Using the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) outside acute hospital settings: A qualitative study of staff experiences in the West of England

© 2018 Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Objectives Early warning scores were developed to improve recognition of clinical deterioration in acute hospital settings. In England, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) is increasingly being recommended at a national level for use outside such settings. In 2015, the West of England Academic Health Science Network supported the roll-out of NEWS across a range of non-acute-hospital healthcare sectors. Research on the use of NEWS outside acute hospitals is limited. The objective of this study was to explore staff experiences of using NEWS in these new settings. Design Thematic analysis of qualitative semi-structured interviews with purposefully sampled healthcare staff. Setting West of England healthcare settings where NEWS was being used outside acute hospitals - primary care, ambulance, referral management, community and mental health services. Participants Twenty-five healthcare staff interviewed from primary care (9), ambulance (3), referral management/acute interface (5), community (4) and mental health services (3), and service commissioning (1). Results Participants reported that NEWS could support clinical decision-making around escalation of care, and provide a clear means of communicating clinical acuity between clinicians and across different healthcare organisations. Challenges with implementing NEWS varied - in primary care, clinicians had to select patients for NEWS and adopt different methods of clinical assessment, whereas for paramedics it fitted well with usual clinical practice and was used for all patients. In community services and mental health, modifications were 'needed' to make the tool relevant to some patient populations. Conclusions This study demonstrated that while NEWS can work for staff outside acute hospital settings, the potential for routine clinical practice to accommodate NEWS in such settings varied. A tailored approach to implementation in different settings, incorporating guidance supported by further research on the use of NEWS with specific patient groups in community settings, may be beneficial, and enhance staff confidence in the tool

Factors influencing streaming to General Practitioners in emergency departments: A qualitative study

Background: Emergency Department attendance is increasing internationally, of which a significant proportion could be managed in general practice. In England, policies backed by substantial capital funding require such patients attending Emergency Departments be directed or ‘streamed’ to general practitioners working in or parallel to Emergency Departments. However, evidence for streaming is limited and the processes of streaming patients attending Emergency Departments to general practitioners lacks exploration. Objectives: This paper explores streaming to general practitioners in and alongside Emergency Departments at ten sites across England. It highlights positive streaming practice, as well as issues that may contribute to poor streaming practice, in order to inform future service improvement. Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study was conducted with data collected between October 2017 and December 2019 across 10 case study sites throughout England as part of a broader mixed methods study. 186 non-participant observations and 226 semi-structured interviews with 191 health professionals working in Emergency Departments or related General Practitioner Services were thematically analysed in relation to streaming processes and experiences. Results: Six interconnected themes influencing streaming were identified: implementing and maintaining structural support; developing and supporting streaming personnel; implementing workable and responsive streaming protocols; negotiating primary/secondary care boundaries; developing and maintaining interprofessional relationships and concerns for patient safety. Streaming was considered central to the success of general practitioners in/parallel to Emergency Departments. The importance of the skills of streaming nurses in delivering an optimal and safety critical service was highlighted, as was the skillset of general practitioners and interprofessional relationships between streamers and general practitioners. There was no distinct streaming model or method associated with good streaming practice to general practitioners in/alongside Emergency Departments, instead factors for success were identified and key recommendations suggested. ‘Inappropriate’ streaming was identified as a problem, where patients streamed to general practitioners in or parallel to Emergency Departments required Emergency Department management, or patients suitable for general practitioner care were kept in the Emergency Department. Conclusion: Despite adopting differing methods, commonalities across case sites in the delivery of good streaming practice were identified, leading to identification of key recommendations which may inform development of streaming services. Study Registration: ISRCTN51780222. Tweetable Abstract: Workplace culture and the skillset of streamers and General Practitioners is crucial to streaming of patients to General Practitioners in Emergency Department

The potential of alternatives to face-to-face consultation in general practice, and the impact on different patient groups: a mixed-methods case study

