How Do Care Transitions Work?: Unraveling the Working Mechanisms of Care Transition Interventions

BACKGROUND: Failure of safe care transitions after hospital discharge results in unnecessary worsening of symptoms, extended period of illness or readmission to the hospital. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to add to the understanding of the working of care transition interventions between hospital and home through unraveling the contextual elements and mechanisms that may have played a role in the success of these interventions, and by developing a conceptual model of how these components relate to each other. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a qualitative study using in-person, semi-structured interviews, based on realist evaluation methods. SUBJECTS: A total of 26 researchers, designers, administrators, and/or practitioners of both current "leading" care transitions interventions and of less successful care transition intervention studies or practices. MEASURES: The contextual elements and working mechanisms of the different care transition intervention studies or practices. RESULTS: Three main contextual factors (internal environment, external environment, and patient population) and 7 working mechanisms (simplifiying, verifiying, connecting, translating, coaching, monitoring, and anticipating) were found to be relevant to the outcome of care transition interventions. Context, Intervention, Mechanism, and Outcome (CIMO) configurations revealed that, in response to these contextual factors, care transition interventions triggered one or several of the mechanisms, in turn generating outcomes, including a safer care transition. CONCLUSION: We developed a conceptual model which explains the working of care transition interventions within different contexts, and believe it can help support future successful implementation of care transition interventions

Characteristics and preventability of medication-related admissions for acute kidney injury and dehydration in elderly patients

Purpose: Patients with impaired renal function using medication that affects glomerular filtration rate are at increased risk of developing acute kidney injury (AKI) leading to hospital admissions. The risk increases during periods of dehydration due to diarrhoea, vomiting or fever (so-called “sick days”), or high environmental temperatures (heat wave). This study aims to gain insight into the characteristics and preventability of medication-related admissions for AKI and dehydration in elderly patients. Methods: Retrospective case series study in patients aged ≥ 65 years with admission for acute kidney injury, dehydration or electrolyte imbalance related to dehydration that was defined as medication-related. General practitioner’s (GP) patient records including medication history and hospital discharge letters were available. For each admission, patient and admission characteristics were collected to review the patient journey. A case-by-case assessment of preventability of hospital admissions was performed. Results: In total, 75 admissions were included. Most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension, diabetes, and known impaired renal function. Diuretics and RAS-inhibitors were the most prevalent medication combination. Eighty percent of patients experienced non-acute onset of symptoms and 60% had contacted their GP within 2 weeks prior to admission. Around 40% (n = 29) of admissions were considered potentially preventable if pharmacotherapy had been timely and adequately adjusted. Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients admitted with AKI or dehydration experience non-acute onset of symptoms and had contacted their GP within 2 weeks prior to admission. Timely adjusting of medication in these patients could have potentially prevented a considerable number of admissions

Call Characteristics of Patients Suspected of Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) or Stroke During Out-of-Hours Service: A Comparison Between Men and Women

Background: In the Netherlands, a digital decision support system for telephone triage at out-of-hours services in primary care (OHS-PC) is used. Differences in help-seeking behavior between men and women when transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke is suspected could potentially affect telephone triage and allocation of urgency. Aim: To assess patient and call characteristics and allocated urgencies between women and men who contacted OHS-PC with suspected TIA/stroke. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 1,266 telephone triage recordings of subjects with suspected neurological symptoms calling the OHS-PC between 2014 and 2016. The allocated urgencies were derived from the electronic medical records of the OHS-PC and the final diagnosis from the patient's own general practitioner, including diagnoses based on hospital specialist letters. Results: Five hundred forty-six men (mean age = 67.3 ± 17.1) and 720 women (mean age = 69.6 ± 19.5) were included. TIA/stroke was diagnosed in 294 men (54%) (mean age = 72.3 ± 13.6) and 366 women (51%) (mean age = 78.0 ± 13.8). In both genders, FAST (face-arm-speech test) symptoms were common in TIA/stroke (men 78%, women 82%) but also in no TIA/stroke (men 63%, women 62%). Men with TIA/stroke had shorter call durations than men without TIA/stroke (7.10 vs. 8.20 min, p = 0.001), whereas in women this difference was smaller and not significant (7.41 vs. 7.56 min, p = 0.41). Both genders were allocated high urgency in 75% of the final TIA/stroke cases. Conclusion: Overall, patient and call characteristics are mostly comparable between men and women, and these only modestly assist in identifying TIA/stroke. There were no gender differences in allocated urgencies after telephone triage in patients with TIA/stroke

