Pragmatic randomised trial to evaluate the use of patient held records for the continuing care of patients with cancer

R. L, S. S, Panniyammakal J, Lavis A. Patients', carers' and healthcare providers' views of patient-held health records in Kerala, India: A qualitative exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Poor medical information transfer across healthcare visits and providers poses a potential threat to patient safety. Patient-held health records (PHRs) may be used to facilitate informational continuity, handover communication and patient self-management. However, there are conflicting opinions on the effectiveness of PHRs, other than in maternal and child care. Moreover, the experiences of users of PHRs in low- and middle-income countries are critical in policy decisions but have rarely been researched.

AIM

This study aimed to explore similarities and differences in the perspectives of patients, carers and healthcare providers (HCPs) on the current PHRs for diabetes and hypertension in Kerala.

METHODS

A qualitative design was used comprising semistructured interviews with patients with diabetes/hypertension (n = 20), carers (n = 15) and HCPs (n = 17) in Kerala, India. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Themes generated regarding the experiences with PHRs from each user group were compared and contrasted. The themes that arose were organized under three headings: use of PHRs in everyday practice; the perceived value of PHR and where practice and value conflict. We found that in the use of PHRs in everyday practice, multiple PHRs posed challenges for patients carrying records and for HCPs locating relevant information. Most carers carried all patients' past PHRs, while patients made decisions on which PHR to take along based on the purpose of the healthcare visit. HCPs appreciated having PHRs but documented limited details in them. The perceived value of PHRs by each group for themselves was different. While HCPs placed value on PHRs for enabling better clinical decision-making, preventing errors and patient safety, patients perceived them as transactional tools for diabetes and hypertension medications; carers highlighted their value during emergencies.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that users find a variety of values for PHRs. However, these perceived values are different for each user group, suggesting minimal functioning of PHRs for informational continuity, handover communication and self-management.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Patients and carers were involved during the pilot testing of topic guides, consent and study information sheets. Patients and carers gave their feedback on the materials to ensure clarity and appropriateness within the context.

Effects of structured involvement of the primary care team versus standard care after a cancer diagnosis on patient satisfaction and healthcare use: the GRIP randomised controlled trial

Background

The growing number of cancer survivors and treatment possibilities call for more personalised and integrated cancer care. Primary care seems well positioned to support this. We aimed to assess the effects of structured follow-up of a primary care team after a cancer diagnosis.

Methods

We performed a multicentre randomised controlled trial enrolling patients curatively treated for breast, lung, colorectal, gynaecologic cancer or melanoma. In addition to usual cancer care in the control group, patients randomized to intervention were offered a “Time Out consultation” (TOC) with the general practitioner (GP) after diagnosis, and subsequent follow-up during and after treatment by a home care oncology nurse (HON). Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with care (questionnaire: EORTC-INPATSAT-32) and healthcare utilisation. Intention-to-treat linear mixed regression analyses were used for satisfaction with care and other continuous outcome variables. The difference in healthcare utilisation for categorical data was calculated with a Pearson Chi-Square or a Fisher exact test and count data (none versus any) with a log-binomial regression.

Results

We included 154 patients (control n = 77, intervention n = 77) who were mostly female (75%), mainly diagnosed with breast cancer (51%), and had a mean age of 61 (SD ± 11.9) years. 81% of the intervention patients had a TOC and 68% had HON contact. Satisfaction with care was high (8 out of 10) in both study groups. At 3 months after treatment, GP satisfaction was significantly lower in the intervention group on 3 of 6 subscales, i.e., quality (− 14.2 (95%CI -27.0;-1.3)), availability (− 15,9 (− 29.1;-2.6)) and information provision (− 15.2 (− 29.1;-1.4)). Patients in the intervention group visited the GP practice and the emergency department more often ((RR 1.3 (1.0;1.7) and 1.70 (1.0;2.8)), respectively).

