Changes in and predictors of length of stay in hospital after surgery for breast cancer between 1997/98 and 2004/05 in two regions of England: a population-based

BACKGROUND Decreases in length of stay (LOS) in hospital after breast cancer surgery can be partly attributed to the change to less radical surgery, but many other factors are operating at the patient, surgeon and hospital levels. This study aimed to describe the changes in and predictors of length of stay (LOS) in hospital after surgery for breast cancer between 1997/98 and 2004/05 in two regions of England. METHODS Cases of female invasive breast cancer diagnosed in two English cancer registry regions were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics data for the period 1st April 1997 to 31st March 2005. A subset of records where women underwent mastectomy or breast conserving surgery (BCS) was extracted (n = 44,877). Variations in LOS over the study period were investigated. A multilevel model with patients clustered within surgical teams and NHS Trusts was used to examine associations between LOS and a range of factors. RESULTS Over the study period the proportion of women having a mastectomy reduced from 58% to 52%. The proportion varied from 14% to 80% according to NHS Trust. LOS decreased by 21% from 1997/98 to 2004/05 (LOSratio = 0.79, 95%CI 0.77-0.80). BCS was associated with 33% shorter hospital stays compared to mastectomy (LOSratio = 0.67, 95%CI 0.66-0.68). Older age, advanced disease, presence of comorbidities, lymph node excision and reconstructive surgery were associated with increased LOS. Significant variation remained amongst Trusts and surgical teams. CONCLUSION The number of days spent in hospital after breast cancer surgery has continued to decline for several decades. The change from mastectomy to BCS accounts for only 9% of the overall decrease in LOS. Other explanations include the adoption of new techniques and practices, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy and early discharge. This study has identified wide variation in practice with substantial cost implications for the NHS. Further work is required to explain this variation

Sex differences in national rates of repair of emergency abdominal aortic aneurysm

Background The aim of this study was to assess the sex differences in both the rate and type of repair for emergency abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in England. Methods Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data sets from April 2002 to February 2015 were obtained. Clinical and administrative codes were used to identify patients who underwent primary emergency definitive repair of ruptured or intact AAA, and patients with a diagnosis of AAA who died in hospital without repair. These three groups included all patients with a primary AAA who presented as an emergency. Sex differences between repair rates and type of surgery (endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open repair) over time were examined. Results In total, 15 717 patients (83·3 per cent men) received emergency surgical intervention for ruptured AAA and 10 276 (81·2 per cent men) for intact AAA; 12 767 (62·0 per cent men) died in hospital without attempted repair. The unadjusted odds ratio for no repair in women versus men was 2·88 (95 per cent c.i. 2·75 to 3·02). Women undergoing repair of ruptured AAA were older and had a higher in‐hospital mortality rate (50·0 versus 41·0 per cent for open repair; 30·9 versus 23·5 per cent for EVAR). After adjustment for age, deprivation and co‐morbidities, the odds ratio for no repair in women versus men was 1·34 (1·28 to 1·40). The in‐hospital mortality rate after emergency repair of an intact AAA was also higher among women. Conclusion Women who present as an emergency with an AAA are less likely to undergo repair than men. Although some of this can be explained by differences in age and co‐morbidities, the differences persist after case‐mix adjustment

Accessibility and implementation in the UK NHS services of an effective depression relapse prevention programme:learning from mindfulness-based cognitive therapy through a mixed-methods study

Background: Depression affects as many as one in five people in their lifetime and often runs a recurrent lifetime course. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an effective psychosocial approach that aims to help people at risk of depressive relapse to learn skills to stay well. However, there is an ‘implementation cliff’: access to those who could benefit from MBCT is variable and little is known about why that is the case, and how to promote sustainable implementation. As such, this study fills a gap in the literature about the implementation of MBCT. Objectives: To describe the existing provision of MBCT in the UK NHS, develop an understanding of the perceived costs and benefits of MBCT implementation, and explore the barriers and critical success factors for enhanced accessibility. We aimed to synthesise the evidence from multiple data sources to create an explanatory framework of the how and why of implementation, and to co-develop an implementation resource with key stakeholders. Design: A two-phase qualitative, exploratory and explanatory study, which was conceptually underpinned by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Setting: UK NHS services. Methods: Phase 1 involved interviews with participants from 40 areas across the UK about the current provision of MBCT. Phase 2 involved 10 case studies purposively sampled with differing degrees of MBCT provision, and from each UK country. Case study methods included interviews with key stakeholders, including commissioners, managers, MBCT practitioners and teachers, and service users. Observations were conducted and key documents were also collected. Data were analysed using a modified approach to framework analysis. Emerging findings were verified through stakeholder discussions and workshops. Results: Phase 1: access to and the format of MBCT provision across the NHS remains variable. NHS services have typically adapted MBCT to their context and its integration into care pathways was also highly variable even within the same trust or health board. Participants’ accounts revealed stories of implementation journeys that were driven by committed individuals that were sometimes met by management commitment. Phase 2: a number of explanations emerged that explained successful implementation. Critically, facilitation was the central role of the MBCT implementers, who were self-designated individuals who ‘championed’ implementation, created networks and over time mobilised top-down organisational support. Our explanatory framework mapped out a prototypical implementation journey, often over many years. This involved implementers working through grassroots initiatives and over time mobilising top-down organisational support, and a continual fitting of evidence, with the MBCT intervention, contextual factors and the training/supervision of MBCT teachers. Key pivot points in the journey provided windows of challenge or opportunity. Limitations: The findings are largely based on informants’ accounts and, therefore, are at risk of the bias of self-reporting. Conclusions: Although access to MBCT across the UK is improving, it remains very patchy. This study provides an explanatory framework that helps us understand what facilitates and supports sustainable MBCT implementation. Future work: The framework and stakeholder workshops are being used to develop online implementation guidance

Australian health policy and end of life care for people with chronic disease: An analysis

End of life care for people with advanced chronic disease is a growing international imperative, with the majority of deaths in the world now related to chronic disease. The provision of care that meets the needs of people with advanced chronic disease must be guided by appropriate policy. The key policy areas impacting directly on end of life care are related to chronic disease, palliative care and, increasingly, aged care. This paper describes the outcomes of an audit of Australian chronic disease and end of life/palliative care policies. We identified that chronic disease health policies/strategies demonstrate a focus on prevention, early intervention and management, with scant recognition of end of life care needs. The majority assume that a referral to palliative care will address end of life care needs for people with chronic disease. By contrast, palliative care policies recognise the need for the incorporation of a palliative approach into advanced chronic disease care, but there are few connections between these two policy areas. Whilst palliative care policies intersect with carer and advance care planning policies, chronic disease policy does not. Key concerns requiring consideration when developing policy in this area are discussed and possible policy options identified.Teresa Burgess, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Gregory B. Crawford, Justin Beilb