Naomi J Fulop, Estela Capelas Barbosa, Melissa Hill, Jean Ledger, Pei Li Ng, Christopher Sherlaw-Johnson, Lucina Rolewicz, Laura Schlepper, Jonathan Spencer, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Stephen Morris
Background: Health-care organisations in England that are rated as inadequate for leadership and one other domain enter the Special Measures for Quality regime to receive support and oversight. A 'watch list' of challenged providers that are at risk of entering Special Measures for Quality also receive support. Knowledge is limited about whether or not the support interventions drive improvements in quality, the costs of the support interventions and whether or not the support interventions strike the right balance between support and scrutiny.
Objective: To analyse the responses of trusts to the implementation of (1) interventions for Special Measures for Quality trusts and (2) interventions for challenged provider trusts to determine their impact on these organisations' capacity to achieve and sustain quality improvements.
Design: This was rapid research comprising five interrelated workstreams: (1) a literature review using systematic methods; (2) an analysis of policy documents and interviews at the national level; (3) eight multisite, mixed-methods trust case studies; (4) an analysis of national performance and workforce indicators; and (5) an economic analysis.
Results: The Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes were intended to be 'support' programmes. Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes had an emotional impact on staff. Perceptions of NHS Improvement interventions were mixed overall. Senior leadership teams were a key driver of change, with strong clinical input being vital. Local systems have a role in improvement. Trusts focus efforts to improve across multiple domains. Internal and external factors contribute to positive performance trajectories. Nationally, only 15.8% of Special Measures for Quality trusts exited the regime in 24 months. Entry into Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes resulted in changes in quality indicators (such the number of patients waiting in emergency departments for more than 4 hours, mortality and the number of delayed transfers of care) that were more positive than national trends. The trends in staff sickness and absence improved after trusts left Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes. There was some evidence that staff survey results improved. No association was found between Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes and referral to treatment times or cancer treatment waiting times. NHS Improvement spending in case study trusts was mostly directed at interventions addressing 'training on cultural change' (33.6%), 'workforce quality and safety' (21.7%) and 'governance and assurance' (18.4%). The impact of Special Measures for Quality on financial stability was equivocal; most trusts exiting Special Measures for Quality experienced the same financial stability before and after exiting.
{"title":"Rapid evaluation of the Special Measures for Quality and challenged provider regimes: a mixed-methods study.","authors":"Naomi J Fulop, Estela Capelas Barbosa, Melissa Hill, Jean Ledger, Pei Li Ng, Christopher Sherlaw-Johnson, Lucina Rolewicz, Laura Schlepper, Jonathan Spencer, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Stephen Morris","doi":"10.3310/GQQV3512","DOIUrl":"10.3310/GQQV3512","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health-care organisations in England that are rated as inadequate for leadership and one other domain enter the Special Measures for Quality regime to receive support and oversight. A 'watch list' of challenged providers that are at risk of entering Special Measures for Quality also receive support. Knowledge is limited about whether or not the support interventions drive improvements in quality, the costs of the support interventions and whether or not the support interventions strike the right balance between support and scrutiny.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyse the responses of trusts to the implementation of (1) interventions for Special Measures for Quality trusts and (2) interventions for challenged provider trusts to determine their impact on these organisations' capacity to achieve and sustain quality improvements.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was rapid research comprising five interrelated workstreams: (1) a literature review using systematic methods; (2) an analysis of policy documents and interviews at the national level; (3) eight multisite, mixed-methods trust case studies; (4) an analysis of national performance and workforce indicators; and (5) an economic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes were intended to be 'support' programmes. Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes had an emotional impact on staff. Perceptions of NHS Improvement interventions were mixed overall. Senior leadership teams were a key driver of change, with strong clinical input being vital. Local systems have a role in improvement. Trusts focus efforts to improve across multiple domains. Internal and external factors contribute to positive performance trajectories. Nationally, only 15.8% of Special Measures for Quality trusts exited the regime in 24 months. Entry into Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes resulted in changes in quality indicators (such the number of patients waiting in emergency departments for more than 4 hours, mortality and the number of delayed transfers of care) that were more positive than national trends. The trends in staff sickness and absence improved after trusts left Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes. There was some evidence that staff survey results improved. No association was found between Special Measures for Quality/challenged provider regimes and referral to treatment times or cancer treatment waiting times. NHS Improvement spending in case study trusts was mostly directed at interventions addressing 'training on cultural change' (33.6%), 'workforce quality and safety' (21.7%) and 'governance and assurance' (18.4%). The impact of Special Measures for Quality on financial stability was equivocal; most trusts exiting Special Measures for Quality experienced the same financial stability before and after exiting.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The rapi","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 19","pages":"1-139"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71429780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Manbinder Sidhu, Catherine L Saunders, Charlotte Davies, Gemma McKenna, Frances Wu, Ian Litchfield, Fifi Olumogba, Jon Sussex
