Joanna McLaughlin, Ruth Kipping, Hugh McLeod, Andrew Judge, Amanda Owen-Smith
{"title":"骨科择期手术前肥胖症患者的健康优化:专业人士对限制性方法和未来实践的定性研究。","authors":"Joanna McLaughlin, Ruth Kipping, Hugh McLeod, Andrew Judge, Amanda Owen-Smith","doi":"10.1186/s13741-024-00460-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative health optimisation for elective surgery entails supporting patients to improve their health in preparation for their treatment and recovery. While there is consensus that this process should address obesity, approaches vary across England. Despite guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to the contrary, restrictive approaches with body mass index thresholds for referral to arthroplasty are in use. This qualitative study aimed to investigate the views of professionals on the current use and future implications of these policies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 professionals including clinicians, commissioners, policymakers, and health service managers, with experience of developing and/or implementing health optimisation policies for elective arthroplasty. Participants were sampled from areas in England with and without restrictive policies. We undertook thematic analysis of the interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants described pre-surgical health optimisation as an important trigger for health improvement but identified current resourcing and inadequacies in provision of weight management support as significant barriers to success. Participants expressed concerns about the appropriateness and fairness of including obesity as a determinant to restrict access to surgery. They described short-term financial pressures underlying the use of restrictive body mass index thresholds and a lack of an evidence base, such that policies amounted to rationing and risked exacerbations of health inequalities. The study identified four priorities for improvements to future health optimisation practices: developing and implementing national guidance with flexibility for local variation, initiating patient engagement in primary care with onward integration across all services, improving resourcing to support effective equitable impact, and addressing wider determinants of obesity through societal change.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, participants had limited expectations of the impact of health optimisation policies on obesity without additional support, investment, and national guideline implementation. They raised strong concerns over current restrictive approaches. We conclude that addressing concerns around weight management support service availability and impacts on health inequalities is essential for shaping effective health optimisation policies. Future policy direction should support health optimisation to be offered early (ideally in primary care). Health optimisation interventions should be non-restrictive, inclusive, and well-monitored, particularly around equality impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":19764,"journal":{"name":"Perioperative Medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"104"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11488359/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health optimisation for patients with obesity before elective orthopaedic surgery: a qualitative study of professionals' views on restrictive approaches and future practice.\",\"authors\":\"Joanna McLaughlin, Ruth Kipping, Hugh McLeod, Andrew Judge, Amanda Owen-Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13741-024-00460-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative health optimisation for elective surgery entails supporting patients to improve their health in preparation for their treatment and recovery. While there is consensus that this process should address obesity, approaches vary across England. Despite guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to the contrary, restrictive approaches with body mass index thresholds for referral to arthroplasty are in use. This qualitative study aimed to investigate the views of professionals on the current use and future implications of these policies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 professionals including clinicians, commissioners, policymakers, and health service managers, with experience of developing and/or implementing health optimisation policies for elective arthroplasty. Participants were sampled from areas in England with and without restrictive policies. We undertook thematic analysis of the interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants described pre-surgical health optimisation as an important trigger for health improvement but identified current resourcing and inadequacies in provision of weight management support as significant barriers to success. Participants expressed concerns about the appropriateness and fairness of including obesity as a determinant to restrict access to surgery. They described short-term financial pressures underlying the use of restrictive body mass index thresholds and a lack of an evidence base, such that policies amounted to rationing and risked exacerbations of health inequalities. The study identified four priorities for improvements to future health optimisation practices: developing and implementing national guidance with flexibility for local variation, initiating patient engagement in primary care with onward integration across all services, improving resourcing to support effective equitable impact, and addressing wider determinants of obesity through societal change.