases, participants confirmed usability, but they suggested changes in default settings and pointed out a few minor bugs that needed to be fixed. While some GPs considered data security an important topic, most patients were unconcerned with this issue and open to share their data.

Conclusion: Our study indicates that focus groups can be used to customize a digital tool according to the needs and wants of target groups and thus, improve content, functionality, usability, and reliability of digital tools. However, digital tools still need to be piloted and evaluated in everyday care. In our focus groups, study participants confirmed that gp-multitool.de can be a relevant approach for overcoming deficits in the information needed for mutual prioritisation of treatments by GPs and patients.

整合全科医生和患者的观点,开发支持对患有多种疾病的老年患者进行初级保健的数字化工具:焦点小组研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信