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vertical integration means merging organisations that operate at different stages along the patient pathway. We focus on acute hospitals running primary care medical practices. Evidence is scarce concerning the impact on use of health-care services and patient experience.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the impact of vertical integration on use of hospital services, service delivery and patient experience and whether patients with multiple long-term conditions are affected differently from others.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Rapid, mixed methods evaluation with four work packages: (1) review of NHS trust annual reports and other sources to understand the scale of vertical integration across England; (2) development of the statistical analysis; (3) analysis of national survey data on patient experience, and national data on use of hospital services over the 2 years preceding and following vertical integration, comparing vertically integrated practices with a variety of control practices; and (4) focus groups and interviews with staff and patients across three case study sites to explore the impact of vertical integration on patient experience of care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 31 March 2021, 26 NHS trusts were in vertically integrated organisations, running 85 general practices across 116 practice sites. The earliest vertical integration between trusts and general practices was in 2015; a mean of 3.3 practices run by each trust (range 1-12). On average, integrated practices have fewer patients, are slightly more likely to be in the most deprived decile of areas, are more likely to hold an alternative provider medical services contract and have worse Quality and Outcomes Framework scores compared with non-integrated practices. Vertical integration is associated with statistically significant, modest reductions in rates of accident and emergency department attendances: 2% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99; <i>p</i> < 0.0001); outpatient attendances: 1% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.0061), emergency inpatient admissions: 3% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 0.99; <i>p</i> = 0.0062) and emergency readmissions: 5% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.039), with no impact on length of stay, overall inpatient admissions or inpatient admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. The falls in accident and emergency department and outpatient attendance rates are temporary. Focus groups and interviews with staff (<i>N</i> = 22) and interviews with patients (<i>N</i> = 14) showed that with vertical integration, health service improvements are introduced following a period of cultural interchange. Patients with multiple long-term conditions continue to encounter 'navigation work' choosing and accessing health-car
{"title":"Vertical integration of general practices with acute hospitals in England: rapid impact evaluation.","authors":"Manbinder Sidhu, Catherine L Saunders, Charlotte Davies, Gemma McKenna, Frances Wu, Ian Litchfield, Fifi Olumogba, Jon Sussex","doi":"10.3310/PRWQ4012","DOIUrl":"10.3310/PRWQ4012","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vertical integration means merging organisations that operate at different stages along the patient pathway. We focus on acute hospitals running primary care medical practices. Evidence is scarce concerning the impact on use of health-care services and patient experience.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the impact of vertical integration on use of hospital services, service delivery and patient experience and whether patients with multiple long-term conditions are affected differently from others.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Rapid, mixed methods evaluation with four work packages: (1) review of NHS trust annual reports and other sources to understand the scale of vertical integration across England; (2) development of the statistical analysis; (3) analysis of national survey data on patient experience, and national data on use of hospital services over the 2 years preceding and following vertical integration, comparing vertically integrated practices with a variety of control practices; and (4) focus groups and interviews with staff and patients across three case study sites to explore the impact of vertical integration on patient experience of care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 31 March 2021, 26 NHS trusts were in vertically integrated organisations, running 85 general practices across 116 practice sites. The earliest vertical integration between trusts and general practices was in 2015; a mean of 3.3 practices run by each trust (range 1-12). On average, integrated practices have fewer patients, are slightly more likely to be in the most deprived decile of areas, are more likely to hold an alternative provider medical services contract and have worse Quality and Outcomes Framework scores compared with non-integrated practices. Vertical integration is associated with statistically significant, modest reductions in rates of accident and emergency department attendances: 2% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99; <i>p</i> < 0.0001); outpatient attendances: 1% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.0061), emergency inpatient admissions: 3% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 0.99; <i>p</i> = 0.0062) and emergency readmissions: 5% reduction (incidence rate ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.039), with no impact on length of stay, overall inpatient admissions or inpatient admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. The falls in accident and emergency department and outpatient attendance rates are temporary. Focus groups and interviews with staff (<i>N</i> = 22) and interviews with patients (<i>N</i> = 14) showed that with vertical integration, health service improvements are introduced following a period of cultural interchange. Patients with multiple long-term conditions continue to encounter 'navigation work' choosing and accessing health-car","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 17","pages":"1-114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41241754","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simon Conroy, Sally Brailsford, Christopher Burton, Tracey England, Jagruti Lalseta, Graham Martin, Suzanne Mason, Laia Maynou-Pujolras, Kay Phelps, Louise Preston, Emma Regen, Peter Riley, Andrew Street, James van Oppen
<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to understand urgent and emergency care pathways for older people and develop a decision support tool using a mixed methods study design.</p><p><strong>Objective(s), study design, settings and participants: </strong>Work package 1 identified best practice through a review of reviews, patient, carer and professional interviews. Work package 2 involved qualitative case studies of selected urgent and emergency care pathways in the Yorkshire and Humber region. Work package 3 analysed linked databases describing urgent and emergency care pathways identifying patient, provider and pathway factors that explain differences in outcomes and costs. Work package 4 developed a system dynamics tool to compare emergency interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 reviews summarising 128 primary studies found that integrated social and medical care, screening and assessment, follow-up and monitoring of service outcomes were important. Forty patient/carer participants described emergency department attendances; most reported a reluctance to attend. Participants emphasised the importance of being treated with dignity, timely and accurate information provision and involvement in decision-making. Receiving care in a calm environment with attention to personal comfort and basic physical needs were key. Patient goals included diagnosis and resolution, well-planned discharge home and