Impact of a general practitioner-led integrated model of care on the cost of potentially preventable diabetes-related hospitalisations

Investigating innovations in outpatient services: a mixed-methods rapid evaluation

Background

Within outpatient services, a broad range of innovations are being pursued to better manage care and reduce unnecessary appointments. One of the least-studied innovations is Patient-Initiated Follow-Up, which allows patients to book appointments if and when they need them, rather than follow a standard schedule.

Objectives

To use routine national hospital data to identify innovations in outpatient services implemented, in recent years, within the National Health Service in England. To carry out a rapid mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation and impact of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up.

Methods

The project was carried out in four sequential workstreams: (1) a rapid scoping review of outpatient innovations; (2) the application of indicator saturation methodology for scanning national patient-level data to identify potentially successful local interventions; (3) interviews with hospitals identified in workstream 2; and (4) a rapid mixed-methods evaluation of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up. The evaluation of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up comprised an evidence review, interviews with 36 clinical and operational staff at 5 National Health Service acute trusts, a workshop with staff from 13 National Health Service acute trusts, interviews with four patients, analysis of national and local data, and development of an evaluation guide.

Results

Using indicator saturation, we identified nine services with notable changes in follow-up to first attendance ratios. Of three sites interviewed, two queried the data findings and one attributed the change to a clinical assessment service. Models of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up varied widely between hospital and clinical specialty, with a significant degree of variation in the approach to patient selection, patient monitoring and discharge. The success of implementation was dependent on several factors, for example, clinical condition, staff capacity and information technology systems. From the analysis of national data, we found evidence of an association between greater use of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up and a lower frequency of outpatient attendance within 15 out of 29 specialties and higher frequency of outpatient attendance within 7 specialties. Four specialties had less frequent emergency department visits associated with increasing Patient-Initiated Follow-Up rates. Patient-Initiated Follow-Up was viewed by staff and the few patients we interviewed as a positive intervention, although there was varied impact on individual staff roles and workload. It is important that sites and services undertake their own evaluations of Patient-Initiated Follow-Up. To this end we have developed an evaluation guide to support trusts with data collection and methods.

Limitations

The Patient-Initiated Follow-Up evaluation was affected by a lack of patient-level data showing who is on a Patient-Initiated Follow-Up pathway. Engagement with local services was also challenging, given the pressures facing sites and staff. Patient recruitment was low, which affected the ability to understand experiences of patients directly.

Conclusions

The study provides useful insights into the evolving national outpatient transformation policy and for local practice. Patient-Initiated Follow-Up is often perceived as a positive intervention for staff and patients, but the impact on individual outcomes, health inequalities, wider patient experience, workload and capacity is still uncertain.

Future research

Further research should include patient-level analysis to determine clinical outcomes for individual patients on Patient-Initiated Follow-Up and health inequalities, and more extensive investigation of patient experiences.

Study registration

This study is registered with the Research Registry (UIN: researchregistry8864).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 16/138/17) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 38. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic care for heart failure patients: Who to refer back to the general practitioner?-Experiences of the Dutch integrated heart failure care model

OBJECTIVE

The number of patients with heart failure (HF) and corresponding burden of the healthcare system will increase significantly. The Dutch integrated model, 'Transmural care of HF Patients' was based on the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines and initiated to manage the increasing prevalence of HF patients in primary and secondary care and stimulate integrated care. It is unknown how many HF patients are eligible for back-referral to general practitioners (GPs), which is important information for the management of chronic HF care. This study aims to evaluate clinical practice of patients for whom chronic HF care can be referred from the cardiologist to the GP based on the aforementioned chronic HF care model.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective case record-based study was conducted, which included all chronic HF patients registered in the cardiology information systems of two different hospitals. Subsequently, 200 patients were randomly selected for evaluation. The following patients were considered eligible for referral to the GP: 1/Stable HF patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), 2/Stable HF patients with a recovered LVEF and 3/Stable HF patients with a preserved LVEF, 4/HF, palliative setting.