Conclusions

In conclusion, the GRIP intervention, which was designed to involve the primary care team during and after cancer treatment, increased the number of primary healthcare contacts. However, it did not improve patient satisfaction with care and it increased emergency department visits. As the high uptake of the intervention suggests a need of patients, future research should focus on optimizing the design and implementation of the intervention.

Trial registration

GRIP is retrospectively (21/06/2016) registered in the ‘Netherlands Trial Register’ (NTR5909).

Systematic review on the use of patient-held health records in low-income and middle-income countries

OBJECTIVE

To review the available evidence on the benefit of patient-held health records (PHRs), other than maternal and child health records, for improving the availability of medical information for handover communication between healthcare providers (HCPs) and/or between HCPs and patients in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

The literature searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL databases for manuscripts without any restrictions on dates/language. Additionally, articles were located through citation checking using previous systematic reviews and a grey literature search by contacting experts, searching of the WHO website and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

Six observational studies in four LMICs met the inclusion criteria. However, no studies reported on health outcomes after using PHRs. Studies in the review reported patients' experience of carrying the records to HCPs (n=3), quality of information available to HCPs (n=1) and the utility of these records to patients (n=6) and HCPs (n=4). Most patients carry PHRs to healthcare visits. One study assessed the completeness of clinical handover information and found that only 41% (161/395) of PHRs were complete with respect to key information on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. No protocols or guidelines for HCPs were reported for use of PHRs. The HCPs perceived the use of PHRs improved medical information availability from other HCPs. From the patient perspective, PHRs functioned as documented source of information about their own condition.

CONCLUSION

Limited data on existing PHRs make their benefits for improving health outcomes in LMICs uncertain. This knowledge gap calls for research on understanding the dynamics and outcomes of PHR use by patients and HCPs and in health systems interventions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019139365.

Integrating Patient Activation Into Dialysis Care

Patient activation, the measure of patients' readiness and willingness to manage their own health care, is low among people receiving in-center hemodialysis, which is exacerbated because such centers are commonly set up for patients to passively receive care. In our pursuit of person-centered care and value-based medicine, enabling patients to take a more active role in their care can lead to healthy behaviors, with subsequent reductions in individual burden and costs to the health care system. To improve patient activation, we need to embrace a patient-first approach and combine it with ways to equip patients to thrive with self-management. This requires changes in the training of the health care team as well as changes in care delivery models, promoting interventions such as health coaching and peer mentoring, while leveraging technology to enable self-access to records, self-monitoring, and communication with providers. We also need health care policies that encourage a focus on patient-identified goals, including more attention to patient-reported outcomes. In this article, we review the current status of patient activation in dialysis patients, outline some of the available interventions, and propose steps to change the dynamics of the current system to move toward a more active role for patients in their care.

Patient and service-related barriers and facitators to the acceptance and use of interventions to promote communication in health and social care: a realist review

Background

More people living into old age with dementia. The complexity of treatment and care, particularly those with multiple health problems, can be experienced as disjointed. As part of an evaluation of a ‘healthcare passport’ for people living with dementia we undertook a realist review of communication tools within health and social care for people living with dementia.

Aims

To explore how a ‘healthcare passport’ might work in the ‘real world’ of people living with dementia through a better understanding of the theoretical issues related to, and the contextual issues that facilitate, successful communication.

Methods

A realist review was considered the most appropriate methodology to inform the further development and evaluation of the healthcare passport. We undertook a purposive literature search related to communication tools to identify (a) underlying programme theories; (b) published reports and papers on their use in various healthcare settings; (c) evidence on barriers and facliitators of their use.

Results

Communication tools were noted as a way of improving communication and outcomes through: (1) improvement of service user autonomy; (2) strengthening the therapeutic alliance; and (3) building integrated care. However, while intuitively perceived to of benefit, evidence on their use is limited and key barriers to their acceptance and use include: (1) difficulties in clearly defining purpose, content, ownership and usage; (2) understanding the role of family caregivers; and (3) preparation among healthcare professionsals.

Conclusion

Patient-held communication tools may be helpful to some people living with dementia but will require considerable preparation and engagement with key stakeholders.