retaining physical function. Participants perceived many of these goals of care were not attained. A total of 21 professional participants were interviewed and 23 participated in focus groups, largely confirming the review evidence. Implementation challenges identified included the urgent and emergency care environment, organisational approaches to service development, staff skills and resources. Work package 2 involved 45 interviews and 30 hours of observation in four contrasting emergency departments. Key themes relating to implementation included: intervention-related staff: frailty mindset and behaviours resources: workforce, space, and physical environment operational influences: referral criteria, frailty assessment, operating hours, transport. context-related links with community, social and primary care organisation and management support COVID-19 pandemic. approaches to implementation service/quality improvement networks engaging staff and building relationships education about frailty evidence. The linked databases in work package 3 comprised 359,945 older people and 1,035,045 observations. The most powerful predictors of four-hour wait and transfer to hospital were age, previous attendance, out-of-hours attendance and call handler designation of urgency. Drawing upon the previous work packages and working closely with a wide range of patient and professional stakeholders, we developed an system dynamics tool that modelled five evidence-based urgent and emergency care interventions and their impact on the whole system in t
{"title":"Identifying models of care to improve outcomes for older people with urgent care needs: a mixed methods approach to develop a system dynamics model.","authors":"Simon Conroy, Sally Brailsford, Christopher Burton, Tracey England, Jagruti Lalseta, Graham Martin, Suzanne Mason, Laia Maynou-Pujolras, Kay Phelps, Louise Preston, Emma Regen, Peter Riley, Andrew Street, James van Oppen","doi":"10.3310/NLCT5104","DOIUrl":"10.3310/NLCT5104","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to understand urgent and emergency care pathways for older people and develop a decision support tool using a mixed methods study design.</p><p><strong>Objective(s), study design, settings and participants: </strong>Work package 1 identified best practice through a review of reviews, patient, carer and professional interviews. Work package 2 involved qualitative case studies of selected urgent and emergency care pathways in the Yorkshire and Humber region. Work package 3 analysed linked databases describing urgent and emergency care pathways identifying patient, provider and pathway factors that explain differences in outcomes and costs. Work package 4 developed a system dynamics tool to compare emergency interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 reviews summarising 128 primary studies found that integrated social and medical care, screening and assessment, follow-up and monitoring of service outcomes were important. Forty patient/carer participants described emergency department attendances; most reported a reluctance to attend. Participants emphasised the importance of being treated with dignity, timely and accurate information provision and involvement in decision-making. Receiving care in a calm environment with attention to personal comfort and basic physical needs were key. Patient goals included diagnosis and resolution, well-planned discharge home and retaining physical function. Participants perceived many of these goals of care were not attained. A total of 21 professional participants were interviewed and 23 participated in focus groups, largely confirming the review evidence. Implementation challenges identified included the urgent and emergency care environment, organisational approaches to service development, staff skills and resources. Work package 2 involved 45 interviews and 30 hours of observation in four contrasting emergency departments. Key themes relating to implementation included: intervention-related staff: frailty mindset and behaviours resources: workforce, space, and physical environment operational influences: referral criteria, frailty assessment, operating hours, transport. context-related links with community, social and primary care organisation and management support COVID-19 pandemic. approaches to implementation service/quality improvement networks engaging staff and building relationships education about frailty evidence. The linked databases in work package 3 comprised 359,945 older people and 1,035,045 observations. The most powerful predictors of four-hour wait and transfer to hospital were age, previous attendance, out-of-hours attendance and call handler designation of urgency. Drawing upon the previous work packages and working closely with a wide range of patient and professional stakeholders, we developed an system dynamics tool that modelled five evidence-based urgent and emergency care interventions and their impact on the whole system in t","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 14","pages":"1-183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41222133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nicola Clibbens, John Baker, Andrew Booth, Kathryn Berzins, Michael C Ashman, Leila Sharda, Jill Thompson, Sarah Kendal, Scott Weich
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.</p><p><strong>Main outcome: </strong>The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the co
{"title":"Explanation of context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care: the MH-CREST realist evidence synthesis.","authors":"Nicola Clibbens, John Baker, Andrew Booth, Kathryn Berzins, Michael C Ashman, Leila Sharda, Jill Thompson, Sarah Kendal, Scott Weich","doi":"10.3310/TWKK5110","DOIUrl":"10.3310/TWKK5110","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.</p><p><strong>Main outcome: </strong>The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the co","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 15","pages":"1-161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41222134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kerin Bayliss, Tracey Shield, Alison Wearden, Jackie Flynn, Christine Rowland, Penny Bee, Morag Farquhar, Danielle Harris, Alexander Hodkinson, Maria Panagioti, Margaret Booth, David Cotterill, Lesley Goodburn, Cedric Knipe, Gunn Grande