RESULTS

Of the 200 patients, 17% was considered eligible for referral to the GP. This group consisted of 5% patients with a reduced LVEF, 10.5% patients with recovered LVEF and 1.5% patients with a preserved LVEF. Main indicators for HF care by cardiologists were active cardiac disease other than HF (39.5%), recent admission for HF (29.5%) or a recent adjustment in HF medication (7.5%).

CONCLUSION

Applying the chronic HF care model of the 'Transmural care of HF patients' and the ESC-guidelines, results in an important opportunity to further optimise HF integrated care and to deal with the increasing number of HF patients referred to the hospital.

Exploring intersectoral collaboration in diabetes care: A positioning theoretical perspective

Intersectoral collaboration (IC) plays a significant role in the delivery of diabetes care and treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes (DM2), as the treatment and care of these patients take place in both primary care and specialist settings. The collaboration involves a large number of actors from primary and secondary healthcare sectors, who are expected to fulfil various roles when they engage in IC. We explored the actors' roles by applying the framework of positioning theory with the aim of revealing seemingly embedded understandings of such roles. The empirical data consisted of individual and focus group interviews. Our results indicate that naturalised understandings of the roles of actors interact with the way in which health professionals, patients, managers and relatives strive to develop IC that aims to help and guide patients who live with DM2.

Effectiveness of Integrated Diabetes Care Interventions Involving Diabetes Specialists Working in Primary and Community Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction:

Evidence that integrated diabetes care interventions can substantially improve clinical outcomes is mixed. However, previous systematic reviews have not focussed on clinical effectiveness where the endocrinologist was actively involved in guiding diabetes management.

Methods:

We searched EMBASE, COCHRANE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Google Scholar databases and grey literature published in English language up to 25 January 2021. Reviewed articles included Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) and pre-post studies testing the effectiveness on clinical outcomes after ≥6 months intervention in non-pregnant adults (age ≥ 18 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Two reviewers independently extracted data and completed a risk of bias assessment. Appropriate meta-analyses for each outcome from RCTs and pre-post studies were performed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and Cochran’s Q and publication bias assessed using Doi plots. Studies were not pooled to estimate the cost-effectiveness as the cost outcomes were not comparable across trials/studies.

Results:

We reviewed 4 RCTs and 12 pre-post studies. The integrated care model of diabetes specialists working with primary care health professionals had a positive impact on HbA1c in both RCTs and pre-post studies and on systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol and weight in pre-post studies. In the RCTs, interventions reduced HbA1c (–0.10% [–0.15 to –0.05]) (–1.1 mmol/mol [–1.6 to –0.5]), versus control. Pre-post studies demonstrated improvements in HbA1c (–0.77% [–1.12 to –0.42]) (–8.4 mmol/mol [–12.2 to –4.6]), systolic blood pressure (–3.30 mmHg [–5.16 to –1.44]), diastolic blood pressure (–3.61 mmHg [–4.82 to –2.39]), total cholesterol (–0.33 mmol/L [–0.52 to –0.14]) and weight (–2.53 kg [–3.86 to –1.19]). In a pre-post study with no control group only 4% patients experienced hypoglycaemia after one year of intervention compared to baseline.

Conclusions:

Integrated interventions with an active endocrinologist involvement can result in modest improvements in HbA1c, blood pressure and weight management. Although the improvements per clinical outcome are modest, there is possible net improvements at a holistic level.

Integrating Primary and Secondary Care to Enhance Chronic Disease Management: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

In Ireland, as in many healthcare systems, health policy has committed to delivering an integrated model of care to address the increasing burden of chronic disease. Integrated care is an approach to healthcare systems delivery that aims to minimise fragmentation of patient services and improve care continuity. To this end, how best to integrate primary and secondary care is a challenge. This paper aims to undertake a scoping review of empirical work on the integration of primary and secondary care in relation to chronic disease management.

METHODS

A search was conducted of 'PubMed', 'Cochrane Library' and 'Google Scholar' for papers published between 2009-2019 using Arksey and O'Malley's framework for conducing scoping reviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included. These reported research from a wide range of healthcare systems (most commonly UK, Australia, the Netherlands), adopted a range of methodologies (most commonly randomised/non-randomised controlled trials, case studies, qualitative studies) and among patients with a range of chronic conditions (most commonly diabetes, COPD, Parkinson's disease). No studies reported on interventions to address the needs of whole populations. Interventions to enhance integration included multidisciplinary teams, education of healthcare professionals, and e-health interventions. Among the effectiveness measures reported were improved disease specific outcomes, and cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

With healthcare systems increasingly recognising that integrated approaches to patient care can enhance chronic disease management, considerable literature now informs how this can be done. However, most of the research published has focussed on specific diseases and their clinical outcomes. Future research should focus on how such approaches may improve health outcomes for populations as a whole.

