Coexisting multiple health conditions is common among older people, a population that is increasing globally. The potential for polypharmacy, adverse events, drug interactions and development of additional health conditions complicates prescribing decisions for these patients. Artificial intelligence (AI)-generated decision-making tools may help guide clinical decisions in the context of multiple health conditions, by determining which of the multiple medication options is best. This study aims to explore the perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients on the use of AI in the management of multiple health conditions.

A qualitative study will be conducted using semistructured interviews. Adults (≥18 years) with multiple health conditions living in the West Midlands of England and HCPs with experience in caring for patients with multiple health conditions will be eligible and purposively sampled. Patients will be identified from Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum; CPRD will contact general practitioners who will in turn, send a letter to patients inviting them to take part. Eligible HCPs will be recruited through British HCP bodies and known contacts. Up to 30 patients and 30 HCPs will be recruited, until data saturation is achieved. Interviews will be in-person or virtual, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. The topic guide is designed to explore participants’ attitudes towards AI-informed clinical decision-making to augment clinician-directed decision-making, the perceived advantages and disadvantages of both methods and attitudes towards risk management. Case vignettes comprising a common decision pathway for patients with multiple health conditions will be presented during each interview to invite participants’ opinions on how their experiences compare. Data will be analysed thematically using the Framework Method.

This study has been approved by the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 22/SC/0210). Written informed consent or verbal consent will be obtained prior to each interview. The findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and lay summaries.

Over 40 million people in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) experience serious health-related suffering (SHS) annually and require palliative care. Patient and caregiver experiences of SHS in LMICs are understudied despite their importance in guiding palliative care provision. Diabetes and cancer are the second-leading and third-leading causes of death in Mexico, causing a significant SHS burden on patients, families and health systems. This study examines SHS and palliative care from the point of view of patients with cancer and diabetes and their caregivers.

A qualitative descriptive study based on in-depth telephone interviews was conducted between August 2021 and February 2022. Data were analysed through inductive thematic analysis.

Overall, 20 patients with end-stage cancer, 13 patients with diabetes and 35 family caregivers were interviewed individually.

Participants were recruited from two family medicine clinics and a pain clinic in Mexico City.

Seven themes emerged: (1) suffering as a multifaceted phenomenon, (2) diversity in perceptions of suffering, (3) different coping strategies, (4) need and perceived importance of relief from suffering, (5) barriers to accessing services to relieve suffering, (6) demand for the health sector’s active and humane role in addressing suffering and (7) preferences and need for comprehensive care for relief from suffering. The primary coping strategies included family companionship, protective buffering and faith-based support. Participants lacked knowledge of palliative care. They expressed the importance of relief from suffering, viewing it as the health sector’s responsibility and requesting more humane, personalised care and access to medicines and pain clinics.

The multifaceted nature of SHS highlights the health system’s responsibility to provide high-quality palliative care. Policies to enhance access to palliative care should integrate it into primary care, redesigning services towards patient and caregiver biopsychosocial and spiritual needs and ensuring access to medicines and competent health personnel.