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Informal carers are central in supporting patients at the end of life, but this has substantial negative impacts on carers' own mental health. When carers are unable to cope, this may affect their ability to support the patient and increase the likelihood of patient hospital admissions. Further, demographic changes mean demands for care at and before end of life are increasing and existing services will struggle to meet these demands. It is important to recognise carers as a vital resource and prevent adverse health outcomes from caregiving (and thereby limit their consequences). Large individual variation in the level of psychological morbidity from end-of-life caregiving suggests there is scope for interventions to improve carer mental health if we can understand the underlying factors.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This meta-synthesis of qualitative studies aims to identify factors reported by carers as important to their mental health.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Searches of MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cochrane Qualitative Reviews 1 January 2009 to 24 November 2019 for empirical publications from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in English/Scandinavian on factors affecting adult carer mental health during end-of-life caregiving in home settings.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Systematic qualitative meta-synthesis in collaboration with a Public Patient Involvement carer Review Advisory Panel, included thematic synthesis, followed by a best-fit framework synthesis, informed by principles of meta-ethnography. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Studies Checklist was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three eligible studies identified six themes encompassing factors perceived by carers to affect their mental health during end-of-life caregiving. These were: (1) the patient condition (including patient decline); (2) impact of caring responsibilities (including exhaustion, lack of time for own needs, isolation); (3) relationships (including quality of the patient-carer relationship); (4) finances (including financial concerns, impact on work); (5) carers' internal processes (including loss of autonomy, lack of confidence, coping strategies); and (6) support (including lack of informal support, inadequacies in formal support information and care provision, limited collaboration, disjointed care). Reported strategies to improve mental health were linked to the final two themes, with suggestions on how to manage carers' internal processes and build appropriate support. Findings correspond with literature 1998-2008, indicating consistency in factors affecting carers and adding validity to findings.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The review was limited to caregi
背景:非正规护理人员是临终患者支持的核心,但这对护理人员自身的心理健康产生了重大负面影响。当护理人员无法应对时,这可能会影响他们支持患者的能力,并增加患者入院的可能性。此外,人口结构的变化意味着对临终前护理的需求正在增加,现有服务将难以满足这些需求。重要的是要认识到护理人员是一种重要的资源,并防止护理带来的不良健康后果(从而限制其后果)。临终护理的心理发病率水平存在很大的个体差异,这表明如果我们能够了解潜在因素,就有干预措施来改善护理人员的心理健康。目的:这种定性研究的元综合旨在确定护理人员报告的对其心理健康重要的因素。数据来源:检索MEDLINE、护理和相关健康文献累积索引、PsycINFO、社会科学引文索引、EMBASE、Cochrane对照试验中央登记册、效果评价摘要数据库,2009年1月1日至2019年11月24日,经济合作与发展组织(Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development)国家以英语/斯堪的纳维亚语出版的关于在家庭环境中临终护理期间影响成年护理人员心理健康的因素的实证出版物的《Cochrane定性评论》。审查方法:与公共患者参与护理人员审查咨询小组合作,进行系统的定性元综合,包括专题综合,然后根据元民族志原则进行最适合的框架综合。使用了关键评估技能计划定性研究检查表。结果:33项符合条件的研究确定了六个主题,包括护理人员在临终护理期间认为影响其心理健康的因素。这些是:(1)患者状况(包括患者下降);(2) 照顾责任的影响(包括精疲力竭、没有时间满足自己的需求、与世隔绝);(3) 关系(包括患者-护理者关系的质量);(4) 财务(包括财务问题、对工作的影响);(5) 护理人员的内部过程(包括丧失自主性、缺乏信心、应对策略);以及(6)支持(包括缺乏非正式支持、正式支持信息和护理提供不足、合作有限、护理脱节)。报告的改善心理健康的策略与最后两个主题有关,并就如何管理护理人员的内部流程和建立适当的支持提出了建议。研究结果与1998-2008年的文献一致,表明影响护理人员的因素一致,并增加了研究结果的有效性。局限性:该审查仅限于家庭护理以及经济合作与发展组织国家以英语和斯堪的纳维亚语发表的研究。已确定的论文主要考虑癌症患者的护理人员,很少从种族角度进行研究。因此,该审查可能没有完全涵盖影响长期疾病患者护理人员的因素,或其他护理环境、国家和人群中的护理人员。结论和未来的工作:在照顾生命末期的人时,广泛的内部和环境因素可能会导致心理发病。因此,未来的实践工作需要一种广泛而非狭隘的方法来维持和改善护理人员的心理健康。未来的研究工作需要研究人员和政策、委托、实践和护理组织内的利益相关者之间的合作,以制定解决方案并评估其有效性。此外,研究人员需要为影响照顾者心理健康的因素及其相互作用开发更好的模型,以建立更强大的证据基础并更好地指导干预措施。研究注册:本研究注册为PROSPERO CRD42019130279。资助:该项目由美国国立卫生与护理研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会护理提供研究计划资助,编号为HSDR 18/01/01,将在《卫生与社会保健提供研究》上全文发表。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
{"title":"Understanding what affects psychological morbidity in informal carers when providing care at home for patients at the end of life: a systematic qualitative evidence synthesis.","authors":"Kerin Bayliss, Tracey Shield, Alison Wearden, Jackie Flynn, Christine Rowland, Penny Bee, Morag Farquhar, Danielle Harris, Alexander Hodkinson, Maria Panagioti, Margaret Booth, David Cotterill, Lesley Goodburn, Cedric Knipe, Gunn Grande","doi":"10.3310/PYTR4127","DOIUrl":"10.3310/PYTR4127","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Informal carers are central in supporting patients at the end of life, but this has substantial negative impacts on carers' own mental health. When carers are unable to cope, this may affect their ability to support the patient and increase the likelihood of patient hospital admissions. Further, demographic changes mean demands for care at and before end of life are increasing and existing services will struggle to meet these demands. It is important to recognise carers as a vital resource and prevent adverse health outcomes from caregiving (and thereby limit their consequences). Large individual variation in the level of psychological morbidity from end-of-life caregiving suggests there is scope for interventions to improve carer mental health if we can understand the underlying factors.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This meta-synthesis of qualitative studies aims to identify factors reported by carers as important to their mental health.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Searches of MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cochrane Qualitative Reviews 1 January 2009 to 24 November 2019 for empirical publications from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in English/Scandinavian on factors affecting adult carer mental health during end-of-life caregiving in home settings.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Systematic qualitative meta-synthesis in collaboration with a Public Patient Involvement carer Review Advisory Panel, included thematic synthesis, followed by a best-fit framework synthesis, informed by principles of meta-ethnography. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Studies Checklist was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three eligible studies identified six themes encompassing factors perceived by carers to affect their mental health during end-of-life caregiving. These were: (1) the patient condition (including patient decline); (2) impact of caring responsibilities (including exhaustion, lack of time for own needs, isolation); (3) relationships (including quality of the patient-carer relationship); (4) finances (including financial concerns, impact on work); (5) carers' internal processes (including loss of autonomy, lack of confidence, coping strategies); and (6) support (including lack of informal support, inadequacies in formal support information and care provision, limited collaboration, disjointed care). Reported strategies to improve mental health were linked to the final two themes, with suggestions on how to manage carers' internal processes and build appropriate support. Findings correspond with literature 1998-2008, indicating consistency in factors affecting carers and adding validity to findings.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The review was limited to caregi","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":"1-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41241752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Claire Duddy, Erica Gadsby, Vivienne Hibberd, Janet Krska, Geoff Wong
Background: The National Health Service Health Check in England aims to provide adults aged 40 to 74 with an assessment of their risk of developing cardiovascular disease and to offer advice to help manage and reduce this risk. The programme is commissioned by local authorities and delivered by a range of providers in different settings, although primarily in general practices. This project focused on variation in the advice, onward referrals and prescriptions offered to attendees following their health check.