Determinants of inappropriate setting allocation in the care of patients with type 2 diabetes: A population-based study in Reggio Emilia province

The study aims to describe the distribution of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) by care plan and to highlight determinants of underuse and overuse of integrated care (IC). This cross-sectional study included all T2D patients resident in Reggio Emilia on 31/12/2015 based on the population-based diabetes registry. Eligibility for IC requires good glycaemic control, no rapid insulin, no kidney failure and no diabetes complications. We calculated the proportion of IC underuse and overuse and adjusted prevalence estimate using multivariate logistic regression. Determinants were age, sex, citizenship, district of residence and time since diagnosis. Of 29,776 patients, 15,364 (51.6%) were in diabetes clinic plan, 9851 (33.1%) in IC plan and 4561 (15.3%) not in any care plan (i.e., in Other group). There were 10,906 (36.6%) patients eligible for IC, of whom 1000 in Other group. When we adjusted for all covariates and restricted the analysis to patients included in care plans, the proportion of those eligible for IC plan but cared for in diabetes clinic plan (i.e. underuse of IC) was 28% (n = 3028/9906; 95%CI 27–29). Similarly, the proportion of those not eligible for IC but cared for in IC plan (i.e. overuse of IC) was 11% (n = 1720/11,896; 95%CI 10–11).The main determinant of both IC underuse and overuse was the district of residence. Foreign status was associated with underuse (37%; 95%CI 33–43), while old age (≥80 years) with both underuse (36%; 95%CI 0.33–0.38) and overuse (23%; 95%CI 22–25). The criterion for suspension of IC plan most frequently found was renal failure, followed by hospitalization for diabetes-related complications. Patients are more often allocated to more specialized settings than not. Healthcare provider-related factors are the main determinants of inappropriate setting allocation.

The Effects of Nurse-Led Multidisciplinary Team Management on Glycosylated Hemoglobin, Quality of Life, Hospitalization, and Help-Seeking Behavior of People with Diabetes Mellitus

AIM

To evaluate the effect of community-nurse-led multidisciplinary team management on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), quality of life (QOL), hospitalization, and help-seeking behavior in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

A quasi-experimental trial was conducted among people with type 2 DM from two community centers in China. The intervention group (n = 88) received community-nurse-led multidisciplinary team management for 2 years, while the control group (n = 91) received usual care. Data regarding HbA1c, QOL (assessed by the SF-36), hospitalization, and help-seeking behavior were collected at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS

During the 24-month project, the intervention group demonstrated 1.08% reduction in HbA1c, whereas the control group achieved an increase of 0.45%. The differences between the two groups were statistically significant (P < 0.001). The intervention group showed greater increased in QOL scores (from 66.43 to 70.47, P < 0.001), more decrease in hospitalization (OR = 2.981, 95% CI: 1.016, 8.752 versus OR = 1.189, 95% CI: 0.411, 3.444; P = 0.028) when compared with the control group. The percentage increase of seeking help from nurses in the intervention group (from 12.5% to 57.3%, P < 0.001) was significantly greater than that in the control group after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-led multidisciplinary team management is an effective intervention for improving glycemic control, QOL, hospitalization, and help-seeking behavior for people with DM in a community.

The Berlin Declaration: A call to improve early actions related to type 2 diabetes. Why is primary care important?

Diabetes is epidemic worldwide and places a huge burden on healthcare systems. The majority of the cost of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is related to hospitalization and the management of complications, and these also have a negative impact on the individual's quality of life. The Berlin Declaration is a global call for early action for the identification of high risk individuals, prevention of T2D and the prevention of complications in those with T2D, through prevention, early detection, early control and early access to the right multidisciplinary interventions. This should empower people to take action to prevent T2D and its complications.