Development of a cancer pain self-management resource to address patient, provider, and health system barriers to care

OBJECTIVE

The majority of self-management interventions are designed with a narrow focus on patient skills and fail to consider their potential as "catalysts" for improving care delivery. A project was undertaken to develop a patient self-management resource to support evidence-based, person-centered care for cancer pain and overcome barriers at the levels of the patient, provider, and health system.

METHOD

The project used a mixed-method design with concurrent triangulation, including the following: a national online survey of current practice; two systematic reviews of cancer pain needs and education; a desktop review of online patient pain diaries and other related resources; consultation with stakeholders; and interviews with patients regarding acceptability and usefulness of a draft resource.

RESULT

Findings suggested that an optimal self-management resource should encourage pain reporting, build patients' sense of control, and support communication with providers and coordination between services. Each of these characteristics was identified as important in overcoming established barriers to cancer pain care. A pain self-management resource was developed to include: (1) a template for setting specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time-bound goals of care, as well as identifying potential obstacles and ways to overcome these; and (2) a pain management plan detailing exacerbating and alleviating factors, current strategies for management, and contacts for support.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Self-management resources have the potential for addressing barriers not only at the patient level, but also at provider and health system levels. A cluster randomized controlled trial is under way to test effectiveness of the resource designed in this project in combination with pain screening, audit and feedback, and provider education. More research of this kind is needed to understand how interventions at different levels can be optimally combined to overcome barriers and improve care.

Early evaluation of experiences of health care providers in reception centers with a patient-held personal health record for asylum seekers: a multi-sited qualitative study in a German federal state

BACKGROUND

The provision of high-quality medical care to asylum seekers represents a key challenge in many countries of the European Union. Especially continuity of care has been difficult to achieve as the migrant trajectory moves asylum seekers across and within European countries. Patient-held personal health records (PHR) have been proposed to facilitate the transfer of medical history between health sectors and providers, but so far there is no data to support its use in the migrant setting. The present paper addresses this knowledge gap by exploring the experiences and practices of healthcare providers in reception centers for asylum seekers using a patient-held PHR as well as the perceived associated benefits and shortcomings.

METHODS

Early evaluation by means of a multi-sited qualitative study in six asylum seeker reception centers in five cities in the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, conducted between November 2016 and January 2017. The PHR evaluated in this study was implemented in five of these reception centers between February and October 2016; the remaining one only receiving patients with the PHR through transfer from the other facilities. 17 interviews were conducted with physicians and nurses working at these reception centers exploring their experiences, routines, and perspectives regarding the patient-held PHR. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed following the approach of thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Healthcare providers recognise the potential of a patient-held PHR to improve access to medical history. They use the PHR to document their medical consultations and to collect other medical reports. However, physician adherence to the patient-held PHR was described as unsatisfactory, in particular among external doctors, thus limiting its immediate benefit. Reasons given for this low adherence included lack of information before implementation, demanding working conditions with little support, low perceived benefits depending on the degree of fragmentation of settings, parallel existence of other documentation platforms and strained patient relationships.

CONCLUSION

A patient-held PHR could improve the availability of health-related information in reception centers if a context-sensitive implementation process achieves high adherence to the PHR among physicians as well as high patient compliance and includes guidelines regarding its adequate integration into local routines.

Medical records: Patient-held records in mental health

‘But don't they get lost?’ This is usually the first comment made when the authors mention the use of patient-held records (PHRs) to colleagues. Nevertheless, PHRs have been used in mental health care as well as several other settings, including services for diabetes, cancer, maternity and child health. In some of these services, including mental health, PHRs have been an addition to clinician held standard notes, whereas in others the patient holds the only record for their care. The main purposes of introducing PHRs have been to empower patients with a sense of ownership of their care and to improve communication, between both patients and clinicians, as well as between different clinicians involved in that person's care (Laugharne & Stafford, 1996).

