How Group-Based Interventions Can Improve Services for People with Severe Obesity

This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this recordPurpose of Review Rising demand for specialised “Tier 3” weight management services in England is exceeding capacity, leading many services to offer group-based care programmes. This review considers the organisation of current provision, exploring how group programmes may enhance services and how these could be scaled up for wider implementation. Recent Findings Existing group-based programmes mainly focus on providing patients with information and education about their condition. Evidence suggests that groups themselves offer therapeutic benefits beyond this, by underpinning patients’ engagement with programme materials and contributing to wider health and well-being. To maximise these benefits, there is a need to attend to the group processes that emerge in treatment groups which, left unchecked, may limit or even adversely impact programme outcomes. Summary Group-based interventions may be of benefit to patients in Tier 3 specialist weight management services, although their format is complex and reliant on facilitators’ expertise.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

How can frontline expertise and new models of care best contribute to safely reducing avoidable acute admissions? A mixed-methods study of four acute hospitals

Background: Hospital emergency admissions have risen annually, exacerbating pressures on emergency departments (EDs) and acute medical units. These pressures have an adverse impact on patient experience and potentially lead to suboptimal clinical decision-making. In response, a variety of innovations have been developed, but whether or not these reduce inappropriate admissions or improve patient and clinician experience is largely unknown. Aims: To investigate the interplay of service factors influencing decision-making about emergency admissions, and to understand how the medical assessment process is experienced by patients, carers and practitioners. Methods: The project used a multiple case study design for a mixed-methods analysis of decision-making about admissions in four acute hospitals. The primary research comprised two parts: value stream mapping to measure time spent by practitioners on key activities in 108 patient pathways, including an embedded study of cost; and an ethnographic study incorporating data from 65 patients, 30 carers and 282 practitioners of different specialties and levels. Additional data were collected through a clinical panel, learning sets, stakeholder workshops, reading groups and review of site data and documentation. We used a realist synthesis approach to integrate findings from all sources. Findings: Patients’ experiences of emergency care were positive and they often did not raise concerns, whereas carers were more vocal. Staff’s focus on patient flow sometimes limited time for basic care, optimal communication and shared decision-making. Practitioners admitted or discharged few patients during the first hour, but decision-making increased rapidly towards the 4-hour target. Overall, patients’ journey times were similar, although waiting before being seen, for tests or after admission decisions, varied considerably. The meaning of what constituted an ‘admission’ varied across sites and sometimes within a site. Medical and social complexity, targets and ‘bed pressure’, patient safety and risk, each influenced admission/discharge decision-making. Each site responded to these pressures with different initiatives designed to expedite appropriate decision-making. New ways of using hospital ‘space’ were identified. Clinical decision units and observation wards allow potentially dischargeable patients with medical and/or social complexity to be ‘off the clock’, allowing time for tests, observation or safe discharge. New teams supported admission avoidance: an acute general practitioner service filtered patients prior to arrival; discharge teams linked with community services; specialist teams for the elderly facilitated outpatient treatment. Senior doctors had a range of roles: evaluating complex patients, advising and training juniors, and overseeing ED activity. Conclusions: This research shows how hospitals under pressure manage complexity, safety and risk in emergency care by developing ‘ground-up’ initiatives that facilitate timely, appropriate and safe decision-making, and alternative care pathways for lower-risk, ambulatory patients. New teams and ‘off the clock’ spaces contribute to safely reducing avoidable admissions; frontline expertise brings value not only by placing senior experienced practitioners at the front door of EDs, but also by using seniors in advisory roles. Although the principal limitation of this research is its observational design, so that causation cannot be inferred, its strength is hypothesis generation. Further research should test whether or not the service and care innovations identified here can improve patient experience of acute care and safely reduce avoidable admissions. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (project number 10/1010/06). This research was supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula

The effectiveness and usability of online, group-based interventions for people with severe obesity: Systematic review protocol

No embargo required.Background: Globally, obesity is a growing crisis. Despite obesity being preventable, over a quarter of the United Kingdom adult population is currently considered clinically obese (typically Body Mass Index ≥35kg/m2). Access to treatment for people with severe obesity is limited by long wait times and local availability. Online and group-based interventions provide means of increasing the accessibility of obesity prevention and treatment services. However, there has been no prior review of the effectiveness of group-based interventions delivered online for people with severe obesity. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review protocol is to provide an evaluation of the effectiveness and usability of different types of online, group-based interventions for people with severe obesity. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome frameworks were used to structure this review. The review will systematically search seven databases: Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, American Psychological Association PsycNet, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses databases. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts of identified articles, select studies for inclusion based on the eligibility criteria, and extract data into a standardized form. Any disagreements will be discussed and resolved by a third reviewer if necessary. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool and a descriptive analysis will be used to evaluate effectiveness and usability. Results: The systematic review has not yet been started. It is expected to be completed and submitted for publication by May 2021. Conclusions: This systematic review will summarize the effectiveness and usability of online, group-based interventions for people with obesity. It will identify the types of online delivery that have the strongest support to help inform the development of more useful and engaging interventions for people with severe obesity

