Integrated care in Switzerland: Results from the first nationwide survey.

Due to fragmentation of care delivery, health systems are under pressure and integrated care is advocated for. Compared to the numerous existing integrated care initiatives in Europe and elsewhere, Switzerland seems to lag behind. The objective of the survey was to produce a comprehensive overview of integrated care initiatives in Switzerland. To be included, initiatives needed to meet four criteria: present some type of formalization, consider >2 different groups of healthcare professionals, integrate >2 healthcare levels, be ongoing. We systematically contacted major health system organizations at federal, cantonal and local level. Between 2015 and 2016, we identified 172 integrated care initiatives and sent them a questionnaire. We performed descriptive analyses. Integrated care initiatives in Switzerland are frequent and increasing. The implementation of initiatives over time, their distribution between linguistic areas, the number of healthcare levels integrated, and the number of professionals involved vary according to the type of initiatives. Despite Switzerland's federalist structure and organization of healthcare, and only recent incentives to develop integrated care, initiatives are frequent and diverse. Stakeholders should support existing initiatives and facilitate their development. They should also promote innovative avenues, experiment alternative payment models for integrated care, foster people-centeredness and incentivize interprofessional models. This will require systems thinking and contributions from all actors of the healthcare system

Healthcare system maturity for integrated care: results of a Swiss nationwide survey using the SCIROCCO tool.

To assess the maturity of the Swiss healthcare system for integrated care and to explore whether this maturity varied according to several variables. A Swiss nationwide individual electronic survey in November 2019. Stakeholders identified via lists of the Swiss Forum for Integrated Care and of the integrated care unit of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health, and representatives of 26 cantonal public health departments, were invited to participate. The outcome was the maturity of the Swiss healthcare system for integrated care, measured with the Scaling Integrated Care in Context maturity model tool (SCIROCCO tool), which comprises 12 dimensions and questions rated on a 6-point scale. Univariate analyses were first performed, followed by bivariate analyses, to find out whether maturity varied according to working linguistic region, healthcare profession, main domain of professional activity, implication in integrated care, attitude towards integrated care and attitude towards the Swiss healthcare system. The 642 respondents were 53.7 years on average, 42.5% were women, 60.0% and 20.7% worked in the German and French-speaking parts of Switzerland, respectively. Overall, the maturity of the Swiss healthcare system for integrated care was evaluated as low, with dimension means ranging from 1.0 (±1.0) for the 'Funding' dimension to a maximum of 2.7 (±1.1) for 'eHealth Services'. Results only varied according to the working linguistic region. Results highlight a limited maturity of the Swiss healthcare system for integrated care, as assessed at a national level by a large and varied number of healthcare stakeholders. They represent important information for the further development of integrated care in Switzerland, and should help identify areas requiring attention for a successful transformation of the Swiss healthcare system towards more integrated care

Realist evaluation of a pilot intervention implementing interprofessional and interinstitutional processes for transitional care.

In 2016, in Switzerland, we implemented transitional interprofessional and interinstitutional shared decision-making processes (IIPs) between a short-stay inpatient care unit (SSU) and primary care professionals. Between 2018 and 2019, we evaluated this intervention using a realist design to answer the following questions: for whom, with whom, in which context and how have IIPs been implemented? Our initial theory was tested via interviews with patients, primary care professionals and staff from the SSU. Results showed that a patient's stay at the SSU, with actors committed to facilitating IIPs, reinforced the perceived appropriateness and implementation of those IIPs. However, this appropriateness varied according to different contextual elements, such as the complexity of needs, preexisting collaborative practices and the purpose of the inpatient stay. Since IIPs occurred in a context of fragmented practices, proactive and sustained efforts are required of the actors implementing them and the organizations supporting them

Transitional shared decision-making processes for patients with complex needs: A feasibility study.

Shared decision-making (SDM) processes, combining patients' and professionals' perspectives, are especially necessary for patients with complex needs (CNs) during their care transitions. In 2016, we started implementing interprofessional and interinstitutional SDM processes (IIPs) for patients admitted to a short-stay unit (SSU) for inpatient care and then followed-up by primary care providers. Two types of IIPs were identified: (a) iterative IIPs, and (b) meeting IIPs. These differed in terms of the timing of SDM processes: whereas the former were multilateral and iterative, meeting IIPs were simultaneous. However, the two processes had similar outcomes and participants had similar characteristics. The intervention included other components, such as CNs assessment and a care coordinator position. The present study aimed to assess the feasibility of the intervention's implementation. The intervention's feasibility was assessed using fidelity and coverage indicators. We collected data from the patients' records on (a) patients' and professionals' characteristics, (b) the fidelity (CNs evaluations and occurrences of IIPs), and (c) the intervention's coverage (types of IIPs, participants). The study included 453 patients between September 2017 and February 2019: mean age of 82.3 years, 65.6% women and 61.1% considered to have CNs. For patients with CNs, iterative IIPs and meeting IIPs occurred in 78.3% and 23.8% of cases, respectively. 35.1% of iterative IIPs and 8.8% of meeting IIPs for patients with CNs involved patients or their informal caregivers, inpatient professionals, primary care physicians and homecare professionals. These results showed that an intervention targeting the implementation of formalized IIPs for SDM in transitional care was feasible. However, to improve the evaluation of such interventions, other methods should be used to measure their appropriateness and acceptability. Additionally, assessing the effects of IIPs would legitimize their funding, supporting their sustainability and generalisability

