1,385 research outputs found

    A systematic literature review of operational research methods for modelling patient flow and outcomes within community healthcare and other settings

    Get PDF
    An ambition of healthcare policy has been to move more acute services into community settings. This systematic literature review presents analysis of published operational research methods for modelling patient flow within community healthcare, and for modelling the combination of patient flow and outcomes in all settings. Assessed for inclusion at three levels – with the references from included papers also assessed – 25 “Patient flow within community care”, 23 “Patient flow and outcomes” papers and 5 papers within the intersection are included for review. Comparisons are made between each paper’s setting, definition of states, factors considered to influence flow, output measures and implementation of results. Common complexities and characteristics of community service models are discussed with directions for future work suggested. We found that in developing patient flow models for community services that use outcomes, transplant waiting list may have transferable benefits

    How is Social Care Provided in Adult Prisons in England and Wales?

    Get PDF
    There is variation in provision of social care in prisons. Our research aimed to understand variation across adult prisons in England and Wales, including: (1) what social care is provided? (2) who delivers social care? (3) what peer support initiatives are used? (4) what social care indicators are relevant? and (5) are there differences between prison type and social care provision? We analysed Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) reports (published 2017–2020) from 102 prisons. From these reports we extracted and analysed data on social care provision. Elements of social care are not consistently delivered; need assessments (81.4 per cent) and referrals (75.5 per cent) were most frequently reported. Different providers (health care/social care/prison) deliver social care. Forty-one prisons (40.2 per cent) included peer support (formal to informal). We found no notable differences between prison categories and social care delivery, although, within category D prisons, a significantly larger proportion of those with a disability reported receiving support they needed. Inspection reports highlighted that prison social care should mirror community social care, but we could not fully evaluate this due to reporting issues. Social care provision varies; effectiveness of different models is not yet known. We provide recommendations to improve social care reporting within HMIP reports

    Evidence use as sociomaterial practice? A qualitative study of decision-making on introducing service innovations in health care

    Get PDF
    A policy aspiration is that evidence should inform decision-making on introducing health service innovations. Internationally, innovation adoption has historically been slow and patchy. Three innovations in the English and Scottish National Health Service were analysed qualitatively: stroke service reconfiguration; revised national guidance on cancer referral; and ‘virtual’ glaucoma outpatient clinics. The authors identify three sociomaterial mechanisms through which evidence and context shape each other in decision-making: connecting, ordering, resisting. Shared preferences for research evidence enabled the medical profession to exert influence on decision-making, while other professions used alternative evidence. Implications for promoting inclusive public management around service innovations are discussed

    One to one specialling and sitters in acute care hospitals: a scoping review

    Get PDF
    Background One to one specialling is a type of care which is provided to ensure the safety of patients who may be suffering from cognitive impairment, exhibit challenging behaviour, or may be at risk of falls or of causing harm to themselves or others. Care such as this, often referred to as ‘specialling’ or ‘sitting’ is common practice in most hospitals around the world, but there is a lack of evidence regarding its cost effectiveness and the quality of care provided. Aim The aim of this scoping review was to explore the breadth and scope of literature on one to one specialling, sitters and similar types of care in acute secondary care settings, in order to identify the challenges and concerns relating to the quality of care (process and outcomes) and cost effectiveness emerging from the literature, and determine the implications of this for policy, practice and future research. Design This review was based on scoping review methodology following a five stage scoping review process. A keyword search was conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, ProQuest Social Science, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health. The time limit placed on the search was January 2000 to April 2016. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality of primary research articles. Findings Forty-four articles were included in the review. We found a lack of clarity in the terms used to describe one to one specialling and variability in what this type of care entails, who provides the care and the needs of patients requiring this type of care. High costs of specialling are often seen as a concern, but there was a lack of economic evaluations considering the full cost of specialling and balancing these against the benefits. Some of the articles proposed alternatives to one to one specialling or the use of sitters, but only some of these were evaluated. Conclusion There is wide variation in what specialling and one to one care entails, which can in turn lead to the provision of poor quality care. A reduction in this variation and improved quality care might be achieved through the development of guidelines, training and standardized decision-making tools. Further research on the impact of one to one specialling on patient outcomes and cost would be beneficial, as well as robust evaluations of the alternatives to specialling

    Patients’ Experiences of Cancer Diagnosis as a Result of an Emergency Presentation: A Qualitative Study

    Get PDF
    Cancers diagnosed following visits to emergency departments (ED) or emergency admissions (emergency presentations) are associated with poor survival and may result from preventable diagnostic delay. To improve outcomes for these patients, a better understanding is needed about how emergency presentations arise. This study sought to capture patients' experiences of this diagnostic pathway in the English NHS. Eligible patients were identified in a service evaluation of emerge ncy presentations and invited to participate. Interviews, using an open-ended biographical structure, captured participants' experiences of healthcare services before diagnosis and were analysed thematically, informed by the Walter model of Pathways to Treatment and NICE guidance in n iterative process. Twenty-seven interviews were conducted. Three typologies were identified: A: Rapid investigation and diagnosis, and B: Repeated cycles of healthcare seeking and appraisal without resolution, with two variants where B1 appears consistent with guidance and B2 has evidence that management was not consistent with guidance. Most patients’ (23/27) experiences fitted types B1 and B2. Potentially avoidable breakdowns in diagnostic pathways caused delays when patients were conflicted by escalating symptoms and a benign diagnosis given earlier by doctors. ED was sometimes used as a conduit to rapid testing by primary care clinicians, although this pathway was not always successful. This study draws on patients' experiences of their diagnosis to provide novel insights into how emergency presentations arise. Through these typologies, we show that the typical experience of patients diagnosed through an emergency presentation diverges significantly from normative pathways even when there is no evidence of serious service failures. Consultations were not a conduit to diagnosis when they inhibited patients’ capacity to appraise their own symptoms appropriately and when they resulted in a reluctance to seek further healthcare. The findings also point to potentially avoidable breakdowns in the diagnostic process. In particular, to encourage patients to return to the GP if symptoms escalate, a stronger emphasis is needed on diagnostic uncertainty in discussions between patients and doctors in both primary and secondary care. To improve appropriate access to rapid investigations, systems are needed for primary care to communicate directly with secondary care at the time of referral
    corecore