Background: There is international interest in the potential role of different forms of communicationtechnology to provide an alternative to face-to-face consultations in health care. There has beenconsiderable rhetoric about the need for general practices to offer consultations by telephone, e-mail orinternet video. However, little is understood about how, under what conditions, for which patients and inwhat ways these approaches may offer benefits to patients and practitioners in general practice.Objectives: Our objectives were to review existing evidence about alternatives to face-to-face consultation;conduct a scoping exercise to identify the ways in which general practices currently provide these alternatives;recruit eight general practices as case studies for focused ethnographic research, exploring how practicecontext, patient characteristics, type of technology and the purpose of the consultation interact to determinethe impact of these alternatives; and synthesise the findings in order to develop a website resource about theimplementation of alternatives to face-to-face consultations and a framework for subsequent evaluation.Design: Mixed-methods case study.Setting: General practices in England and Scotland with varied experience of implementing alternatives toface-to-face consultations.Participants: Patients and practice staff.Interventions: Alternatives to face-to-face consultations include telephone consultations, e-mail,e-consultations and internet video.Main outcome measures: How context influenced the implementation and impact of alternatives to theface-to-face consultation; the rationale for practices to introduce alternatives; the use of different forms ofconsultation by different patient groups; and the intended benefits/outcomes.Review methods: The conceptual review used an approach informed by realist review, a method forsynthesising research evidence regarding complex interventions.Results: Alternatives to the face-to-face consultation are not in mainstream use in general practice, withlow uptake in our case study practices. We identified the underlying rationales for the use of thesealternatives and have shown that different stakeholders have different perspectives on what they hope toachieve through the use of alternatives to the face-to-face consultation. Through the observation of real-lifeuse of different forms of alternative, we have a clearer understanding of how, under what circumstancesand for which patients alternatives might have a range of intended benefits and potential unintendedadverse consequences. We have also developed a framework for future evaluation.Limitations: The low uptake of alternatives to the face-to-face consultation means that our researchparticipants might be deemed to be early adopters. The case study approach provides an in-depthexamination of a small number of sites, each using alternatives in different ways. The findings aretherefore hypothesis-generating, rather than hypothesis-testing.Conclusions: The current low uptake of alternatives, lack of clarity about purpose and limited evidence ofbenefit may be at odds with current policy, which encourages the use of alternatives. We have highlightedkey issues for practices and policy-makers to consider and have made recommendations about priorities forfurther research to be conducted, before or alongside the future roll-out of alternatives to the face-to-faceconsultation, such as telephone consulting, e-consultation, e-mail and video consulting.Future work: We have synthesised our findings to develop a framework and recommendations aboutfuture evaluation of the use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations.Funding details: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and DeliveryResearch programme.ABSTRACTNIH

Receptionists' role in new approaches to consultations in primary care: A focused ethnographic study

© British Journal of General Practice. Background The receptionist is pivotal to the smooth running of general practice in the UK, communicating with patients and booking appointments. Aim The authors aimed to explore the role of the receptionist in the implementation of new approaches to consultations in primary care. Design and setting The authors conducted a team-based focused ethnography. Three researchers observed eight general practices across England and Scotland between June 2015 and May 2016. Method Interviews were conducted with 39 patients and 45 staff in the practices, all of which had adopted one or more methods (telephone, email, e-consultation, or internet video) for providing an alternative to face-to-face consultation. Results Receptionists have a key role in facilitating patient awareness regarding new approaches to consultations in primary care, while at the same time ensuring that patients receive a consultation appropriate to their needs. In this study, receptionists' involvement in implementation and planning for the introduction of alternative approaches to faceto-face consultations was minimal, despite the expectation that they would be involved in delivery. Conclusion A shared understanding within practices of the potential difficulties and extra work that might ensue for reception staff was lacking. This might contribute to the low uptake by patients of potentially important innovations in service delivery. Involvement of the wider practice team in planning and piloting changes, supporting team members through service reconfiguration, and providing an opportunity to discuss and contribute to modifications of any new system would ensure that reception staff are suitably prepared to support the introduction of a new approach to consultations

Potential impacts of general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments in England: Initial qualitative findings from a national mixed-methods evaluation

Objectives To explore the potential impacts of introducing General Practitioners into Emergency Departments (GPED) from the perspectives of service leaders, health professionals and patients. These 'expectations of impact' can be used to generate hypotheses that will inform future implementations and evaluations of GPED. Design Qualitative study consisting of 228 semistructured interviews. Setting 10 acute National Health Service (NHS) hospitals and the wider healthcare system in England. Interviews were undertaken face to face or via telephone. Data were analysed thematically. Participants 124 health professionals and 94 patients and carers. 10 service leaders representing a range of national organisations and government departments across England (eg, NHS England and Department of Health) were also interviewed. Results A range of GPED models are being implemented across the NHS due to different interpretations of national policy and variation in local context. This has resulted in stakeholders and organisations interpreting the aims of GPED differently and anticipating a range of potential impacts. Participants expected GPED to affect the following areas: ED performance indicators; patient outcome and experience; service access; staffing and workforce experience; and resources. Across these 'domains of influence', arguments for positive, negative and no effect of GPED were proposed. Conclusions Evaluating whether GPED has been successful will be challenging. However, despite uncertainty surrounding the direction of effect, there was agreement across all stakeholder groups on the areas that GPED would influence. As a result, we propose eight domains of influence that will inform our subsequent mixed-methods evaluation of GPED