Women's colposcopy experience and preferences: a mixed methods study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The colposcopy service is a key component in the UK Cervical Screening Programme. Over 120,000 women are referred to the service annually, however up to 25% of women fail to attend their appointment. Little is known about patients' preferences for colposcopic investigation and treatment. This study aims to investigate women's experience of colposcopy, to identify patients' preferences for aspects of appointments within the colposcopy service, and to make suggestions for service improvement.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This study has been designed as a two stage, mixed method project. Stage one will involve in-depth interviews with new colposcopy patients to ascertain their experience of colposcopy services. This qualitative stage will generate factors thought to be important by service users in their experience. Stage two will utilise a choice based quantitative technique to identify women's preferences and determine the representativeness of factors generated through the interviews.</p> <p>The initial stage of in-depth interviews will be conducted with patients who are newly referred to colposcopy clinics to investigate the experience that they have of the referral process and appointment attendance. The outcome of these interviews will be analysed qualitatively using Framework analysis. Factors found to be important in women's experience will be extracted and used to construct a choice based questionnaire.</p> <p>The discrete choice experiment (questionnaire) will apply a best-worst technique through scenario-based questions to find women's relative preferences for different aspects of the service. It will be offered to women attending follow-up appointments at two colposcopy clinics in the West Midlands. Women will complete the questionnaire whilst they wait for their appointment, or, if they prefer, will take it home to complete in private. Women who do not attend their appointment will be posted the research information and questionnaire. The questionnaire analysis will use a weighted least squares regression technique for each best/worst pair. The accept/reject 'would you attend this appointment' question will be analysed using a random effects logit model.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Colposcopy is a common procedure and one that is associated with raised anxiety among women experiencing the service. Little is known about women's experience of the service or their preferences for service delivery. The outcomes of the study will comprise a description of women's experience of colposcopy and establishing their preferences for how aspects of the service should be provided. Women's preferences will be fed back to service providers to enable improvements to the service to be made.</p

Not all waits are equal: An investigation of emergency care patient pathway.

Abstract Background: Increasing pressure in the United Kingdom (UK) urgent care system has led to Emergency Departments (EDs) failing to meet the national requirement that 95% of patients are admitted, discharged or transferred within 4-h of arrival. Despite the target being the same for all acute hospitals, individual Trusts organise their services in different ways. The impact of this variation on patient journey time and waiting is unknown. Our study aimed to apply the Lean technique of Value Stream Mapping (VSM) to investigate care processes and delays in patient journeys at four contrasting hospitals. Methods: VSM timing data were collected for patients accessing acute care at four hospitals in South West England. Data were categorised according to waits and activities, which were compared across sites to identify variations in practice from the patient viewpoint. We included Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) to fully interpret our findings; observations and initial findings were considered in a PPI workshop. Results: One hundred eight patients were recruited, comprising 25,432 min of patient time containing 4098 episodes of care or waiting. The median patient journey was 223 min (3 h, 43 min); just within the 4-h target. Although total patient journey times were similar between sites, the stage where the greatest proportion of waiting occurred varied. Reasons for waiting were dominated by waits for beds, investigations or results to be available. From our sample we observed that EDs without a discharge/clinical decision area exhibited a greater proportion of waiting time following an admission or discharge decision. PPI interpretation indicated that patients who experience waits at the beginning of their journey feel more anxious because they are ‘not in the system yet’. Conclusions: The novel application of VSM analysis across different hospitals, coupled with PPI interpretation, provides important insight into the impact of care provision on patient experience. Measures that could reduce patient waiting include automatic notification of test results, and the option of discharge/clinical decision areas for patients awaiting results or departure. To enhance patient experience, good communication with patients and relatives about reasons for waits is essential. Keywords: Health service research, Acute care, Emergency admissions, Patient care, Value stream mapping, Emergency department, Patient public involvemen

A group-based behavioural intervention for weight management (PROGROUP) versus usual care in adults with severe obesity: a feasibility randomised controlled trial protocol

This is the final version. Available on open access from BMC via the DOI in this recordBackground Approximately 15 million people in the UK live with obesity, around 5 million of whom have severe obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥35kg/m2). Having severe obesity markedly compromises health, well-being and quality of life, and substantially reduces life expectancy. These adverse outcomes are prevented or ameliorated by weight loss, for which sustained behavioural change is the cornerstone of treatment. Although NHS specialist ‘Tier 3’ Weight Management Services (T3WMS) support people with severe obesity, using individual and group-based treatment, the current evidence on optimal intervention design and outcomes is limited. Due to heterogeneity of severe obesity, there is a need to tailor treatment to address individual needs. Despite this heterogeneity, there are good reasons to suspect that a structured group-based behavioural intervention may be more effective and cost-effective for the treatment of severe obesity compared to usual care. The aims of this study are to test the feasibility of establishing and delivering a multi-centre randomised controlled clinical trial to compare a group-based behavioural intervention versus usual care in people with severe obesity. Methods This feasibility randomised controlled study is a partially clustered multi-centre trial of PROGROUP (a novel group-based behavioural intervention) versus usual care. Adults ≥18 years of age who have been newly referred to and accepted by NHS T3WMS will be eligible if they have a BMI ≥40, or ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidity, are suitable for group-based care and are willing to be randomised. Exclusion criteria are participation in another weight management study, planned bariatric surgery during the trial, and unwillingness or inability to attend group sessions. Outcome assessors will be blinded to treatment allocation and success of blinding will be evaluated. Clinical measures will be collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months post-randomisation. Secondary outcome measures will be self-reported and collected remotely. Process and economic evaluations will be conducted. Discussion This randomised feasibility study has been designed to test all the required research procedures and additionally explore three key issues; the feasibility of implementing a complex trial at participating NHS T3WMS, training the multidisciplinary healthcare teams in a standard intervention, and the acceptability of a group intervention for these particularly complex patients. Trial registration ISRCTN number 22088800