初级保健复杂性的流行及其相关因素:新加坡的经验。

IF 2 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jing Sheng Quek, Jeremy Kaiwei Lew, Eng Sing Lee, Helen Elizabeth Smith, Sabrina Kay Wye Wong
{"title":"初级保健复杂性的流行及其相关因素:新加坡的经验。","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":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":2.0000,\"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}","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

摘要

导言:随着人口老龄化,患者的复杂性正在增加,加强了对资源充足,协调护理的需求。更深入地了解导致这种复杂性的因素对于优化资源分配至关重要。本研究评估了新加坡初级保健机构中复杂护理需求的患病率,并确定了与这些需求相关的因素。方法:采用定性研究设计,我们开发了一份患者复杂性问卷,以评估新加坡家庭医生如何认识患者复杂性。69名经验丰富的初级保健医生应用该工具评估患者就诊情况,并将每种情况归类为“常规护理”(RC)、“具有医学挑战性”(MC)或“复杂护理”(CC)。我们比较了这些类别的护理需求,并使用混合效应多项逻辑回归来确定复杂性的独立预测因子。结果:在4327次评估中,15.0%为CC, 18.5%为MC, 66.4%为RC。在CC和MC遭遇中,最常见的医疗挑战是多种药物(CC为66.2%,MC为44.9%);慢性疾病控制不良(CC 41.3%, MC 24.5%);治疗相互作用(CC为34.4%,MC为26.0%)。经常发现的非医疗问题包括卫生素养低(CC为32.6%,MC为20.8%);健康生活方式行为的动机有限(CC为27.2%,MC为16.6%);需要与医院专家协调护理(CC为24.7%,MC为17.1%)。复杂性的前3个独立预测因素包括需要辅助的行动能力限制(需要轮椅/手推车的优势比[OR]: CC vs RC为7.14,95%可信区间[CI] 4.74-10.74);更长的医生咨询时间(花20分钟看医生的OR: CC vs RC为3.96,95% CI 2.86-5.48);社会经济地位低(居住在一室或两室组屋的OR: CC vs RC 2.98, 95% CI 1.74-5.13)。结论:高护理需求,包括CC和MC相遇,在初级保健互动中普遍存在。这些发现强调,仅仅依靠慢性疾病数量不足以捕捉患者复杂性的全部范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prevalence of complexity in primary care and its associated factors: A Singapore experience.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信