Objectives: (1) Map recent programme delivery across England via a survey of local authorities; (2) conduct a realist review to enable understanding of how the National Health Service Health Check programme works in different settings, for different groups; (3) provide recommendations to improve delivery.
Design: Survey of local authorities and realist review of the literature.
Review methods: Realist review is a theory-driven, interpretive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to explain why, when and for whom outcomes occur. We gathered published research and grey literature (including local evaluation documents and conference materials) via searching and supplementary methods. Extracted data were synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to develop an understanding of important contexts that affect the delivery of National Health Service Health Checks, and underlying mechanisms that produce outcomes related to our project focus.
Results: Our findings highlight the variation in National Health Service Health Check delivery models across England. Commissioners, providers and attendees understand the programme's purpose in different ways. When understood primarily as an opportunity to screen for disease, responsibility for delivery and outcomes rests with primary care, and there is an emphasis on volume of checks delivered, gathering essential data and communicating risk. When understood as an opportunity to prompt and support behaviour change, more emphasis is placed on delivery of advice and referrals to 'lifestyle services'. Practical constraints limit what can be delivered within the programme's remit. Public health funding restricts delivery options and links with onward services, while providers may struggle to deliver effective checks when faced with competing priorities. Attendees' responses to the programme are affected by features of delivery models and the constraints they face within their own lives.
Limitations: Survey response rate lower than anticipated; review findings limited by the availability and quality of the literature.
Conclusions and implications: The purpose and remit of the National Health Service Health Check programme should be clarified, considering prevailing attitudes about its value (especially among providers) and what can be delivered within e
{"title":"What happens after an NHS Health Check? A survey and realist review.","authors":"Claire Duddy, Erica Gadsby, Vivienne Hibberd, Janet Krska, Geoff Wong","doi":"10.3310/RGTH4127","DOIUrl":"10.3310/RGTH4127","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The National Health Service Health Check in England aims to provide adults aged 40 to 74 with an assessment of their risk of developing cardiovascular disease and to offer advice to help manage and reduce this risk. The programme is commissioned by local authorities and delivered by a range of providers in different settings, although primarily in general practices. This project focused on variation in the advice, onward referrals and prescriptions offered to attendees following their health check.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) Map recent programme delivery across England via a survey of local authorities; (2) conduct a realist review to enable understanding of how the National Health Service Health Check programme works in different settings, for different groups; (3) provide recommendations to improve delivery.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Survey of local authorities and realist review of the literature.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Realist review is a theory-driven, interpretive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to explain why, when and for whom outcomes occur. We gathered published research and grey literature (including local evaluation documents and conference materials) via searching and supplementary methods. Extracted data were synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to develop an understanding of important contexts that affect the delivery of National Health Service Health Checks, and underlying mechanisms that produce outcomes related to our project focus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our findings highlight the variation in National Health Service Health Check delivery models across England. Commissioners, providers and attendees understand the programme's purpose in different ways. When understood primarily as an opportunity to screen for disease, responsibility for delivery and outcomes rests with primary care, and there is an emphasis on volume of checks delivered, gathering essential data and communicating risk. When understood as an opportunity to prompt and support behaviour change, more emphasis is placed on delivery of advice and referrals to 'lifestyle services'. Practical constraints limit what can be delivered within the programme's remit. Public health funding restricts delivery options and links with onward services, while providers may struggle to deliver effective checks when faced with competing priorities. Attendees' responses to the programme are affected by features of delivery models and the constraints they face within their own lives.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Survey response rate lower than anticipated; review findings limited by the availability and quality of the literature.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and implications: </strong>The purpose and remit of the National Health Service Health Check programme should be clarified, considering prevailing attitudes about its value (especially among providers) and what can be delivered within e","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 12","pages":"1-133"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41222135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Judith Smith, Jo Ellins, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, John Appleby, Stephen Morris, Jon Sussex, Naomi J Fulop
Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (RSET: 16/138/17; BRACE: 16/138/31).
{"title":"Rapid evaluation of service innovations in health and social care: key considerations.","authors":"Judith Smith, Jo Ellins, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, John Appleby, Stephen Morris, Jon Sussex, Naomi J Fulop","doi":"10.3310/BTNU5673","DOIUrl":"10.3310/BTNU5673","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Funding: </strong>This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (RSET: 16/138/17; BRACE: 16/138/31).</p>","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 11","pages":"1-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41146948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
John Appleby, Theo Georghiou, Jean Ledger, Lucina Rolewicz, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Sonila M Tomini, Jason M Frerich, Pei Li Ng
Background: Youth violence intervention programmes involving the embedding of youth workers in NHS emergency departments to help young people (broadly aged between 11 and 24 years) improve the quality of their lives following their attendance at an emergency department as a result of violent assault or associated trauma are increasing across the NHS. This study evaluates one such initiative run by the charity Redthread in partnership with a NHS trust.