Digital Health als Enabler für eine integrierte Health-Value-Chain

Effizienz, Senkung der stetig ansteigenden Kosten sowie eine verbesserte Versorgungsqualität für den Patienten (Hinweis: Aus Gründen der besseren Lesbarkeit wird lediglich die männliche Schreibweise verwendet. Bezeichnungen in der männlichen Form beziehen sich auf Frauen und Männer in gleicher Weise). Durch die Einführung des elektronischen Patientendossiers (EPD) wurde dazu ein wichtiger Grundstein gelegt. Damit soll die Vision eines integrierten, reibungslos ablaufenden Gesundheitssystems, welches von Porter und Teisberg (2006) als Health-Value-Chain-Konzept beschrieben wird, realisierbar werden. Jedoch zeichnen sich bereits zum heutigen Zeitpunkt erste Probleme ab: Die gesetzlichen Bestimmungen verpflichten lediglich Krankenhäuser, Alters- und Pflegeheime das EPD umzusetzen. Alle weiteren Akteure des Gesundheitswesens dagegen können sich auf freiwilliger Basis daran anbinden oder gar ganz auf die Digitalisierung verzichten. Besonders im Hinblick auf Arztpraxen ist dies bedauerlich, weil diese Patienten über den gesamten Versorgungsprozess hinweg begleiten und somit eine zentrale Stelle im Informationsfluss darstellen. Verfügen Arztpraxen über keine digitalen Kommunikationswege, führt dies zu Bruchstellen im Informationsfluss zwischen den Arztpraxen und weiteren Akteuren. Um diese Bruchstellen zu vermeiden hat die Firma BlueCare AG die Software BlueConnect zur Digitalisierung der Kommunikationswege von Arztpraxen entwickelt. BlueConnect stellt die digitale Übermittlung der besonders schützenswerten medizinischen Dokumente an den korrekten Empfänger sicher. Dies ermöglicht es den Arztpraxen, die Informationen strukturiert und medienbruchfrei entlang des Versorgungsprozesses auszutauschen. Dadurch können Arztpraxen die Informationen in ihrem Primärsystem ablegen und so ohne Aufwand eine elektronische Patientengeschichte aufbauen. Diese Lösung ist primär auf die Bedürfnisse der niedergelassenen Arztpraxen ausgerichtet. Um die Vision der Health-Value-Chain zu realisieren, wäre eine Einbindung von Krankenhäusern von zentraler Bedeutung. Im Rahmen der vorliegenden Fallstudie werden Optimierungspotenziale und Herausforderungen in der zukünftigen digitalen Kommunikation zwischen Arztpraxen und Krankenhäusern anhand der Health-Value-Chain aufgezeigt und diskutiert. Als Basis dienen die Erkenntnisse aus der Einführung von BlueConnect in Arztpraxen und die daraus resultierende Prozessoptimierung. Sowohl die Erkenntnisse wie auch die Implikation für nachlagernden Schritte basiert auf dem Können-Wollen-Dürfen-Modell, welches als Optimierungstool für die interorganisationale Zusammenarbeit entwickelt wurde (Angerer et al. 2016)

Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Chronic diarrhea and known inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: To summarize the published literature on assessment of appropriateness of colonoscopy for investigation of chronic diarrhea, management of patients with known inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and for colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance in such patients, and to report report appropriateness criteria developed by an expert panel, the 2008 European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, EPAGE II. METHODS: A systematic search of guidelines, systematic reviews, and primary studies regarding the evaluation of chronic diarrhea, the management of IBD, and colorectal cancer surveillance in IBD was performed. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was applied to develop appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy for these conditions. RESULTS: According to the literature, colonoscopic evaluation may be justified for patients aged > 50 years with recent-onset chronic diarrhea or with alarm symptoms. Surveillance colonoscopy for CRC should be offered to all patients with extensive ulcerative colitis or colonic Crohn's disease of 8 years' duration, and to all patients with less extensive disease of 15 years' duration. Intervals for surveillance colonoscopy depend on duration of evolution, initial diagnosis, and histological findings. The EPAGE II criteria also confirmed the appropriateness of diagnostic colonoscopy for diarrhea of > 4 weeks' duration. They also suggest that, in addition to assessing extent of IBD by colonoscopy, further colonoscopic examination is appropriate in the face of persistent or worsening symptoms. Surveillance colonoscopy in IBD patients was generally appropriate after a lapse of 2 years. In the presence of dysplasia at previous colonoscopy, it was not only appropriate but necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Despite or perhaps because of the limitations of the available published studies, the panel-based EPAGE II (http://www.epage.ch) criteria can help guide appropriate colonoscopy use in the absence of strong evidence from the literature

Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Surveillance after polypectomy and after resection of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: To summarize the published literature on assessment of appropriateness of colonoscopy for surveillance after polypectomy and after curative-intent resection of colorectal cancer (CRC), and report appropriateness criteria developed by an expert panel, the 2008 European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, EPAGE II. METHODS: A systematic search of guidelines, systematic reviews and primary studies regarding the evaluation and management of surveillance colonoscopy after polypectomy and after resection of CRC was performed. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was applied to develop appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy for these conditions. RESULTS: Most CRCs arise from adenomatous polyps. The characteristics of removed polyps, especially the distinction between low-risk adenomas (1 or 2, small [< 1 cm], tubular, no high-grade dysplasia) vs. high-risk adenomas (large [> or = 1 cm], multiple [> 3], high-grade dysplasia or villous features), have an impact on advanced adenoma recurrence. Most guidelines recommend a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy for high-risk adenomas and a 5-year colonoscopy for low-risk adenomas. Despite the lack of evidence to support or refute any survival benefit for follow-up colonoscopy after curative-intent CRC resection, surveillance colonoscopy is recommended by most guidelines. The timing of the first surveillance colonoscopy differs. The expert panel considered that 56 % of the clinical indications for colonoscopy for surveillance after polypectomy were appropriate. For surveillance after CRC resection, it considered colonoscopy appropriate 1 year after resection. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy is recommended as a first-choice procedure for surveillance after polypectomy by all published guidelines and by the EPAGE II criteria. Despite the limitations of the published studies, colonoscopy is also recommended by most of the guidelines and by EPAGE II criteria for surveillance after curative-intent CRC resection

Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Functional bowel disorders: pain, constipation and bloating.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: To summarize the published literature on assessment of appropriateness of colonoscopy for the investigation of functional bowel symptoms, and report appropriateness criteria developed by an expert panel, the 2008 European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, EPAGE II. METHODS: A systematic search of guidelines, systematic reviews and primary studies regarding the evaluation and management of functional bowel symptoms was performed. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was applied to develop appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy for these conditions. RESULTS: Much of the evidence for use of colonoscopy in evaluation of chronic abdominal pain, and/or constipation and/or abdominal bloating is modest. Major limitations include small numbers of patients and lack of adequate characterization of these patients. Large community-based follow-up studies are needed to enable better definition of the natural history of patients with functional bowel disorders. Guidelines stress that alarm features ("red flags"), such as rectal bleeding, anemia, weight loss, nocturnal symptoms, family history of colon cancer, age of onset > 50 years, and recent onset of symptoms should all lead to careful evaluation before a diagnosis of functional bowel disorder is made. EPAGE II assessed these symptoms by means of 12 clinical scenarios, rating colonoscopy as appropriate, uncertain and inappropriate in 42 % (5/12), 25 % (3/12), and 33 % (4/12) of these, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to support the use of colonoscopy in the evaluation of patients with functional bowel disorders and no alarm features is lacking. These patients have no increased risk of colon cancer and thus advice on screening for this is not different from that for the general population. EPAGE II criteria, available online (http://www.epage.ch), consider colonoscopy appropriate in patients of > 50 years with chronic or new-onset bowel disturbances, but not in patients with isolated chronic abdominal pain

Iron-deficiency anemia and hematochezia: when is colonoscopy appropriate?

Background: Colonoscopy is usually proposed for the evaluation of lower gastrointestinal blood loss (hematochezia) or iron deficiency anemia (IDA). Clinical practice guidelines support this approach but formal evidence is lacking. Real clinical scenarios made available on the web would be of great help in decision-making in clinical practice as to whether colonoscopy is appropriate for a given patient. Method: A multidisciplinary multinational expert panel (EPAGE II) developed appropriateness criteria based on best published evidence (systematic reviews, clinical trials, guidelines) and experts' judgement. Using the explicit RAND Appropriateness Method (3 round of experts' votes and a panel meeting) 102 clinical scenarios were judged inappropriate, uncertain, appropriate, or necessary. Results: In IDA, colonoscopy was appropriate in patients >50 years and necessary in the presence of lower abdominal symptoms. In both men and women aged <50 years, colonoscopy was appropriate if prior sigmoidoscopy and/or gastroscopy did not explain the IDA, and necessary if lower gastrointestinal symptoms were present. In women <50 years with a potential gynecological cause, additional lower gastrointestinal symptoms rendered colonoscopy appropriate. In patients >50 years with hematochezia, colonoscopy was always appropriate and mostly necessary, except if a prior colonoscopy was normal within the previous 5 years. Under age 50 years, the presence of any risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC) and no previous normal colonoscopy (within the last 5 years) made this procedure appropriate and necessary. Conclusion: Colonoscopy is appropriate and even necessary for many indications related to iron deficiency anemia or hematochezia, in particular in patients aged >50 years. The main factors influencing appropriateness are age, results of prior investigations (sigmoidoscopy, gastroscopy, previous colonoscopy), CRC risk and sex. EPAGE II appropriateness criteria are available on www.epage.c