Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries

ObjectivesThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to e...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ open 2018-08, Vol.8 (8), p.e021072-e021072
Hauptverfasser: Leijten, Fenna R M, Hoedemakers, Maaike, Struckmann, Verena, Kraus, Markus, Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh, Zemplényi, Antal, Ervik, Rune, Vallvé, Claudia, Huiĉ, Mirjana, Czypionka, Thomas, Boland, Melinde, Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e021072
container_issue 8
container_start_page e021072
container_title BMJ open
container_volume 8
creator Leijten, Fenna R M
Hoedemakers, Maaike
Struckmann, Verena
Kraus, Markus
Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh
Zemplényi, Antal
Ervik, Rune
Vallvé, Claudia
Huiĉ, Mirjana
Czypionka, Thomas
Boland, Melinde
Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H
description ObjectivesThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to evaluate these and to choose appropriate outcome measures. Focus groups were held with persons with multimorbidity in eight European countries to better understand what good health and a good care process mean to them and to identify what they find most important in each.MethodsIn 2016, eight focus groups were organised with persons with multimorbidity in: Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the UK (total n=58). Each focus group followed the same two-part procedure: (1) defining (A) good health and well-being and (B) a good care process, and (2) group discussion on prioritising the most important concepts derived from part one and from a list extracted from the literature. Inductive and deductive analyses were done.ResultsOverall, the participants in all focus groups concentrated more on the care process than on health. Persons with multimorbidity defined good health as being able to conduct and plan normal daily activities, having meaningful social relationships and accepting the current situation. Absence of shame, fear and/or stigma, being able to enjoy life and overall psychological well-being were also important facets of good health. Being approached holistically by care professionals was said to be vital to a good care process. Continuity of care and trusting professionals were also described as important. Across countries, little variation in health definitions were found, but variation in defining a good care process was seen.ConclusionA variety of health outcomes that entail well-being, social and psychological facets and especially experience with care outcomes should be included when evaluating integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021072
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6119413</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2099480350</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b472t-3ae2a8a8076d766dc9679e2777f77d173666f75f88038bf8e13c7158acdfa2403</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks1u1DAUhSMEolXpEyAhS2zYpLWdxHZYIKFSKFIlNrC2nOQ641Fip_4pmqfhVXGaoSqs8MZ_3zm-Vz5F8ZrgC0IqdtnNe7eALSkmvMSUYE6fFacU13XJcNM8f7I-Kc5D2OM86qZtGvqyOKkwYYy29Wnx6xNoY40d0ejcgHagprhDyg6oVx6Q9m5GcQdoAR8W6KO5B-T0w9bZgH6aTM9pimZ2vjODiYf3yEPIJ2ETK3SX1GSiepCGmIbDaqBdnwIavUtLQMYiMOMuouvkc1fKot4lG72B8Kp4odUU4Pw4nxU_Pl9_v7opb799-Xr18bbsak5jWSmgSiiBORs4Y0PfMt4C5ZxrzgfCK8aY5o0WAlei0wJI1XPSCNUPWtEaV2fFh813Sd0MQw_5eTXJxZtZ-YN0ysi_b6zZydHdS0ZIW5MqG7w7Gnh3lyBEOZvQwzQpCy4FSXErOBON4Bl9-w-6d8nb3N5KtXWusVkrqjaq9y4ED_qxGILlmgF5zIBcMyC3DGTVm6d9PGr-_HgGLjYgq__L8TeoysFo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2099480350</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries</title><source>BMJ Open Access Journals</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Leijten, Fenna R M ; Hoedemakers, Maaike ; Struckmann, Verena ; Kraus, Markus ; Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh ; Zemplényi, Antal ; Ervik, Rune ; Vallvé, Claudia ; Huiĉ, Mirjana ; Czypionka, Thomas ; Boland, Melinde ; Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</creator><creatorcontrib>Leijten, Fenna R M ; Hoedemakers, Maaike ; Struckmann, Verena ; Kraus, Markus ; Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh ; Zemplényi, Antal ; Ervik, Rune ; Vallvé, Claudia ; Huiĉ, Mirjana ; Czypionka, Thomas ; Boland, Melinde ; Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H ; SELFIE consortium</creatorcontrib><description>ObjectivesThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to evaluate these and to choose appropriate outcome measures. Focus groups were held with persons with multimorbidity in eight European countries to better understand what good health and a good care process mean to them and to identify what they find most important in each.MethodsIn 2016, eight focus groups were organised with persons with multimorbidity in: Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the UK (total n=58). Each focus group followed the same two-part procedure: (1) defining (A) good health and well-being and (B) a good care process, and (2) group discussion on prioritising the most important concepts derived from part one and from a list extracted from the literature. Inductive and deductive analyses were done.ResultsOverall, the participants in all focus groups concentrated more on the care process than on health. Persons with multimorbidity defined good health as being able to conduct and plan normal daily activities, having meaningful social relationships and accepting the current situation. Absence of shame, fear and/or stigma, being able to enjoy life and overall psychological well-being were also important facets of good health. Being approached holistically by care professionals was said to be vital to a good care process. Continuity of care and trusting professionals were also described as important. Across countries, little variation in