Objectives: To evaluate the implementation and impact of a new youth violence intervention programme at University College London Hospital NHS Trust and delivered by the charity Redthread: (1) literature review of studies of hospital-based violent crime interventions; (2) evaluation of local implementation and of University College London Hospital staff and relevant local stakeholders concerning the intervention and its impact; (3) assessment of the feasibility of using routine secondary care data to evaluate the impact of the Redthread intervention; and (4) cost-effectiveness analysis of the Redthread intervention from the perspective of the NHS.
Methods: The evaluation was designed as a mixed-methods multiphased study, including an in-depth process evaluation case study and quantitative and economic analyses. The project was undertaken in different stages over two years, starting with desk-based research and an exploratory phase suitable for remote working while COVID-19 was affecting NHS services. A total of 22 semistructured interviews were conducted with staff at Redthread and University College London Hospital and others (e.g. a senior stakeholder involved in NHS youth violence prevention policy). We analysed Redthread documents, engaged with experts and conducted observations of staff meetings to gather more in-depth insights about the effectiveness of the intervention, the processes of implementation, staff perceptions and cost. We also undertook quantitative analyses to ascertain suitable measures of impact to inform stakeholders and future evaluations.
Results: Redthread's service was viewed as a necessary intervention, which complemented clinical and other statutory services. It was well embedded in the paediatric emergency department and adolescent services but less so in the adult emergency department. The diverse reasons for individual referrals, the various routes by which young people were identified, and the mix of specific support interventions provided, together emphasised the complexity of this intervention, with consequent challenges in implementation and evaluation. Given the relative unit costs of Redthread and University College London Hospital's inpatient services, it is estimated that the service would break even if around one-third of Redthread interventions resulted in at least one avoided emergency inpatient admission. This evaluation was unable to determine a feasible approach to me
背景:青年暴力干预方案涉及在国民保健制度急诊科安置青年工作人员,以帮助年轻人(年龄一般在11至24岁之间)在因暴力袭击或相关创伤而到急诊科就诊后改善生活质量,这种方案在全国保健制度中正在增加。这项研究评估了由慈善机构Redthread与NHS信托机构合作开展的一项此类倡议。目的:评估由慈善机构Redthread提供的伦敦大学学院医院NHS信托新青年暴力干预方案的实施和影响:(1)对基于医院的暴力犯罪干预研究的文献综述;(2)评估当地实施情况,以及伦敦大学学院医院员工和当地相关利益相关者对干预措施及其影响的评估;(3)评估使用常规二级护理数据评估Redthread干预效果的可行性;(4) NHS视角下Redthread干预的成本-效果分析。方法:采用多阶段混合方法进行评价,包括深入的过程评价案例研究、定量分析和经济分析。该项目在两年多的时间里分不同阶段进行,从基于桌面的研究开始,到适合在COVID-19影响NHS服务时远程工作的探索阶段。与Redthread和伦敦大学学院医院的工作人员以及其他人(例如参与国民保健制度预防青少年暴力政策的高级利益攸关方)共进行了22次半结构化访谈。我们分析了Redthread文件,与专家进行了接触,并对员工会议进行了观察,以收集有关干预措施有效性、实施过程、员工看法和成本的更深入见解。我们还进行了定量分析,以确定适当的影响措施,以告知利益相关者和未来的评估。结果:Redthread的服务被认为是必要的干预措施,是对临床和其他法定服务的补充。它在儿科急诊科和青少年服务中得到了很好的应用,但在成人急诊科则不那么普遍。个别转介的不同原因、甄别青少年的不同途径,以及所提供的具体支助干预措施的混合,共同强调了这种干预措施的复杂性,随之而来的是在实施和评估方面的挑战。考虑到Redthread和伦敦大学学院医院(University College London Hospital)住院服务的相对单位成本,据估计,如果大约三分之一的Redthread干预措施至少避免了一名紧急住院病人入院,该服务将实现收支平衡。这项评估无法确定一种可行的方法来衡量Redthread青少年暴力干预项目的定量影响,但它反映了描述该服务的数据,包括成本,并提出建议,以支持未来的评估。限制:2019冠状病毒病大流行严重阻碍了红线服务的实施和评估能力。由于同意程序的限制、在将红线与伦敦大学学院医院的病人数据联系起来方面存在问题,以及在评估期间获得长期支持的年轻人数量相对较少,因此不可能有最有力的选择来分析效果和成本。结论:我们已经能够提供关于伦敦大学学院医院实施青年暴力干预方案的定性证据,例如,表明NHS工作人员将该服务视为重要和必要的干预措施。鉴于常规患者数据系统和联系的问题,我们也能够反思描述服务的数据,包括成本,并提出建议,以支持未来的评估。未来工作:没有未来工作计划。资助:国家卫生和保健研究所卫生服务和提供研究方案(RSET: 16/138/17)。
{"title":"Youth violence intervention programme for vulnerable young people attending emergency departments in London: a rapid evaluation.","authors":"John Appleby, Theo Georghiou, Jean Ledger, Lucina Rolewicz, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Sonila M Tomini, Jason M Frerich, Pei Li Ng","doi":"10.3310/JWKT0492","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/JWKT0492","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Youth violence intervention programmes involving the embedding of youth workers in NHS emergency departments to help young people (broadly aged between 11 and 24 years) improve the quality of their lives following their attendance at an emergency department as a result of violent assault or associated trauma are increasing across the NHS. This study evaluates one such initiative run by the charity Redthread in partnership with a NHS trust.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the implementation and impact of a new youth violence intervention programme at University College London Hospital NHS Trust and delivered by the charity Redthread: (1) literature review of studies of hospital-based violent crime interventions; (2) evaluation of local implementation and of University College London Hospital staff and relevant local stakeholders concerning the intervention and its impact; (3) assessment of the feasibility of using routine secondary care data to evaluate the impact of the Redthread intervention; and (4) cost-effectiveness analysis of the Redthread intervention from the perspective of the NHS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The evaluation was designed as a mixed-methods multiphased study, including an in-depth process evaluation case study and quantitative and economic analyses. The project was undertaken in different stages over two years, starting with desk-based research and an exploratory phase suitable for remote working while COVID-19 was affecting NHS services. A total of 22 semistructured interviews were conducted with staff at Redthread and University College London Hospital and others (e.g. a senior stakeholder involved in NHS youth violence prevention policy). We analysed Redthread documents, engaged with experts and conducted observations of staff meetings to gather more in-depth insights about the effectiveness of the intervention, the processes of implementation, staff perceptions and cost. We also undertook quantitative analyses to ascertain suitable measures of impact to inform stakeholders and future evaluations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Redthread's service was viewed as a necessary intervention, which complemented clinical and other statutory services. It was well embedded in the paediatric emergency department and adolescent services but less so in the adult emergency department. The diverse reasons for individual referrals, the various routes by which young people were identified, and the mix of specific support interventions provided, together emphasised the complexity of this intervention, with consequent challenges in implementation and evaluation. Given the relative unit costs of Redthread and University College London Hospital's inpatient services, it is estimated that the service would break even if around one-third of Redthread interventions resulted in at least one avoided emergency inpatient admission. This evaluation was unable to determine a feasible approach to me","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 10","pages":"1-122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9848045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Naomi J Fulop, Holly Walton, Nadia Crellin, Theo Georghiou, Lauren Herlitz, Ian Litchfield, Efthalia Massou, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Manbinder Sidhu, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Jo Ellins, Stephen Morris, Pei Li Ng
