No abstract

In this descriptive study, the use of a professional e-communication tool, Congredi, is evaluated. Ninety-six Congredi records of patients with dementia could be divided into the subgroups low-complex care (n = 43) and high-complex care (n = 53). If Congredi is an adequate communication tool for professionals, the changing involvement of caregivers must also be reflected within the two subgroups. We hypothesized that use would be more intensive in the high-complex group in comparison with the low-complex group. Data were gathered during 42 weeks. Results showed that the mean number of care activities in the high-complex group was significantly higher than in the low-complex group (10.43 vs 5.61, P = .001). The number of professionals involved with the high-complex care group (3.58) was higher compared to the low-complex care group (2.51) (P = .000). The most frequent use was by case managers and nurses (43.4%) in the high-complex group and by several case managers (41.9%) in the low-complex group. It was concluded that professionals used Congredi adequately in the multidisciplinary care of patients with dementia because the changing involvement of caregivers and the level of care activities were reflected in the use of Congredi.

BackgroundHome-dwelling elderly patients with multimorbidity are at risk of fragmentation of care because of the many different professionals involved and a potentially unclear level of communication. Multidisciplinary communication seems to occur incidentally. Mutual feedback is needed for a professional team to provide consistent care and adequate support to the patient system. eHealth technology can improve outcomes.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a tool, Congredi, for electronic communication by professionals for the care of home-dwelling elderly patients.MethodsThe research group was recruited through general practices and home care organizations. Congredi, a tool designed for multidisciplinary communication, was made available for professionals in primary care. It consists of a care plan and a communication channel (secure emailing). Professionals opened Congredi records for elderly patients who had 2 or more professionals involved. The records were the unit of analysis. Data were gathered from the Congredi system over a period of 42 weeks.ResultsAn inclusion rate of 21.4% (203/950) was achieved; nearly half of the participants were nurses. During the study, professionals were active in 448 patient records; female professionals were prevalent. In the patient records, 3 types of actions (care activities, emailing, and process activities) were registered. Most activities occurred in the multidisciplinary records (mean 12.2), which had twice the number of activities of monodisciplinary records (6.35), and solo records had a mean of 3.43 activities. Most activities were care activities (mean 9.14), emailing had a mean of 0.89 activities, and process activities had a mean of 0.29.ConclusionsAn e-communication tool (Congredi) was usable for improving multidisciplinary communication among professionals. It even seemed to yield results for 40% of the professionals who used the e-care plan on their own. The content of the tool provided an active communication practice, with significant increases observed in the actions that must be shared for the effective coordination of care.

Background Elderly patients in primary care often have multiple health problems, with different healthcare professionals involved. For consistency in care, it is required that communication amongst professionals and patient-systems (patient and informal-carers) be well tuned. Electronic-communication can make it easier for patient-system to be active in care. Objective To examine whether an e-communication tool (Congredi) designed for professionals, including a care plan and secure e-mail, is usable for patient-systems and what their experiences are. Methods In a multi-method study, home-dwelling elderly patients with two or more professionals were invited to use Congredi; data were gathered from the system after 42 weeks. Also semi-structured interviews were undertaken with patient-systems with topics retrieved from literature. Analysis took place by two researchers independently; the themes were extracted together by consensus. Results Data about actual use of the tool were gathered from 22 patients. Four profiles of Congredi-users were distinguished, varying in intensity of use. Data from interviews with members of patient-systems (n = 7) showed that they were motivated and able to use Congredi. Barriers in daily use were limited participation of professionals, unanswered e-mail and not being alerted about actions. Despite limitations, patient-systems retained their motivation. Conclusion Congredi was usable for patient-systems. The barriers found seem not to be tool-related but primarily user-related. An important barrier for daily use was limited active participation of involved professionals in a complete feedback loop. Potential for future implementation was found, as patient-systems were intrinsically motivated for better feedback with the professionals, even though in this study it only partly met their expectations.