Journal of Health Services Research & Policy最新文献

The COVID-19 pandemic mandated a substantial switch in primary health care delivery from an in-person to a mainly remote telephone or video service. As the COVID-19 pandemic approaches its third year, limited progress appears to have been made in terms of policy development around consultation methods for the post-acute phase of the pandemic. In September 2020, the International Primary Care Respiratory Group convened a global panel of primary care clinicians - including family physicians, paediatricians, pharmacists, academics and patients - to consider the policy and health management implications of the move to remote consultations in the primary care setting. The group gave special consideration to how and how far remote consultations should be integrated into routine primary health care delivery. Remote consultations can be a useful alternative to in-person consultations in primary care not only in situations where there is a need for viral infection control but also for the routine delivery of chronic disease management. However, they may not be more time efficient for the clinician, and they can add to the workload and work-related stress for primary care practitioners if they remain the dominant consultation mode. Remote consultations are also less appropriate than in-person consultations for new disease diagnosis, dealing with multiple issues and providing complex care. Ensuring health care professionals have the appropriate skill set to effectively deliver remote consultations, administrative and/or IT support and appropriate reimbursement will be key to achieving optimal integration of remote consultations into routine clinical practice. Addressing digital access and digital literacy issues at a societal level will also be essential to ensure individuals have fair and equitable access to the internet and sufficient security for exchange of personal and health-related data.

Objective: Arts-based research (ABR) refers to the use of art in the research process to help generate, interpret and/or communicate knowledge. We used ABR principles to adapt a centre-staging method to complement a more traditional qualitative approach to evaluate participants' views on dental service reform.

Methods: We asked five individuals in the dental health sector in the National Health Service in Wales to select objects to depict their views on the current reform process and their ideal reform process. This process took place alongside traditional semi-structured interviews with the participants.

Results: There were three marked differences in the centre-staging process as compared to the interviews: (1) there was a greater use of symbolism by the participants, (2) the participants put a greater focus on the process of change and (3) the participants were more likely to reveal the emotions underlying their assessments of the reform process.

Conclusions: The arts-based approach adopted appeared to be highly accessible and has the potential to be used in a wide range of applications.

Objective: Little is known about how to achieve scale and spread beyond the early local adoption of an innovative health care programme. We use the New Care Model - or 'Vanguard' - programme in the English National Health Service to illuminate the process, assessing why only one of five Vanguard programmes was successfully scaled up.

Methods: We interviewed a wide range of stakeholders involved in the Vanguard programme, including programme leads, provider organisations, and policymakers. We also consulted relevant documentation.

Results: A lack of direction near the end of the Vanguard programme, a lack of ongoing resources, and limited success in providing real-time monitoring and evaluation may all have contributed to the failure to scale and spread most of the Vanguard models.

Conclusions: This programme is an example of the 'scale and spread paradox', in which localism was a key factor influencing the successful implementation of the Vanguards but ultimately limited their scale and spread.

Objective: State-level variation in how restrictive policies affect health care access for transgender populations has not been widely studied. Therefore, we assessed the association between structural stigma and four measures of individual health care access among transgender people in the United States, and the extent to which structural stigma explains state-level variability.

Methods: Data were drawn from the 2015-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the Human Rights Campaign's State Equality Index. We calculated weighted proportions and conducted multilevel logistic regression of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.

Results: An increase in the structural stigma score by one standard deviation was associated with lower odds of health care coverage (OR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.96) after adjusting for individual-level confounders. Approximately 11% of the total variance for insurance coverage was attributable to the state level; however, only 18% of state-level variability was explained by structural stigma. Adding Medicaid expansion attenuated the structural stigma-insurance association and explained 22% of state-level variation in health insurance. For the remaining outcomes (usual source of care, routine medical check-up, and cost-related barriers), we found neither meaningful associations nor considerable between-state variability.

Conclusions: Our findings support the importance of Medicaid expansion and transgender-inclusive antidiscrimination protections to enhance health care insurance coverage. From a measurement perspective, however, additional research is needed to develop and validate measures of transgender-specific structural stigma to guide future policy interventions.

Objective: In the context of increasing demand for ambulance services, emergency mental health cases are among the most difficult for ambulance clinicians to attend, partly because the cases often involve referring patients to other services. We describe the characteristics of mental health emergencies in the East Midlands region of the United Kingdom. We explore the association between 999 (i.e. emergency) call records, the clinical impressions of ambulance clinicians attending emergencies and the outcomes of ambulance attendance. We consider the implications of our results for optimizing patient care and ambulance service delivery.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of records of all patients experiencing mental health emergencies attended by ambulances between 1 January 2018 and 31 July 2020. The records comprised details of 103,801 '999' calls (Dispatch), the preliminary diagnoses by ambulance clinicians on-scene (Primary Clinical Impression) and the outcomes of ambulance attendance for patients (Outcome).

Results: A multinomial regression analysis found that model fit with Outcome data was improved with the addition of Dispatch and Primary Clinical Impression categories compared to the fit for the model containing only the intercept and Outcome categories (Chi-square = 18,357.56, df = 180, p < 0.01). Dispatch was a poor predictor of Primary Clinical impression. The most common predictors of Outcome care pathways other than 'Treated and transported' were records of respiratory conditions at Dispatch and anxiety reported by clinicians on-scene.

