Table 1.

Overview of the included studies

1st Author, year	Country	Study design	Time for data collection	Setting	Multimorbidity	Type of participants	No. of participant (%men)	Age mean +/− sd, median, {range}, (age-groups)	Objectives	Quality rating: repor-ted/items
Andreasen, 2015 [22]	Denmark	Interviews	1 week after discharge	Primary to secondary	Tilburg Frailty Indicator + comorbidity	Acutely admitted frail elderly	14 (50)	80.6, {69–93}	“was to explore how the frail elderly experience daily life 1 week after discharge from an acute admission to the hospital”	11/11
Arendts, 2015 [21]	Australia	Interviews	When resident were able to do the interview	Secondary to primary	Unclear*	Residents of Residential Aged Care facilities (RACF)	11 (18)	88	“to capture and interpret the perspectives of three important decision-making groups concerning the transfer of residents from RACF to Emergency department; to understand how the perspectives of these converge and diverge; and to explore shared decision-making and the extent to which there was delegation of transfer decisions to others”	8/11
Bayliss, 2008 [23]	USA	Interviews	Unclear	Secondary	Three target conditions (diabetes, depression, osteoarthritis) + self-reported condition	Members of a not- for-profit Health Maintenance Organization	26 (50)	(65–84)	“was to explore patient perspectives on components of ‘best’ Processes of care for persons with multiple morbidities in order to inform the development of future interventions to improve care”	8/11
Butterworth, 2014 [24]	United Kingdom	Interviews	Unclear	Secondary	14 participants had one or more chronic diseases	Registered with surgery for at least 6 month	20 (45)	(65–74), (75–84), (85–94)	“to investigate the association between older patients’ trust in their general practitioner and their perceptions of shared decision-making.”	8/11
Foss, 2011 [25]	Norway	Face to face questionnaire	2–3 weeks after discharge	Primary to secondary	Unclear*	Patients discharged from hospitals	254 (31.5)	86.9 +/− 4.9	“was to describe older hospital patients’ discharge experiences concerning participation in discharge planning”	10/11
Gabrielsson-Järhult, 2016 [26]	Sweden	Observations and discharge meeting material	Before discharge	Primary to secondary	Unclear*	Admitted to hospital and about to be discharged	27 (37)	81	“was to explore older people’s concerns about their needs as expressed in a discharge planning meeting at a hospital”	10/11
Gill, 2014 [27]	Canada	Interviews	Unclear	Primary to secondary	Two or more chronic conditions	Patients from a family health team	27 (56)	82.3 +/− 7.7	“was to explore the challenges experienced by 27 patients-caregivers-family physician triads in an attempt to capture a full understanding of their health system experience and to illuminate where system improvements are most needed for managing multimorbidity”	11/11
Neiterman, 2015 [28]	Canada	Interviews	2–5 weeks post discharge	Primary to secondary	Lace score 10 or higher	Patients discharged from acute care hospital	17 (58)	(70–89)	“was to understand how patients and their caregivers experienced the transition to community and which barriers and facilitators they identified on their way to recovery”	11/11
Sheaff, 2017 [29]	United Kingdom	Interviews	May 2012–November 2013	Primary to secondary	Two or more specified chronic conditions	Patient who had been admitted within a year and who had received care from 2 separate healthcare services	66(NA)	78, (65 or older)	“was to analyze what information was changed or lost in communication between clinicians and a group of frail older patients in England, and some implications for care coordination and continuity”	6/11

*Included because we know that among those aged more than 85 years, 82% are patients with multimorbidity