Using the Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency care and Treatment (ReSPECT) in care homes:a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND: The Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) is an advance care planning process designed to facilitate discussion and documentation of preferences for care in a medical emergency. Advance care planning is important in residential and nursing homes. AIM: To explore the views and experiences of GPs and care home staff of the role of ReSPECT in: (i) supporting, and documenting, conversations about care home residents’ preferences for emergency care situations, and (ii) supporting decision-making in clinical emergencies. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen GPs providing clinical care for care home residents and 11 care home staff in the West of England. METHODS: A qualitative research design using semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Participants’ accounts described the ReSPECT process as facilitating person-centred conversations about residents’ preferences for care in emergency situations. The creation of personalised scenarios supported residents to consider their preferences. However, using ReSPECT was complex, requiring interactional work to identify and incorporate resident or relative preferences. Subsequent translation of preferences into action during emergency situations also proved difficult in some cases. Care staff played an important role in facilitating and supporting ReSPECT conversations and in translating it into action. CONCLUSIONS: The ReSPECT process in care homes was positive for GPs and care home staff. We highlight challenges with the process, communication of preferences in emergency situations and the importance of balancing detail with clarity. This study highlights the potential for a multi-disciplinary approach engaging care staff more in the process

Alternatives to the face-to-face consultation in general practice: Focused ethnographic case study

© British Journal of General Practice. Background NHS policy encourages general practices to introduce alternatives to the face-to-face consultation, such as telephone, email, e-consultation systems, or internet video. Most have been slow to adopt these, citing concerns about workload. This project builds on previous research by focusing on the experiences of patients and practitioners who have used one or more of these alternatives. Aim To understand how, under what conditions, for which patients, and in what ways, alternatives to face-to-face consultations present benefits and challenges to patients and practitioners in general practice. Design and setting Focused ethnographic case studies took place in eight UK general practices between June 2015 and March 2016. Method Non-participant observation, informal conversations with staff, and semi-structured interviews with staff and patients were conducted. Practice documents and protocols were reviewed. Data were analysed through charting and the 'one sheet of paper' mind-map method to identify the line of argument in each thematic report. Results Case study practices had different rationales for offering alternatives to the face-to-face consultation. Beliefs varied about which patients and health issues were suitable. Co-workers were often unaware of each other's practice; for example, practice policies for use of e-consultations systems with patients were not known about or followed. Patients reported benefits including convenience and access. Staff and some patients regarded the face-toface consultation as the ideal. Conclusion Experience of implementing alternatives to the face-to-face consultation suggests that changes in patient access and staff workload may be both modest and gradual. Practices planning to implement them should consider carefully their reasons for doing so and involve the whole practice team

How can frontline expertise and new models of care best contribute to safely reducing avoidable acute admissions? A mixed-methods study of four acute hospitals

BackgroundHospital emergency admissions have risen annually, exacerbating pressures on emergency departments (EDs) and acute medical units. These pressures have an adverse impact on patient experience and potentially lead to suboptimal clinical decision-making. In response, a variety of innovations have been developed, but whether or not these reduce inappropriate admissions or improve patient and clinician experience is largely unknown.AimsTo investigate the interplay of service factors influencing decision-making about emergency admissions, and to understand how the medical assessment process is experienced by patients, carers and practitioners.MethodsThe project used a multiple case study design for a mixed-methods analysis of decision-making about admissions in four acute hospitals. The primary research comprised two parts: value stream mapping to measure time spent by practitioners on key activities in 108 patient pathways, including an embedded study of cost; and an ethnographic study incorporating data from 65 patients, 30 carers and 282 practitioners of different specialties and levels. Additional data were collected through a clinical panel, learning sets, stakeholder workshops, reading groups and review of site data and documentation. We used a realist synthesis approach to integrate findings from all sources.FindingsPatients’ experiences of emergency care were positive and they often did not raise concerns, whereas carers were more vocal. Staff’s focus on patient flow sometimes limited time for basic care, optimal communication and shared decision-making. Practitioners admitted or discharged few patients during the first hour, but decision-making increased rapidly towards the 4-hour target. Overall, patients’ journey times were similar, although waiting before being seen, for tests or after admission decisions, varied considerably. The meaning of what constituted an ‘admission’ varied across sites and sometimes within a site. Medical and social complexity, targets and ‘bed pressure’, patient safety and risk, each influenced admission/discharge decision-making. Each site responded to these pressures with different initiatives designed to expedite appropriate decision-making. New ways of using hospital ‘space’ were identified. Clinical decision units and observation wards allow potentially dischargeable patients with medical and/or social complexity to be ‘off the clock’, allowing time for tests, observation or safe discharge. New teams supported admission avoidance: an acute general practitioner service filtered patients prior to arrival; discharge teams linked with community services; specialist teams for the elderly facilitated outpatient treatment. Senior doctors had a range of roles: evaluating complex patients, advising and training juniors, and overseeing ED activity.ConclusionsThis research shows how hospitals under pressure manage complexity, safety and risk in emergency care by developing ‘ground-up’ initiatives that facilitate timely, appropriate and safe decision-making, and alternative care pathways for lower-risk, ambulatory patients. New teams and ‘off the clock’ spaces contribute to safely reducing avoidable admissions; frontline expertise brings value not only by placing senior experienced practitioners at the front door of EDs, but also by using seniors in advisory roles. Although the principal limitation of this research is its observational design, so that causation cannot be inferred, its strength is hypothesis generation. Further research should test whether or not the service and care innovations identified here can improve patient experience of acute care and safely reduce avoidable admissions.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (project number 10/1010/06). This research was supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula

