Introduction: Self-management is considered a potential answer to the increasing demand for family medicine by people suffering from a chronic condition or multi-morbidity. A key element of self-management is goal setting. Goal setting is often defined as a moment of agreement between a professional and a patient. In the self-management literature, however, goal setting is regarded as a circular process. Still, it is unclear how professionals working in family medicine can put it into practice. This background paper aims to contribute to the understanding of goal setting within self-management and to identify elements that need further development for practical use. Debate: Four questions for debate emerge in this article: (1) What are self-management goals? (2) What is necessary to accomplish the process of goal setting within self-management? (3) How can professionals decide on the degree of support needed for goal setting within self-management? (4) How can patients set their goals and how can they be supported? Implications: Self-management goals can be set for different (life) domains. Using a holistic framework will help in creating an overview of patients’ goals that do not merely focus on medical issues. It is a challenge for professionals to coach their patients to think about and set their goals themselves. More insight in patients’ willingness and ability to set self-management goals is desirable. Moreover, as goal setting is a circular process, professionals need to be supported to go through this process with their patients.
Clear role descriptions promote the quality of interprofessional collaboration. Currently, it is unclear to what extent healthcare professionals consider pharmaceutical care (PC) activities to be nurses’ responsibility in order to obtain best care quality. This study aimed to create and evaluate a framework describing potential nursing tasks in PC and to investigate nurses’ level of responsibility. A framework of PC tasks and contextual factors was developed based on literature review and previous DeMoPhaC project results. Tasks and context were cross-sectionally evaluated using an online survey in 14 European countries. A total of 923 nurses, 240 physicians and 199 pharmacists responded. The majority would consider nurses responsible for tasks within: medication self-management (86–97%), patient education (85–96%), medication safety (83–95%), monitoring adherence (82–97%), care coordination (82–95%), and drug monitoring (78–96%). The most prevalent level of responsibility was ‘with shared responsibility’. Prescription management tasks were considered to be nurses’ responsibility by 48–81% of the professionals. All contextual factors were indicated as being relevant for nurses’ role in PC by at least 74% of the participants. No task nor contextual factor was removed from the framework after evaluation. This framework can be used to enable healthcare professionals to openly discuss allocation of specific (shared) responsibilities and tasks.
Background: Changes in reimbursement have been compelling for Dutch primary care practices to apply a disease management approach for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This approach includes individual patient consultations with a practice nurse, who coaches patients in COPD management. The aim of this study was to gauge the feasibility of adding a web-based patient self-management support application, by assessing patients’ self-management, patients’ health status, the impact on the organization of care, and the level of application use and appreciation. Methods: The study employed a mixed methods design. Six practice nurses recruited COPD patients during a consultation. The e-Health application included a questionnaire that captured information on demographics, self-management related behaviors (smoking cessation, physical activity and medication adherence) and their determinants, and nurse recommendations. The application provided tailored feedback messages to patients and provided the nurse with reports. Data were collected through questionnaires and medical record abstractions at baseline and one year later. Semi-structured interviews with patients and nurses were conducted. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative data and content analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data. Results: Eleven patients, recruited by three nurses, used the application 1 to 7 times (median 4). Most patients thought that the application supported self-management, but their interest diminished after multiple uses. Impact on patients’ health could not be determined due to the small sample size. Nurses reported benefits for the organization of care and made suggestions to optimize the use of the reports. Conclusion: Results suggest that it is possible to integrate a web-based COPD self-management application into the current primary care disease management process. The pilot study also revealed opportunities to improve the application and reports, in order to increase technology use and appreciation.