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remote home monitoring services were developed and implemented for patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic. Patients monitored blood oxygen saturation and other readings (e.g. temperature) at home and were escalated as necessary.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate effectiveness, costs, implementation, and staff and patient experiences (including disparities and mode) of COVID-19 remote home monitoring services in England during the COVID-19 pandemic (waves 1 and 2).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A rapid mixed-methods evaluation, conducted in two phases. Phase 1 (July-August 2020) comprised a rapid systematic review, implementation and economic analysis study (in eight sites). Phase 2 (January-June 2021) comprised a large-scale, multisite, mixed-methods study of effectiveness, costs, implementation and patient/staff experience, using national data sets, surveys (28 sites) and interviews (17 sites).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong><i>Phase 1</i> Findings from the review and empirical study indicated that these services have been implemented worldwide and vary substantially. Empirical findings highlighted that communication, appropriate information and multiple modes of monitoring facilitated implementation; barriers included unclear referral processes, workforce availability and lack of administrative support. <i>Phase 2</i> We received surveys from 292 staff (39% response rate) and 1069 patients/carers (18% response rate). We conducted interviews with 58 staff, 62 patients/carers and 5 national leads. Despite national roll-out, enrolment to services was lower than expected (average enrolment across 37 clinical commissioning groups judged to have completed data was 8.7%). There was large variability in implementation of services, influenced by patient (e.g. local population needs), workforce (e.g. workload), organisational (e.g. collaboration) and resource (e.g. software) factors. We found that for every 10% increase in enrolment to the programme, mortality was reduced by 2% (95% confidence interval: 4% reduction to 1% increase), admissions increased by 3% (-1% to 7%), in-hospital mortality fell by 3% (-8% to 3%) and lengths of stay increased by 1.8% (-1.2% to 4.9%). None of these results are statistically significant. We found slightly longer hospital lengths of stay associated with virtual ward services (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.09), and no statistically significant impact on subsequent COVID-19 readmissions (adjusted odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.02). Low patient enrolment rates and incomplete data may have affected chances of detecting possible impact. The mean running cost per patient varied for different types of service and mode; and was driven by the number and grade of staff. Staff, patients and carers generally reported positive experiences of services. Services were easy to deliver but staff needed additional training. Staff
{"title":"A rapid mixed-methods evaluation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.","authors":"Naomi J Fulop, Holly Walton, Nadia Crellin, Theo Georghiou, Lauren Herlitz, Ian Litchfield, Efthalia Massou, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Manbinder Sidhu, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Jo Ellins, Stephen Morris, Pei Li Ng","doi":"10.3310/FVQW4410","DOIUrl":"10.3310/FVQW4410","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remote home monitoring services were developed and implemented for patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic. Patients monitored blood oxygen saturation and other readings (e.g. temperature) at home and were escalated as necessary.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate effectiveness, costs, implementation, and staff and patient experiences (including disparities and mode) of COVID-19 remote home monitoring services in England during the COVID-19 pandemic (waves 1 and 2).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A rapid mixed-methods evaluation, conducted in two phases. Phase 1 (July-August 2020) comprised a rapid systematic review, implementation and economic analysis study (in eight sites). Phase 2 (January-June 2021) comprised a large-scale, multisite, mixed-methods study of effectiveness, costs, implementation and patient/staff experience, using national data sets, surveys (28 sites) and interviews (17 sites).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong><i>Phase 1</i> Findings from the review and empirical study indicated that these services have been implemented worldwide and vary substantially. Empirical findings highlighted that communication, appropriate information and multiple modes of monitoring facilitated implementation; barriers included unclear referral processes, workforce availability and lack of administrative support. <i>Phase 2</i> We received surveys from 292 staff (39% response rate) and 1069 patients/carers (18% response rate). We conducted interviews with 58 staff, 62 patients/carers and 5 national leads. Despite national roll-out, enrolment to services was lower than expected (average enrolment across 37 clinical commissioning groups judged to have completed data was 8.7%). There was large variability in implementation of services, influenced by patient (e.g. local population needs), workforce (e.g. workload), organisational (e.g. collaboration) and resource (e.g. software) factors. We found that for every 10% increase in enrolment to the programme, mortality was reduced by 2% (95% confidence interval: 4% reduction to 1% increase), admissions increased by 3% (-1% to 7%), in-hospital mortality fell by 3% (-8% to 3%) and lengths of stay increased by 1.8% (-1.2% to 4.9%). None of these results are statistically significant. We found slightly longer hospital lengths of stay associated with virtual ward services (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.09), and no statistically significant impact on subsequent COVID-19 readmissions (adjusted odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.02). Low patient enrolment rates and incomplete data may have affected chances of detecting possible impact. The mean running cost per patient varied for different types of service and mode; and was driven by the number and grade of staff. Staff, patients and carers generally reported positive experiences of services. Services were easy to deliver but staff needed additional training. Staff ","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 13","pages":"1-151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41171814","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jon Glasby, Ian Litchfield, Sarah Parkinson, Lucy Hocking, Denise Tanner, Bridget Roe, Jennifer Bousfield
Background: Digital technology is a focus within the NHS and social care as a way to improve care and address pressures. Sensor-based technology with artificial intelligence capabilities is one type of technology that may be useful, although there are gaps in evidence that need to be addressed.
