A randomised controlled trial and cost effectiveness study of systematic screening (targeted and total population screening) versus routine practice for the detection of atrial fibrillation in the over 65s: (SAFE) [ISRCTN19633732].

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been recognised as an important independent risk factor for thromboembolic disease, particularly stroke for which it provides a five-fold increase in risk. This study aimed to determine the baseline prevalence and the incidence of AF based on a variety of screening strategies and in doing so to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies, including targeted or whole population screening, compared with routine clinical practice, for detection of AF in people aged 65 and over. The value of clinical assessment and echocardiography as additional methods of risk stratification for thromboembolic disease in patients with AF were also evaluated. METHODS: The study design was a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with a study population of patients aged 65 and over from 50 General Practices in the West Midlands. These purposefully selected general practices were randomly allocated to 25 intervention practices and 25 control practices. GPs and practice nurses within the intervention practices received education on the importance of AF detection and ECG interpretation. Patients in the intervention practices were randomly allocated to systematic (n = 5000) or opportunistic screening (n = 5000). Prospective identification of pre-existing risk factors for AF within the screened population enabled comparison between high risk targeted screening and total population screening. AF detection rates in systematically screened and opportunistically screened populations in the intervention practices were compared to AF detection rate in 5,000 patients in the control practices

A Qualitative Exploration of Patient and Staff Experiences of the Receipt and Delivery of Specialist Weight Management Services in the UK

Background Addressing the increasing prevalence of obesity is a global public health priority. Severe obesity (body mass index > 40) reduces life expectancy, due to its association with people developing complications (e.g. diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease), and greatly impairs quality of life. The National Health Service (NHS) in the UK provides specialist weight management services (SWMS) for people with severe obesity, but key uncertainties remain around patient access to and engagement with weight management services, as well as pathways beyond the service. Methods In this multiple methods study, using online forum data and semi-structured interviews, stakeholders’ experiences of delivering and receiving SWMS were explored. Using the web search engine Google with keywords and web address (URL) identifiers, relevant public online platforms were sourced with snowball sampling and search strings used to identify threads related to people’s experiences of accessing SWMS (n = 57). Interviews were conducted with 24 participants (nine patients, 15 staff), and data from all sources were analysed thematically using the framework approach. Results Six themes related to access to and engagement with SWMS emerged during data analysis: (1) making the first move, (2) uncertainty and confusion, (3) resource issues, (4) respect and understanding, (5) mode of delivery, and (6) desire for ongoing support. Conclusion There is a mixed and varied picture of SWMS provision across the UK. The service offered is based on local clinical decision making and available resources, resulting in a range of patient experiences and perspectives. Whilst service capacity issues and patient anxiety were seen as barriers to accessing care, peer support and positive clinical and group interactions (connectedness between individuals) were considered to increase engagement

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

BackgroundHospital 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.AimsTo 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.MethodsThe 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.FindingsPatients’ 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.ConclusionsThis 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.FundingThe 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

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

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