Conclusions: Drawing on the expertise of mental health specialists may help '999' dispatchers distinguish between physical and mental health emergencies and refer patients to appropriate services earlier in the response cycle. Further investigation is needed to determine if training Dispatch operatives for early triage and referral can be appropriately managed without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To estimate changes in Boston Emergency Services Team (BEST) psychiatric emergency services (PES) encounter volume (total and by care team) and inpatient disposition during the first 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: Data on 30,657 PES encounters was extracted from the four-county, BEST reporting system. The study period consisted of the first 34 weeks of 2019 and 2020. This period corresponded to the first five stages of Massachusetts's COVID-19 public health restrictions: pre-lockdown, lockdown, Phase I, II and III reopenings. Descriptive and regression analyses were performed to estimate changes in encounter volume by care team and disposition.

Results: Compared to the same period in 2019, covariate-adjusted, weekly PES encounters decreased by 39% (β = -0.40, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = [-0.51, -0.28], p < 0.00) during the lockdown. PES volume remained significantly lower during Phase I reopening compared to the previous year but returned to 2019 levels during Phase II. The covariate-adjusted proportion of weekly encounters that led to inpatient admission significantly increased by 16% (CI = [0.11, 0.21], p < 0.00) for mobile crisis teams (MCTs) and significantly declined by 13% (CI = [-0.19, -0.07], p < 0.00) for BEST-designated emergency departments during the lockdown period compared to the prior year.

Conclusions: The overall drop in PES utilization and the rise in inpatient admissions for MCT encounters suggests that during the early phases of the pandemic, patients delayed psychiatric care until they had a psychiatric crisis. Public health messaging about the lockdowns and absent equivalent messaging about the availability of telehealth services may have made patients more reluctant to seek psychiatric care.

Objective: To explore how mental health trusts in England adapted and responded to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim of identifying lessons that can be learned during and beyond the pandemic.

Methods: Following a scoping study, we undertook 52 semi-structured interviews with senior managers, clinicians, patient representatives and commissioning staff across four case study sites. These sites varied in size, location and grading awarded by a national regulatory body. We explored how services have been repurposed and reorganized in response to the pandemic and the participants' perceptions of the impact of these changes on quality of care and the wellbeing of staff.

Results: Mental health trusts have shown great flexibility and resilience in rapidly implementing new models of care and developing creative digital solutions at speed. New collaborative arrangements have been stimulated by a shared sense of urgency and enabled by additional funding and a more permissive policy environment. But there has also been a significant negative impact on the wellbeing of staff, particularly those staff from a minority ethnic background. Also, there were concerns that digital technology could effectively disenfranchise some vulnerable groups and exacerbate existing health inequalities.

Conclusions: Many of the service changes and digital innovations undertaken during the pandemic appear promising. Nevertheless, those changes need to be urgently and rigorously appraised to assure their effectiveness and to assess their impact on social exclusion and health inequalities.

Background: The impact of hospital building design on patients, families and nurses related to nursing care interactions is not well understood. This study reports a pre-post intervention study to understand the effects of the move to a new children's hospital in Perth, Australia, on nurse workflow activities and on patient, family, and nurse experiences.

Methods: We used a pre-post explanatory sequential design involving observation of nurse work tasks; measurement of the Practice Environment Scale and Nurse Work Index; weekly surveys of nurse, patient and family experiences; and nurse focus groups and interviews with patients and families. Survey data were analysed using linear regression; qualitative data analysis used a thematic approach.

Results: Nurse time spent walking almost doubled (p < 0.001), from an estimated 10 min at T1 (pre-move) to around 20 min at T4 (12 months post-move), but there was no difference in nurse time providing patient care (p = 0.114). The Practice Environment Scale and Nurse Work Index showed significantly reduced scores for nursing foundations for quality of care (adjusted mean difference -0.08, p = 0.016) and staffing and resource adequacy (adjusted mean difference -0.19, p < 0.001).This fall was mirrored in nurse experience surveys with a reduction in mean scores from T1 to T3 (3 months post-move) of -0.7 (p < 0.001) and from T1 to T4 of -0.4 (p = 0.002). Thematic analysis of qualitative data found that initial challenges appeared to reduce over time. Nurses reported difficulties managing workflow in the new wards and feelings of exhaustion at T3, but this changed to more positive accounts at T4. For patients and families there was a tension between leaving the old and familiar, enjoying the light and space of the new and shared observations that nurses appeared to be busier at T3. At T4, these experiences had changed to 'being a family in hospital' and confidence that a nurse was always close by.

Conclusions: Both benefits and challenges of the new hospital design were encountered from the perspective of nurses, patients, and families. Nurses spent double the time walking in the new environment, but time spent providing patient care was unchanged. Over time, the initial practice challenges reduced as nurses adapted to working in the new environment.

Trial registration: ACTRN12618000775213.

Objective: In 2017, the Australian state of New South Wales introduced a revised policy to provide a healthy food and drink environment for staff and visitors in the state's publicly funded health facilities. We sought to understand how contextual factors, intervention features and the responses of diverse stakeholders affected the policy's implementation in public hospitals.

Methods: Ninety-nine interviews were conducted with chief executives, implementers and retailers in the health and food retail systems after the target date for the implementation of 13 initial policy practices. Stakeholder responses were analysed to understand commitment to, engagement with and achievement of these practices and the different contexts and implementation approaches that prompted these responses.

Results: Key mechanisms that drove systemic change included stakeholders' broad acceptance of the policy premise; stakeholders' sense of accountability and desire for the policy to succeed; and the policy's perceived benefits, feasibility and effectiveness. Important underpinning factors were chief executives' commitment to implementation and monitoring, a flexible approach to locally tailored implementation and historical precedents.

Conclusions: This study provides policy and practice insights for the initial phase of state-wide implementation to achieve change in health facility food retail environments.