Primary care services co-located with Emergency Departments across a UK region: early views on their development

Background Co-location of primary care services with Emergency Departments (ED) is one initiative aiming to reduce the burden on EDs of patients attending with non-urgent problems. However, the extent to which these services are operating within or alongside EDs is not currently known. This study aimed to create a typology of co-located primary care services in operation across Yorkshire and Humber (Y&H) as well as identify early barriers and facilitators to their implementation and sustainability. Methods A self-report survey was sent to the lead consultant or other key contact at 17 EDs in the Y&H region to establish the extent and configuration of co-located primary care services. Semi-structured interviews were then conducted with urgent and unscheduled care stakeholders across five hospital sites to explore the barriers and facilitators to the formation and sustainability of these services. Results Thirteen EDs completed the survey and interviews were carried out with four ED consultants, one ED nurse and three general practitioners (GPs). Three distinct models were identified: ‘Primary Care Services Embedded within the ED’ (seven sites), ‘Co-located Urgent Care Centre’ (two sites) and ‘GP out-of-hours’ (nine sites). Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Four interview themes emerged (justification for the service, level of integration, referral processes and sustainability) highlighting some of the challenges in implementing these co-located primary care services. Conclusion Creating a service within or alongside the ED in which GPs can use their distinct skills and therefore add value to the existing skill mix of ED staff is an important consideration when setting up these systems. Effective triage arrangements should also be established to ensure appropriate patients are referred to GPs. Further research is required to identify the full range of models nationally and to carry out a rigorous assessment of their impact

Adapting safety plans for autistic adults with involvement from the autism community

Background: Autistic adults are at greater risk of self-harm and suicide than the general population. One promising intervention in the general population is safety planning. We aimed to seek advice from autistic adults and others in the autism community on how to adapt safety plans for autistic adults. Methods: We conducted focus groups with autistic adults (n = 15), family members (n = 5), and service providers (n = 10), about their views of the Autism Adapted Safety Plan (AASP). We also conducted interviews about the acceptability of the AASP with autistic adults who had developed an AASP (n = 8) and with service providers who had supported them (n = 8). We analyzed the focus group and interview transcripts using thematic analysis. Results: Theme 1 highlights conditions needed to make the process of creating the AASP acceptable for autistic adults. This included creating the AASP with someone they could trust and at the right place and time, when they were not in distress or in crisis. Theme 2 describes how safety planning needed to be a creative, flexible, and iterative process. Autistic adults may need help in expressing their emotions and identifying coping strategies, which can be supported through visual resources and suggestions from the service provider. To ensure that the AASP is accessible in times of crisis, it needs to meet the autistic adults' preferences in terms of formatting and how it is stored (i.e., hard copy or electronic). Conclusions: The AASP is a potentially valuable intervention for autistic adults, provided that the process of creating it is flexible and sensitive to individual needs. Further testing of the AASP to assess its clinical effectiveness in reducing suicidal behavior could provide a life-saving intervention for autistic adults

What is the evidence for the management of patients along the pathway from the emergency department to acute admission to reduce unplanned attendance and admission? An evidence synthesis

Background Globally, the rate of emergency hospital admissions is increasing. However, little evidence exists to inform the development of interventions to reduce unplanned Emergency Department (ED) attendances and hospital admissions. The objective of this evidence synthesis was to review the evidence for interventions, conducted during the patient’s journey through the ED or acute care setting, to manage people with an exacerbation of a medical condition to reduce unplanned emergency hospital attendance and admissions. Methods A rapid evidence synthesis, using a systematic literature search, was undertaken in the electronic data bases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science, for the years 2000–2014. Evidence included in this review was restricted to Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) and observational studies (with a control arm) reported in peer-reviewed journals. Studies evaluating interventions for patients with an acute exacerbation of a medical condition in the ED or acute care setting which reported at least one outcome related to ED attendance or unplanned admission were included. Results Thirty papers met our inclusion criteria: 19 intervention studies (14 RCTs) and 11 controlled observational studies. Sixteen studies were set in the ED and 14 were conducted in an acute setting. Two studies (one RCT), set in the ED were effective in reducing ED attendance and hospital admission. Both of these interventions were initiated in the ED and included a post-discharge community component. Paradoxically 3 ED initiated interventions showed an increase in ED re-attendance. Six studies (1 RCT) set in acute care settings were effective in reducing: hospital admission, ED re-attendance or re-admission (two in an observation ward, one in an ED assessment unit and three in which the intervention was conducted within 72 h of admission). Conclusions There is no clear evidence that specific interventions along the patient journey from ED arrival to 72 h after admission benefit ED re-attendance or readmission. Interventions targeted at high-risk patients, particularly the elderly, may reduce ED utilization and warrant future research. Some interventions showing effectiveness in reducing unplanned ED attendances and admissions are delivered by appropriately trained personnel in an environment that allows sufficient time to assess and manage patients

List of investigations and treatments identifying non-urgent ED attendances with corresponding HES A&E codes.

<p>List of investigations and treatments identifying non-urgent ED attendances with corresponding HES A&E codes.</p

Classification of all attendances.

<p>Classification of all attendances.</p

% of non-urgent attendances presenting by ambulance by age group and time period.

<p>% of non-urgent attendances presenting by ambulance by age group and time period.</p

Non-urgent attendances by arrival mode and time period of arrival.

<p>Non-urgent attendances by arrival mode and time period of arrival.</p

ED waiting times, treatment times and total department times by attendance type (urgent or non-urgent).

<p>ED waiting times, treatment times and total department times by attendance type (urgent or non-urgent).</p

Pattern of first time attendances and non-urgent by day of week/time of day and age.

<p>Pattern of first time attendances and non-urgent by day of week/time of day and age.</p

% of non-urgent attendances by age (categories).

<p>% of non-urgent attendances by age (categories).</p