Objective: This study evaluates how one example of a technology using home-based sensors with artificial intelligence capabilities (pseudonymised as 'IndependencePlus') was implemented in three case study sites across England. The focus of this study was on decision-making processes and implementation.
Design: Stage 1 consisted of a rapid literature review, nine interviews and three project design groups. Stage 2 involved qualitative data collection from three social care sites (20 interviews), and three interviews with technology providers and regulators.
Results: • It was expected that the technology would improve care planning and reduce costs for the social care system, aid in prevention and responding to needs, support independent living and provide reassurance for those who draw on care and their carers. • The sensors were not able to collect the necessary data to create anticipated benefits. Several technological aspects of the system reduced its flexibility and were complex for staff to use. • There appeared to be no systematic decision-making process in deciding whether to adopt artificial intelligence. In its absence, a number of contextual factors influenced procurement decisions. • Incorporating artificial intelligence-based technology into existing models of social care provision requires alterations to existing funding models and care pathways, as well as workforce training. • Technology-enabled care solutions require robust digital infrastructure, which is lacking for many of those who draw on care and support. • Short-term service pressures and a sense of crisis management are not conducive to the culture that is needed to reap the potential longer-term benefits of artificial intelligence.
Limitations: Significant recruitment challenges (especially regarding people who draw on care and carers) were faced, particularly in relation to pressures from COVID-19.
Conclusions: This study confirmed a number of common implementation challenges, and adds insight around the specific decision-making processes for a technology that has been implemented in social care. We have also identified issues related to managing and analysing data, and introducing a technology focused on prevention into an environment which is focused on dealing with crises. This has helped to fill gaps in the literature and share practical lessons with commissioners, social care providers, technology providers and policy-makers.
Future work: We have highlighted the implications of our findings for future practice and shared
{"title":"New and emerging technology for adult social care - the example of home sensors with artificial intelligence (AI) technology.","authors":"Jon Glasby, Ian Litchfield, Sarah Parkinson, Lucy Hocking, Denise Tanner, Bridget Roe, Jennifer Bousfield","doi":"10.3310/HRYW4281","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/HRYW4281","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital technology is a focus within the NHS and social care as a way to improve care and address pressures. Sensor-based technology with artificial intelligence capabilities is one type of technology that may be useful, although there are gaps in evidence that need to be addressed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study evaluates how one example of a technology using home-based sensors with artificial intelligence capabilities (pseudonymised as 'IndependencePlus') was implemented in three case study sites across England. The focus of this study was on decision-making processes and implementation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Stage 1 consisted of a rapid literature review, nine interviews and three project design groups. Stage 2 involved qualitative data collection from three social care sites (20 interviews), and three interviews with technology providers and regulators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>• It was expected that the technology would improve care planning and reduce costs for the social care system, aid in prevention and responding to needs, support independent living and provide reassurance for those who draw on care and their carers. • The sensors were not able to collect the necessary data to create anticipated benefits. Several technological aspects of the system reduced its flexibility and were complex for staff to use. • There appeared to be no systematic decision-making process in deciding whether to adopt artificial intelligence. In its absence, a number of contextual factors influenced procurement decisions. • Incorporating artificial intelligence-based technology into existing models of social care provision requires alterations to existing funding models and care pathways, as well as workforce training. • Technology-enabled care solutions require robust digital infrastructure, which is lacking for many of those who draw on care and support. • Short-term service pressures and a sense of crisis management are not conducive to the culture that is needed to reap the potential longer-term benefits of artificial intelligence.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Significant recruitment challenges (especially regarding people who draw on care and carers) were faced, particularly in relation to pressures from COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study confirmed a number of common implementation challenges, and adds insight around the specific decision-making processes for a technology that has been implemented in social care. We have also identified issues related to managing and analysing data, and introducing a technology focused on prevention into an environment which is focused on dealing with crises. This has helped to fill gaps in the literature and share practical lessons with commissioners, social care providers, technology providers and policy-makers.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>We have highlighted the implications of our findings for future practice and shared ","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"11 9","pages":"1-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9859691","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}