health definitions were found, but variation in defining a good care process was seen.ConclusionA variety of health outcomes that entail well-being, social and psychological facets and especially experience with care outcomes should be included when evaluating integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2044-6055</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2044-6055</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021072</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30166294</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group LTD</publisher><subject>Chronic illnesses ; Comorbidity ; Continuity of care ; Focus groups ; Holistic medicine ; Literature reviews ; Patient assessment ; Patient-centered care ; Patient-Centred Medicine ; Qualitative research ; Ratings &amp; rankings</subject><ispartof>BMJ open, 2018-08, Vol.8 (8), p.e021072-e021072</ispartof><rights>Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.</rights><rights>2018 Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b472t-3ae2a8a8076d766dc9679e2777f77d173666f75f88038bf8e13c7158acdfa2403</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b472t-3ae2a8a8076d766dc9679e2777f77d173666f75f88038bf8e13c7158acdfa2403</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/8/e021072.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/8/e021072.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,865,886,27554,27555,27929,27930,53796,53798,77606,77637</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30166294$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leijten, Fenna R M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoedemakers, Maaike</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struckmann, Verena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kraus, Markus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zemplényi, Antal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ervik, Rune</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vallvé, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huiĉ, Mirjana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Czypionka, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boland, Melinde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SELFIE consortium</creatorcontrib><title>Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries</title><title>BMJ open</title><addtitle>BMJ Open</addtitle><description>ObjectivesThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to evaluate these and to choose appropriate outcome measures. Focus groups were held with persons with multimorbidity in eight European countries to better understand what good health and a good care process mean to them and to identify what they find most important in each.MethodsIn 2016, eight focus groups were organised with persons with multimorbidity in: Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the UK (total n=58). Each focus group followed the same two-part procedure: (1) defining (A) good health and well-being and (B) a good care process, and (2) group discussion on prioritising the most important concepts derived from part one and from a list extracted from the literature. Inductive and deductive analyses were done.ResultsOverall, the participants in all focus groups concentrated more on the care process than on health. Persons with multimorbidity defined good health as being able to conduct and plan normal daily activities, having meaningful social relationships and accepting the current situation. Absence of shame, fear and/or stigma, being able to enjoy life and overall psychological well-being were also important facets of good health. Being approached holistically by care professionals was said to be vital to a good care process. Continuity of care and trusting professionals were also described as important. Across countries, little variation in health definitions were found, but variation in defining a good care process was seen.ConclusionA variety of health outcomes that entail well-being, social and psychological facets and especially experience with care outcomes should be included when evaluating integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity.</description><subject>Chronic illnesses</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Continuity of care</subject><subject>Focus groups</subject><subject>Holistic medicine</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Patient assessment</subject><subject>Patient-centered care</subject><subject>Patient-Centred Medicine</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Ratings &amp; rankings</subject><issn>2044-6055</issn><issn>2044-6055</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>9YT</sourceid><sourceid>ACMMV</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks1u1DAUhSMEolXpEyAhS2zYpLWdxHZYIKFSKFIlNrC2nOQ641Fip_4pmqfhVXGaoSqs8MZ_3zm-Vz5F8ZrgC0IqdtnNe7eALSkmvMSUYE6fFacU13XJcNM8f7I-Kc5D2OM86qZtGvqyOKkwYYy29Wnx6xNoY40d0ejcgHagprhDyg6oVx6Q9m5GcQdoAR8W6KO5B-T0w9bZgH6aTM9pimZ2vjODiYf3yEPIJ2ETK3SX1GSiepCGmIbDaqBdnwIavUtLQMYiMOMuouvkc1fKot4lG72B8Kp4odUU4Pw4nxU_Pl9_v7opb799-Xr18bbsak5jWSmgSiiBORs4Y0PfMt4C5ZxrzgfCK8aY5o0WAlei0wJI1XPSCNUPWtEaV2fFh813Sd0MQw_5eTXJxZtZ-YN0ysi_b6zZydHdS0ZIW5MqG7w7Gnh3lyBEOZvQwzQpCy4FSXErOBON4Bl9-w-6d8nb3N5KtXWusVkrqjaq9y4ED_qxGILlmgF5zIBcMyC3DGTVm6d9PGr-_HgGLjYgq__L8TeoysFo</recordid><startdate>20180801</startdate><enddate>20180801</enddate><creator>Leijten, Fenna R M</creator><creator>Hoedemakers, Maaike</creator><creator>Struckmann, Verena</creator><creator>Kraus, Markus</creator><creator>Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh</creator><creator>Zemplényi, Antal</creator><creator>Ervik, Rune</creator><creator>Vallvé, Claudia</creator><creator>Huiĉ, Mirjana</creator><creator>Czypionka, Thomas</creator><creator>Boland, Melinde</creator><creator>Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><scope>9YT</scope><scope>ACMMV</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180801</creationdate><title>Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries</title><author>Leijten, Fenna