Populations and Interventions for Palliative and End-of-Life Care: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Evidence supports palliative care effectiveness. Given workforce constraints and the costs of new services, payers and providers need help to prioritize their investments. They need to know which patients to target, which personnel to hire, and which services best improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To inform how payers and providers should identify patients with "advanced illness" and the specific interventions they should implement, we reviewed the evidence to identify (1) individuals appropriate for palliative care and (2) elements of health service interventions (personnel involved, use of multidisciplinary teams, and settings of care) effective in achieving better outcomes for patients, caregivers, and the healthcare system.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases (1/1/2001-1/8/2015).

RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials (124) met inclusion criteria. The majority of studies in cancer (49%, 38 of 77 studies) demonstrated statistically significant patient or caregiver outcomes (e.g., p < 0.05), as did those in congestive heart failure (CHF) (62%, 13 of 21), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; 58%, 11 of 19), and dementia (60%, 15 of 25). Most prognostic criteria used clinicians' judgment (73%, 22 of 30). Most interventions included a nurse (70%, 69 of 98), and many were nurse-only (39%, 27 of 69). Social workers were well represented, and home-based approaches were common (56%, 70 of 124). Home interventions with visits were more effective than those without (64%, 28 of 44; vs. 46%, 12 of 26). Interventions improved communication and care planning (70%, 12 of 18), psychosocial health (36%, 12 of 33, for depressive symptoms; 41%, 9 of 22, for anxiety), and patient (40%, 8 of 20) and caregiver experiences (63%, 5 of 8). Many interventions reduced hospital use (65%, 11 of 17), but most other economic outcomes, including costs, were poorly characterized. Palliative care teams did not reliably lower healthcare costs (20%, 2 of 10).

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative care improves cancer, CHF, COPD, and dementia outcomes. Effective models include nurses, social workers, and home-based components, and a focus on communication, psychosocial support, and the patient or caregiver experience. High-quality research on intervention costs and cost outcomes in palliative care is limited.

Patients' views on the effectiveness of patient-held records: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the views of patients on patient-held records (PHR) and to determine from a patient's perspective the effectiveness and any benefits or drawbacks to the PHR.

DESIGN

Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies, which investigate the perspective of patients on the effectiveness of the PHR.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, Cochrane.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic review of literature relevant to the research question and thematic synthesis involving line by line coding of the quotations from participants and the interpretations of the findings offered by authors.

RESULTS

Ten papers that reported the experiences of 455 patients were included in the thematic synthesis. Five studies focused on cancer care, two on mental health, one on antenatal care, one on chronic disease and one on learning disability. The completeness of reporting was variable. Three main themes were identified: (i) practical benefits of the PHR (having a record of one's condition, an aide memoire, useful information source and tool for sharing information across the health system); (ii) psychological benefits of the PHR (empowered to ask questions, a place to record thoughts and feelings and feeling in control); and (iii) drawbacks to the PHR (PHR imposes unwanted responsibility and ineffectiveness).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of the PHR is largely dependent upon uptake across the health system from patients and health-care providers alike. Robust qualitative studies are needed, which offer more complete reporting and examine what patients want and need from a PHR.

Improving quality of care and long-term health outcomes through continuity of care with the use of an electronic or paper patient-held portable health file (COMMUNICATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The advantages of patient-held portable health files (PHF) and personal health records (PHR), paper or electronic, are said to include improved health-care provider continuity-of-care and patient empowerment in maintaining health. Top-down approaches are favored by public sector government and health managers. Bottom-up approaches include systems developed directly by health-care providers, consumers and industry, implemented locally on devices carried by patient-consumers or shared via web-based portals. These allow individuals to access, manage and share their health information, and that of others for whom they are authorized, in a private, secure and confidential environment. Few medical record technologies have been evaluated in randomized trials to determine whether there are important clinical benefits of these interventions. The COMMUNICATE trial will assess the acceptability and long-term clinical outcomes of an electronic and paper patient-held PHF.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a 48-month, open-label pragmatic, superiority, parallel-group design randomized controlled trial. Subjects (n = 792) will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to each of the trial arms: the electronic PHF added to usual care, the paper PHF added to usual care and usual care alone (no PHF). Inclusion criteria include those 60 years or older living independently in the community, but who have two or more chronic medical conditions that require prescription medication and regular care by at least three medical practitioners (general and specialist care). The primary objective is whether use of a PHF compared to usual care reduces a combined endpoint of deaths, overnight hospitalizations and blindly adjudicated serious out-of-hospital events. All primary analyses will be undertaken masked to randomized arm allocation using intention-to-treat principles. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and health literacy improvements.

