Advocating for a Flexible Approach to Defining Multiple Long Term Conditions in Healthcare Research
"Multiple long term conditions is a term that is useful for the conceptual framework it provides, rather than as a diagnostic label. Achieving a rigid consensus definition may not be attainable or desirable." - Dr Thomas Beaney
In a recent opinion piece, Dr Thomas Beaney, Clinical Research Fellow, challenges the conventional approach to defining and diagnosing Multiple Long Term Conditions (MLTC). Beaney argues that MLTC should be viewed more as a conceptual framework than a strict diagnostic label, shedding light on the complexities of managing multiple chronic conditions.
Beaney's article delves into the complexities surrounding the definition of MLTC, which typically refers to individuals living with two or more chronic health conditions. While this definition seems straightforward, Beaney reveals that the specific conditions considered under the MLTC umbrella vary widely across studies, complicating efforts to establish a consistent prevalence rate.
Dr Thomas Beaney
"Recent work by our team showed that not only does the number of conditions included in a classification of MLTC lead to variation in the estimated prevalence, but the way in which we define chronicity of conditions also has a large impact. Chronicity itself lacks a universally agreed characterisation but is usually defined by an extended duration—for example, a disease lasting at least three or 12 months, or “lifelong."
Highlighting recent research findings, Beaney underscores the significant impact that differing methodologies for measuring chronicity can have on estimated prevalence rates. According to Beaney, the prevalence of MLTC can vary dramatically depending on how chronicity is defined, raising questions about the reliability of using MLTC as a diagnostic label. Beaney argues that MLTC research should shift its focus from rigid definitions to understanding the intricate interactions between various health conditions and the broader biological, psychological, and social factors influencing individuals with MLTC. He suggests that this approach could lead to breakthroughs in identifying shared causes and treatment pathways among individuals with multiple chronic conditions.
Embracing a diversity of definitions
Contrary to seeking a universally agreed-upon definition, Beaney proposes embracing the diversity of definitions available in MLTC research. He believes that this approach will better capture the diverse experiences of individuals living with MLTC and foster innovation in exploring new treatment modalities. Beaney's perspective challenges the status quo in MLTC research and invites scholars and practitioners to rethink their approach to understanding and managing multiple chronic conditions. As the field continues to evolve, Beaney's insights offer a fresh perspective that could pave the way for more effective strategies in addressing the complexities of MLTC.
Dr Thomas Beaney's opinion piece advocates for a shift towards a more holistic understanding of MLTC, one that goes beyond a simple tally of conditions to consider the intricate interplay between health, social, and psychological factors. His call for flexibility in defining MLTC signals a new direction in healthcare research—one that prioritises the complexity of human health over rigid diagnostic labels.