R M ; Hoedemakers, Maaike ; Struckmann, Verena ; Kraus, Markus ; Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh ; Zemplényi, Antal ; Ervik, Rune ; Vallvé, Claudia ; Huiĉ, Mirjana ; Czypionka, Thomas ; Boland, Melinde ; Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b472t-3ae2a8a8076d766dc9679e2777f77d173666f75f88038bf8e13c7158acdfa2403</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Chronic illnesses</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Continuity of care</topic><topic>Focus groups</topic><topic>Holistic medicine</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Patient assessment</topic><topic>Patient-centered care</topic><topic>Patient-Centred Medicine</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Ratings &amp; rankings</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leijten, Fenna R M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoedemakers, Maaike</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struckmann, Verena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kraus, Markus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zemplényi, Antal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ervik, Rune</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vallvé, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huiĉ, Mirjana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Czypionka, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boland, Melinde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SELFIE consortium</creatorcontrib><collection>BMJ Open Access Journals</collection><collection>BMJ Journals:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMJ open</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leijten, Fenna R M</au><au>Hoedemakers, Maaike</au><au>Struckmann, Verena</au><au>Kraus, Markus</au><au>Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh</au><au>Zemplényi, Antal</au><au>Ervik, Rune</au><au>Vallvé, Claudia</au><au>Huiĉ, Mirjana</au><au>Czypionka, Thomas</au><au>Boland, Melinde</au><au>Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen P M H</au><aucorp>SELFIE consortium</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries</atitle><jtitle>BMJ open</jtitle><addtitle>BMJ Open</addtitle><date>2018-08-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>8</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>e021072</spage><epage>e021072</epage><pages>e021072-e021072</pages><issn>2044-6055</issn><eissn>2044-6055</eissn><abstract>ObjectivesThe prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to evaluate these and to choose appropriate outcome measures. Focus groups were held with persons with multimorbidity in eight European countries to better understand what good health and a good care process mean to them and to identify what they find most important in each.MethodsIn 2016, eight focus groups were organised with persons with multimorbidity in: Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the UK (total n=58). Each focus group followed the same two-part procedure: (1) defining (A) good health and well-being and (B) a good care process, and (2) group discussion on prioritising the most important concepts derived from part one and from a list extracted from the literature. Inductive and deductive analyses were done.ResultsOverall, the participants in all focus groups concentrated more on the care process than on health. Persons with multimorbidity defined good health as being able to conduct and plan normal daily activities, having meaningful social relationships and accepting the current situation. Absence of shame, fear and/or stigma, being able to enjoy life and overall psychological well-being were also important facets of good health. Being approached holistically by care professionals was said to be vital to a good care process. Continuity of care and trusting professionals were also described as important. Across countries, little variation in health definitions were found, but variation in defining a good care process was seen.ConclusionA variety of health outcomes that entail well-being, social and psychological facets and especially experience with care outcomes should be included when evaluating integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</pub><pmid>30166294</pmid><doi>10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021072</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2044-6055
ispartof BMJ open, 2018-08, Vol.8 (8), p.e021072-e021072
issn 2044-6055
2044-6055
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6119413
source BMJ Open Access Journals; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Chronic illnesses
Comorbidity
Continuity of care
Focus groups
Holistic medicine
Literature reviews
Patient assessment
Patient-centered care
Patient-Centred Medicine
Qualitative research
Ratings & rankings
title Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T23%3A24%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Defining%20good%20health%20and%20care%20from%20the%20perspective%20of%20persons%20with%20multimorbidity:%20results%20from%20a%20qualitative%20study%20of%20focus%20groups%20in%20eight%20European%20countries&rft.jtitle=BMJ%20open&rft.au=Leijten,%20Fenna%20R%20M&rft.aucorp=SELFIE%20consortium&rft.date=2018-08-01&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=e021072&rft.epage=e021072&rft.pages=e021072-e021072&rft.issn=2044-6055&rft.eissn=2044-6055&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021072&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2099480350%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2099480350&rft_id=info:pmid/30166294&rfr_iscdi=true