Do general practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department improve clinical outcomes or experience? A mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of general practitioners (GPs) working in or alongside the emergency department (GPED) on patient outcomes and experience, and the associated impacts of implementation on the workforce. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study: interviews with service leaders and NHS managers; in-depth case studies (n=10) and retrospective observational analysis of routinely collected national data. We used normalisation process theory to map our findings to the theory's four main constructs of coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from 64 EDs in England. Case site data included: non-participant observation of 142 clinical encounters; 467 semistructured interviews with policy-makers, service leaders, clinical staff, patients and carers. Retrospective observational analysis used routinely collected Hospital Episode Statistics alongside information on GPED service hours from 40 hospitals for which complete data were available. RESULTS: There was disagreement at individual, stakeholder and organisational levels regarding the purpose and potential impact of GPED (coherence). Participants criticised policy development and implementation, and staff engagement was hindered by tensions between ED and GP staff (cognitive participation). Patient 'streaming' processes, staffing and resource constraints influenced whether GPED became embedded in routine practice. Concerns that GPED may increase ED attendance influenced staff views. Our quantitative analysis showed no detectable impact on attendance (collective action). Stakeholders disagreed whether GPED was successful, due to variations in GPED model, site-specific patient mix and governance arrangements. Following statistical adjustment for multiple testing, we found no impact on: ED reattendances within 7 days, patients discharged within 4 hours of arrival, patients leaving the ED without being seen; inpatient admissions; non-urgent ED attendances and 30-day mortality (reflexive monitoring). CONCLUSIONS: We found a high degree of variability between hospital sites, but no overall evidence that GPED increases the efficient operation of EDs or improves clinical outcomes, patient or staff experience. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISCRTN5178022

Changes in insulin resistance indicators, IGFs, and adipokines in a year-long trial of aerobic exercise in postmenopausal women

Physical activity is a known modifiable lifestyle means for reducing postmenopausal breast cancer risk, but the biologic mechanisms are not well understood. Metabolic factors may be involved. In this study, we aimed to determine the effects of exercise on insulin resistance (IR) indicators, IGF1, and adipokines in postmenopausal women. The Alberta Physical Activity and Breast Cancer Prevention Trial was a two-armed randomized controlled trial in postmenopausal, inactive, cancer-free women. A year-long aerobic exercise intervention of 225 min/week (n=160) was compared with a control group asked to maintain usual activity levels (n=160). Baseline, 6- and 12-month serum levels of insulin, glucose, IGF1, IGF-binding protein 3 (IGFBP3), adiponectin, and leptin were assayed, and after data collection, homeostasis model assessment of IR (HOMA-IR) scores were calculated. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed using linear mixed models. The treatment effect ratio (TER) of exercisers to controls was calculated. Data were available on 308 (96.3%) women at 6 months and 310 (96.9%) women at 12 months. Across the study period, statistically significant reductions in insulin (TER=0.87, 95% confidence interval (95% CI)=0.81–0.93), HOMA-IR (TER=0.86, 95% CI=0.80–0.93), and leptin (TER=0.82, 95% CI=0.78–0.87), and an increase in the adiponectin/leptin ratio (TER=1.21, 95% CI=1.13–1.28) were observed in the exercise group compared with the control group. No significant differences were observed for glucose, IGF1, IGFBP3, adiponectin or the IGF1/IGFBP3 ratio. Previously inactive postmenopausal women who engaged in a moderate-to-vigorous intensity exercise program experienced changes in insulin, HOMA-IR, leptin, and adiponectin/leptin that might decrease the risk for postmenopausal breast cancer