DISCUSSION

Lack of blinding creates potential for bias in trial conduct and ascertainment of clinical outcomes. Mechanisms are provided to reduce bias, including balanced study contact with all participants, a blinded adjudication committee determining which out-of-hospital events are serious and endpoints that are objective (overnight hospitalizations and mortality). The PRECIS tool provides a summary of the trial's design on the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT01082978) on 8 March 2010.

The influence of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the patient-clinician relationship has a beneficial effect on either objective or validated subjective healthcare outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases EMBASE and MEDLINE and the reference sections of previous reviews.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients in which the patient-clinician relationship was systematically manipulated and healthcare outcomes were either objective (e.g., blood pressure) or validated subjective measures (e.g., pain scores). Studies were excluded if the encounter was a routine physical, or a mental health or substance abuse visit; if the outcome was an intermediate outcome such as patient satisfaction or adherence to treatment; if the patient-clinician relationship was manipulated solely by intervening with patients; or if the duration of the clinical encounter was unequal across conditions.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs met eligibility criteria. Observed effect sizes for the individual studies ranged from d = -.23 to .66. Using a random-effects model, the estimate of the overall effect size was small (d = .11), but statistically significant (p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that the patient-clinician relationship has a small, but statistically significant effect on healthcare outcomes. Given that relatively few RCTs met our eligibility criteria, and that the majority of these trials were not specifically designed to test the effect of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes, we conclude with a call for more research on this important topic.

The role of primary care in early detection and follow-up of cancer

Primary care providers have important roles across the cancer continuum, from encouraging screening and accurate diagnosis to providing care during and after treatment for both the cancer and any comorbid conditions. Evidence shows that higher cancer screening participation rates are associated with greater involvement of primary care. Primary care providers are pivotal in reducing diagnostic delay, particularly in health systems that have long waiting times for outpatient diagnostic services. However, so-called fast-track systems designed to speed up hospital referrals are weakened by significant variation in their use by general practitioners (GPs), and affect the associated conversion and detection rates. Several randomized controlled trials have shown primary care-led follow-up care to be equivalent to hospital-led care in terms of patient wellbeing, recurrence rates and survival, and might be less costly. For primary care-led follow-up to be successful, appropriate guidelines must be incorporated, clear communication must be provided and specialist care must be accessible if required. Finally, models of long-term cancer follow-up are needed that provide holistic care and incorporate management of co-morbid conditions. We discuss all these aspects of primary care, focusing on the most common cancers managed at the GP office-breast, colorectal, prostate, lung and cervical cancers.

User-held personalised information for routine care of people with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

It is important to seek cost-effective methods of improving the care and outcome of those with serious mental illnesses. User-held records, where the person with the illness holds all or some personal information relating to the course and care of their illness, are now the norm in some clinical settings. Their value for those with severe mental illnesses is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of personalised, accessible, user-held clinical information for people with a severe mental illness (defined as psychotic illnesses).