Gender-stratified analyses of symptoms associated with acute coronary syndrome in telephone triage: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES: To identify clinical variables that are associated with the diagnosis acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in women and men with chest discomfort who contact out-of-hours primary care (OHS-PC) by telephone, and to explore whether there are indications whether these variables differ among women and men. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study in which we compared patient and call characteristics of triage call recordings between women with and without ACS, and men with and without ACS. SETTING: Nine OHS-PC in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 993 women and 802 men who called OHS-PC for acute chest discomfort (pain, pressure, tightness or discomfort) between 2014 and 2016. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Diagnosis of ACS retrieved from the patient's medical record in general practice, including hospital specialists' discharge letters. RESULTS: Among 1795 patients (mean age 58.8 (SD 19.5) years, 55.3% women), 15.0% of men and 8.6% of women had an ACS. In both sexes, retrosternal chest pain was associated with ACS (women with ACS vs without 62.3% vs 40.3%, p=0.002; men with ACS vs without 52.5% vs 39.7%, p=0.032; gender interaction, p=0.323), as was pressing/heavy/tightening pain (women 78.6% vs 61.5%, p=0.011; men 82.1% vs 57.4%, p=<0.001; gender interaction, p=0.368) and radiation to the arm (women 75.6% vs 45.9%, p<0.001; men 56.0% vs 34.8%, p<0.001; gender interaction, p=0.339). Results indicate that only in women were severe pain (65.4% vs 38.1%, p=0.006; gender interaction p=0.007) and radiation to jaw (50.0% vs 22.9%, p=0.007; gender interaction p=0.015) associated with ACS.Ambulances were dispatched equally in women (72.9%) and men with ACS (70.0%). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate there were more similarities than differences in symptoms associated with the diagnosis ACS for women and men. Important exceptions were pain severity and radiation of pain in women. Whether these differences have an impact on predicting ACS needs to be further investigated with multivariable analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7331

Non-dispensing pharmacist integrated in the primary care team:Effect on the quality of physician's prescribing, a non-randomised comparative study

BackgroundEspecially in elderly with polypharmacy, medication can do harm. Clinical pharmacists integrated in primary care teams might improve quality of pharmaceutical care.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of non-dispensing clinical pharmacists integrated in primary care teams on general practitioners' prescribing quality.SettingThis study was conducted in 25 primary care practices in the Netherlands.MethodsNon-randomised, controlled, multi-centre, complex intervention study with pre-post comparison. First, we identified potential prescribing quality indicators from the literature and assessed their feasibility, validity, acceptability, reliability and sensitivity to change. Also, an expert panel assessed the indicators' health impact. Next, using the final set of indicators, we measured the quality of prescribing in practices where non-dispensing pharmacists were integrated in the team (intervention group) compared to usual care (two control groups). Data were extracted anonymously from the healthcare records. Comparisons were made using mixed models correcting for potential confounders.Main outcome measureQuality of prescribing, measured with prescribing quality indicators.ResultsOf 388 eligible indicators reported in the literature we selected 8. In addition, two more indicators relevant for Dutch general practice were formulated by an expert panel. Scores on all 10 indicators improved in the intervention group after introduction of the non-dispensing pharmacist. However, when compared to control groups, prescribing quality improved solely on the indicator measuring monitoring of the renal function in patients using antihypertensive medication: relative risk of a monitored renal function in the intervention group compared to usual care: 1.03 (95% CI 1.01-1.05, p-value 0.010) and compared to usual care plus: 1.04 (1.01-1.06, p-value 0.004).ConclusionThis study did not demonstrate a consistent effect of the introduction of non-dispensing clinical pharmacists in the primary care team on the quality of physician's prescribing. This study is part of the POINT-study, which was registered at The Netherlands National Trial Register with trial registration number NTR-4389

Common infections and antibiotic prescribing during the first year of the covid-19 pandemic: A primary care-based observational cohort study

Presentation and antibiotic prescribing for common infectious disease episodes decreased substantially during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave in Dutch general practice. We set out to determine the course of these variables during the first pandemic year. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using routine health care data from the Julius General Practitioners’ Network. All patients registered in the pre-pandemic year (n = 425,129) and/or during the first pandemic year (n = 432,122) were included. Relative risks for the number of infectious disease episodes (respiratory tract/ear, urinary tract, gastrointestinal, and skin), in total and those treated with antibiotics, and proportions of episodes treated with antibiotics (prescription rates) were calculated. Compared to the pre-pandemic year, primary care presentation for common infections remained lower during the full first pandemic year (RR, 0.77; CI, 0.76–0.78), mainly attributed to a sustained decline in respiratory tract/ear and gastrointestinal infection episodes. Presentation for urinary tract and skin infection episodes declined during the first wave, but returned to pre-pandemic levels during the second and start of the third wave. Antibiotic prescription rates were lower during the full first pandemic year (24%) as compared to the pre-pandemic year (28%), mainly attributed to a 10% lower prescription rate for respiratory tract/ear infections; the latter was not accompanied by an increase in complications. The decline in primary care presentation for common infections during the full first COVID-19 pandemic year, together with lower prescription rates for respiratory tract/ear infections, resulted in a substantial reduction in antibiotic prescribing in Dutch primary care

