Prevalence of complexity in primary care and its associated factors: A Singapore experience.

IF 2.5 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jing Sheng Quek, Jeremy Kaiwei Lew, Eng Sing Lee, Helen Elizabeth Smith, Sabrina Kay Wye Wong
{"title":"Prevalence of complexity in primary care and its associated factors: A Singapore experience.","authors":"Jing Sheng Quek, Jeremy Kaiwei Lew, Eng Sing Lee, Helen Elizabeth Smith, Sabrina Kay Wye Wong","doi":"10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2024312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>As the population ages, patient complexity is increasing, intensifying the demand for well-resourced, coordinated care. A deeper understanding of the factors contributing to this complexity is essential for optimising resource allocation. This study evaluates the prevalence of complex care needs in Singapore's primary care settings and identifies the factors associated with these needs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using a qualitative study design, we developed a patient complexity questionnaire to assess how Singapore family physicians recognise patient complexity. Sixty-nine experienced primary care physicians applied this tool to assess patient encounters, categorising each as \"routine care\" (RC), \"medically challenging\" (MC), or \"complex care\" (CC). We compared the care needs across these categories and used mixed-effects multinomial logistic regression to determine the independent predictors of complexity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 4327 encounters evaluated, 15.0% were classified as CC, 18.5% as MC, and 66.4% as RC. In both CC and MC encounters, the most common medical challenges were polypharmacy (66.2% in CC, 44.9% in MC); poorly controlled chronic conditions (41.3% in CC, 24.5% in MC); and treatment interactions (34.4% in CC, 26.0% in MC). Non-medical issues frequently identified included low health literacy (32.6% in CC, 20.8% in MC); limited motivation for healthy lifestyle behaviours (27.2% in CC, 16.6% in MC); and the need for coordinated care with hospital specialists (24.7% in CC, 17.1% in MC). The top 3 independent predictors of complexity included mobility limitations requiring assistance (odds ratio [OR] for requiring wheelchair/trolley: 7.14 for CC vs RC, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.74-10.74); longer consultation times with physicians (OR for taking >20 minutes for doctor's consultation: 3.96 for CC vs RC, 95% CI 2.86-5.48); and low socioeconomic status (OR for living in 1- or 2-room HDB flats: 2.98 for CC vs RC, 95% CI 1.74-5.13).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>High care needs, encompassing both CC and MC encounters, were prevalent in primary care interactions. These findings highlight that relying solely on chronic disease count is insufficient to capture the full spectrum of patient complexity.</p>","PeriodicalId":502093,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore","volume":"54 2","pages":"87-100"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2024312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: As the population ages, patient complexity is increasing, intensifying the demand for well-resourced, coordinated care. A deeper understanding of the factors contributing to this complexity is essential for optimising resource allocation. This study evaluates the prevalence of complex care needs in Singapore's primary care settings and identifies the factors associated with these needs.

Method: Using a qualitative study design, we developed a patient complexity questionnaire to assess how Singapore family physicians recognise patient complexity. Sixty-nine experienced primary care physicians applied this tool to assess patient encounters, categorising each as "routine care" (RC), "medically challenging" (MC), or "complex care" (CC). We compared the care needs across these categories and used mixed-effects multinomial logistic regression to determine the independent predictors of complexity.

Results: Of the 4327 encounters evaluated, 15.0% were classified as CC, 18.5% as MC, and 66.4% as RC. In both CC and MC encounters, the most common medical challenges were polypharmacy (66.2% in CC, 44.9% in MC); poorly controlled chronic conditions (41.3% in CC, 24.5% in MC); and treatment interactions (34.4% in CC, 26.0% in MC). Non-medical issues frequently identified included low health literacy (32.6% in CC, 20.8% in MC); limited motivation for healthy lifestyle behaviours (27.2% in CC, 16.6% in MC); and the need for coordinated care with hospital specialists (24.7% in CC, 17.1% in MC). The top 3 independent predictors of complexity included mobility limitations requiring assistance (odds ratio [OR] for requiring wheelchair/trolley: 7.14 for CC vs RC, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.74-10.74); longer consultation times with physicians (OR for taking >20 minutes for doctor's consultation: 3.96 for CC vs RC, 95% CI 2.86-5.48); and low socioeconomic status (OR for living in 1- or 2-room HDB flats: 2.98 for CC vs RC, 95% CI 1.74-5.13).

Conclusion: High care needs, encompassing both CC and MC encounters, were prevalent in primary care interactions. These findings highlight that relying solely on chronic disease count is insufficient to capture the full spectrum of patient complexity.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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