SEARCH METHODS

We updated previous searches by searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register in August 2011. This register is compiled by systematic searches of major databases, and handsearches of journals and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that:i. have recruited adult participants with a diagnosis of a severe mental illness (specifically psychotic illnesses and severe mood disorders such as bipolar and depression with psychotic features); andii. compared any personalised and accessible clinical information held by the user beyond standard care to standard information routinely held such as appointment cards and generic information on diagnosis, treatment or services available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection and data extraction were undertaken independently by two authors and confirmed and checked by a third. We contacted authors of trials for additional and missing data. Where possible, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs (n = 607) of user-held records versus treatment as usual met the inclusion criteria. When the effect of user-held records on psychiatric hospital admissions was compared with treatment as usual in four studies, the pooled treatment effect showed no significant impact of the intervention and was of very low magnitude (n = 597, 4 RCTs, RR 0.99 CI 0.71 to 1.38, moderate quality evidence). Similarly, there was no significant effect of the intervention in three studies which investigated compulsory psychiatric hospital admissions (n = 507, 4 RCTs, RR 0.64 CI 0.37 to 1.10, moderate quality evidence). Other outcomes including satisfaction and mental state were investigated but pooled estimates were not obtainable due to skewed or poorly reported data, or only being investigated by one study. Two outcomes (violence and death) were not investigated by the included studies. Two important randomised studies are ongoing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence gap remains regarding user-held, personalised, accessible clinical information for people with psychotic illnesses for many of the outcomes of interest. However, based on moderate quality evidence, this review suggests that there is no effect of the intervention on hospital or outpatient appointment use for individuals with psychotic disorders. The number of studies is low, however, and further evidence is required to ascertain whether these results are mediated by the type of intervention, such as involvement of a clinical team or the type of information included.

Family practice enhancements for patients with severe mental illness

Individuals with severe mental health disorders experience difficulty maneuvering the complexity encountered in primary care (PC). This study describes the impact of three components of primary care practice enhancements on: changes in missed appointments, changes in health outcomes, number of ER visits and hospitalization days, and perceptions of integrated care. Missed PC appointments: baseline to post practice enhancement changed from 42 to 11, statistically significant (p < .01). Changes in health outcomes: SF-12 scores had no significant change nor did ER utilization and hospitalization; however, outcomes are low-base rate and assessment period was short. Integration of care: liaison was most helpful in accessing and navigating PC, educating and reconciling medication lists. Behavioral health staff voiced relief regarding access and felt better informed. Strategies focusing on increasing communication, staff education, and reducing barriers to access and receipt of PC may improve integration and continuity of care.

Patient-perceived usefulness and practical obstacles of patient-held records for cancer patients in Japan: OPTIM study

BACKGROUND

Although the use of a patient-held record (PHR) for cancer patients has been introduced in many settings, little is known about the role of the PHR in palliative care settings and use in Asian cultures.

AIM

This study investigated the patient-perceived usefulness and practical obstacles of using the PHR specifically designed for palliative care patients.

DESIGN

This study adopted a qualitative design based on semi-structured interviews and content analysis.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Fifty cancer patients were recruited from two regions in Japan. They used the PHR for more than three months, and then were asked to participate in a face-to-face interview.

RESULTS

The content analysis revealed the following patient-perceived usefulness of the PHR: (1) increase in patient-staff communication; (2) increase in patient-family communication; (3) increase in patient-patient communication; (4) increase in understanding of medical conditions and treatments; and (5) facilitating end-of-life care discussion. The practical obstacles to using the PHR were also indicated: (1) the lack of adequate instruction about the role of the PHR; (2) undervaluing the role of the PHR and sharing information by medical professionals; (3) patients' unwillingness to participate in decision making; (4) concerns about privacy; (5) burdensome nature of self-reporting; and (6) patients' preference for their own ways of recording.

CONCLUSIONS

The PHR can be helpful in facilitating communication, understanding medical conditions and treatments, and facilitating end-of-life care discussion; however, for wide-spread implementation, resolving the obstacles related to both patients and health-care professionals is required.

Interventions to improve continuity of care in the follow-up of patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Care from the family physician is generally interrupted when patients with cancer come under the care of second-line and third-line healthcare professionals who may also manage the patient's comorbid conditions. This situation may lead to fragmented and uncoordinated care, and results in an increased likelihood of not receiving recommended preventive services or recommended care.