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, participants had limited expectations of the impact of health optimisation policies on obesity without additional support, investment, and national guideline implementation. They raised strong concerns over current restrictive approaches. We conclude that addressing concerns around weight management support service availability and impacts on health inequalities is essential for shaping effective health optimisation policies. Future policy direction should support health optimisation to be offered early (ideally in primary care). Health optimisation interventions should be non-restrictive, inclusive, and well-monitored, particularly around equality impact.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perioperative Medicine\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11488359/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perioperative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13741-024-00460-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perioperative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13741-024-00460-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:择期手术的术前健康优化需要帮助患者改善健康状况,为治疗和康复做好准备。虽然大家一致认为这一过程应解决肥胖问题,但英格兰各地的做法却不尽相同。尽管英国国家健康与护理卓越研究所(National Institute for Health and Care Excellence)提出了相反的指导意见,但目前仍在使用以体重指数为转诊关节置换术阈值的限制性方法。这项定性研究旨在调查专业人士对这些政策的当前使用情况和未来影响的看法:对 20 名专业人士进行了半结构化访谈,其中包括临床医生、专员、政策制定者和医疗服务管理人员,他们都具有制定和/或实施择期关节置换术健康优化政策的经验。访谈对象分别来自英格兰实施和未实施限制性政策的地区。我们对访谈数据进行了主题分析:结果:参与者认为手术前健康优化是改善健康状况的重要触发因素,但认为目前的资源配置和体重管理支持服务的不足是成功的重大障碍。与会者对将肥胖作为限制手术机会的决定因素是否适当和公平表示担忧。他们描述了使用限制性体重指数阈值的短期经济压力和缺乏证据基础的情况,这样的政策等同于配给制,有可能加剧健康不平等。该研究确定了改进未来健康优化实践的四个优先事项:制定和实施具有灵活性的国家指导,以适应地方差异;在初级保健中启动患者参与,并在所有服务中进行后续整合;改善资源配置以支持有效的公平影响;通过社会变革解决肥胖的更广泛决定因素:总体而言,如果没有额外的支持、投资和国家指南的实施,与会者对健康优化政策对肥胖症的影响预期有限。他们对目前的限制性方法提出了强烈的担忧。我们的结论是,要制定有效的健康优化政策,就必须解决体重管理支持服务的可用性以及对健康不平等的影响等问题。未来的政策方向应支持尽早提供健康优化服务(最好是在初级保健中)。健康优化干预措施应该是非限制性的、包容性的,并得到良好的监测,尤其是对平等的影响。
Health optimisation for patients with obesity before elective orthopaedic surgery: a qualitative study of professionals' views on restrictive approaches and future practice.
Background: Preoperative health optimisation for elective surgery entails supporting patients to improve their health in preparation for their treatment and recovery. While there is consensus that this process should address obesity, approaches vary across England. Despite guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to the contrary, restrictive approaches with body mass index thresholds for referral to arthroplasty are in use. This qualitative study aimed to investigate the views of professionals on the current use and future implications of these policies.
Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 professionals including clinicians, commissioners, policymakers, and health service managers, with experience of developing and/or implementing health optimisation policies for elective arthroplasty. Participants were sampled from areas in England with and without restrictive policies. We undertook thematic analysis of the interview data.
Results: Participants described pre-surgical health optimisation as an important trigger for health improvement but identified current resourcing and inadequacies in provision of weight management support as significant barriers to success. Participants expressed concerns about the appropriateness and fairness of including obesity as a determinant to restrict access to surgery. They described short-term financial pressures underlying the use of restrictive body mass index thresholds and a lack of an evidence base, such that policies amounted to rationing and risked exacerbations of health inequalities. The study identified four priorities for improvements to future health optimisation practices: developing and implementing national guidance with flexibility for local variation, initiating patient engagement in primary care with onward integration across all services, improving resourcing to support effective equitable impact, and addressing wider determinants of obesity through societal change.
Conclusions: Overall, participants had limited expectations of the impact of health optimisation policies on obesity without additional support, investment, and national guideline implementation. They raised strong concerns over current restrictive approaches. We conclude that addressing concerns around weight management support service availability and impacts on health inequalities is essential for shaping effective health optimisation policies. Future policy direction should support health optimisation to be offered early (ideally in primary care). Health optimisation interventions should be non-restrictive, inclusive, and well-monitored, particularly around equality impact.