Pharmacists’ current and potential prescribing roles in primary care in the Netherlands: a case study

In some countries, pharmacists have obtained prescribing rights to improve quality and accessibility of care and reduce physician workload. This case study explored pharmacists’ current roles in and potential for prescribing in primary care in the Netherlands, where prescribing rights for pharmacists do not exist. Participatory observations of pharmacists working in either general practice or community pharmacy were conducted, as were semi-structured interviews about current and potential practice. The latter were extended to patients and other healthcare professionals, mainly general practitioners, resulting in 34 interviews in total. Thematic analyses revealed that pharmacists, in all cases, wrote prescriptions that were then authorized by a physician before dispensing. General practice-based pharmacists often prescribed medications during patient consultations. Community pharmacists mainly influenced prescribing through (a) medication reviews where the physician and/or practice nurse often were consulted to make treatment decisions, and (b) collaborative agreements with physicians to start or substitute medications in specific situations. These findings imply that the pharmacists’ current roles in prescribing in the Netherlands resemble collaborative prescribing practices in other countries. We also identified several issues that should be addressed before formally introducing pharmacist prescribing, such as definitions of tasks and responsibilities and prescribing-specific training for pharmacists

Home-based initiatives for acute management of COVID-19 patients needing oxygen: differences across The Netherlands

Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic new collaborative-care initiatives were developed for treating and monitoring COVID-19 patients with oxygen at home. Aim was to provide a structured overview focused on differences and similarities of initiatives of acute home-based management in the Netherlands. Methods: Initiatives were eligible for evaluation if (i) COVID-19 patients received oxygen treatment at home; (ii) patients received structured remote monitoring; (iii) it was not an ‘early hospital discharge’ program; (iv) at least one patient was included. Protocols were screened, and additional information was obtained from involved physicians. Design choices were categorised into: eligible patient group, organization medical care, remote monitoring, nursing care, and devices used. Results: Nine initiatives were screened for eligibility; five were included. Three initiatives included low-risk patients and two were designed specifically for frail patients. Emergency department (ED) visit for an initial diagnostic work-up and evaluation was mandatory in three initiatives before starting home management. Medical responsibility was either assigned to the general practitioner or hospital specialist, most often pulmonologist or internist. Pulse-oximetry was used in all initiatives, with additional monitoring of heart rate and respiratory rate in three initiatives. Remote monitoring staff’s qualification and authority varied, and organization and logistics were covered by persons with various backgrounds. All initiatives offered remote monitoring via an application, two also offered a paper diary option. Conclusions: We observed differences in the organization of interprofessional collaboration for acute home management of hypoxemic COVID-19 patients. All initiatives used pulse-oximetry and an app for remote monitoring. Our overview may be of help to healthcare providers and organizations to set up and implement similar acute home management initiatives for critical episodes of COVID-19 (or other acute disorders) that would otherwise require hospital care

Validation of a questionnaire measuring transitional patient safety climate indicated differences in transitional patient safety climate between primary and secondary care

Objectives: This study describes the development and validation of the TRAnsitional patient safety Climate Evaluation (TRACE) questionnaire, measuring transitional patient safety climate from the perspective of general practitioners and hospital physicians. Patient safety climate reflects the professionals' perception of the organizational patient safety culture. Study Design and Setting: In the development of the TRACE, we adjusted existing questionnaires on patient safety culture. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed. Internal consistency and correlations between factors and a global transitional patient safety rating were calculated. Results: In total, 162 questionnaires were completed (response 23%; general practice: N = 97, hospital physicians: N = 65). Analysis of all respondents did not provide an interpretable factor solution. However, the EFA on the results of hospital physicians revealed four relevant factors: (1) collaboration, (2) speaking up, (3) communication on transitional incidents and improvement measures, and (4) transitional patient safety management. The internal consistency of these factors was good for hospital respondents (0.71-0.87) and fair to acceptable for general practices' respondents (0.63-0.72). Conclusion: Although the TRACE questionnaire did not provide a solid factor structure in a combined sample of general practice and hospital respondents, the factors found reliable in hospital setting had acceptable reliability in general practice setting