OBJECTIVES

To classify, describe and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions aiming to improve continuity of cancer care on patient, healthcare provider and process outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, using a strategy incorporating an EPOC Methodological filter. Reference lists of the included study reports and relevant reviews were also scanned, and ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar were used to identify relevant reports having cited the studies included in this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (including cluster trials), controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series evaluating interventions to improve continuity of cancer care were considered for inclusion. We included studies that involved a majority (> 50%) of adults with cancer or healthcare providers of adults with cancer. Primary outcomes considered for inclusion were the processes of healthcare services, objectively measured healthcare professional, informal carer and patient outcomes, and self-reported measures performed with scales deemed valid and reliable. Healthcare professional satisfaction was included as a secondary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers described the interventions, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The authors contacted several investigators to obtain missing information. Interventions were regrouped by type of continuity targeted, model of care or interventional strategy and were compared to usual care. Given the expected clinical and methodological diversity, median changes in outcomes (and bootstrap confidence intervals) among groups of studies that shared specific features of interest were chosen to analyse the effectiveness of included interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-one studies were included. They used three different models, namely case management, shared care, and interdisciplinary teams. Six additional interventional strategies were used besides these models: (1) patient-held record, (2) telephone follow-up, (3) communication and case discussion between distant healthcare professionals, (4) change in medical record system, (5) care protocols, directives and guidelines, and (6) coordination of assessments and treatment.Based on the median effect size estimates, no significant difference in patient health-related outcomes was found between patients assigned to interventions and those assigned to usual care. A limited number of studies reported psychological health, satisfaction of providers, or process of care measures. However, they could not be regrouped to calculate median effect size estimates because of a high heterogeneity among studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results from this Cochrane review do not allow us to conclude on the effectiveness of included interventions to improve continuity of care on patient, healthcare provider or process of care outcomes. Future research should evaluate interventions that target an improvement in continuity as their primary objective and describe these interventions with the categories proposed in this review. Also of importance, continuity measures should be validated with persons with cancer who have been followed in various settings.

How can we improve cancer care? A review of interprofessional collaboration models and their use in clinical management

BACKGROUND

Multimodal cancer care requires collaboration among different professionals in various settings. Practice guidelines provide little direction on how this can best be achieved. Research shows that collaborative cancer management is limited, and challenged by numerous issues. The purpose of this research was to describe conceptual models of collaboration, and analyze how they have been applied in the clinical management of cancer patients.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using a two-phase meta-narrative approach. The first phase involved searching for conceptual models of collaboration. Their components and limitations were summarized. The second phase involved targeted searching for empirical research on evaluation of these concepts in the clinical management of cancer patients. Data on study objective, design, and findings were tabulated, and then summarized according to collaborative model and phase of clinical care to identify topics warranting further research.

RESULTS

Conceptual models for teamwork, interprofessional collaboration, integrated care delivery, interorganizational collaboration, continuity of care, and case management were described. All concepts involve two or more health care professionals that share patient care goals and interact on a continuum from consultative to integrative, varying according to extent and nature of interaction, degree to which decision making is shared, and the scope of patient management (medical versus holistic). Determinants of positive objective and subjective patient, team and organizational outcomes common across models included system or organizational support, team structure and traits, and team processes. Twenty-two studies conducted in ten countries examining these concepts for cancer care were identified. Two were based on an explicit model of collaboration. Many health professionals function through parallel or consultative models of care and are not well integrated. Few interventions or strategies have been applied to promote models that support collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Ongoing development, implementation and evaluation of collaborative cancer management, in the context of both practice and research, would benefit from systematic planning and operationalization. Such an approach is likely to improve patient, professional and organizational outcomes, and contribute to a collective understanding of collaborative cancer care.

Patient perceptions of carrying their own health information: approaches towards responsibility and playing an active role in their own health - implications for a patient-held health file

OBJECTIVE

To elicit patients' views on whether they could contribute to improvements in their care by carrying their own health information to clinician encounters; and to consider the implications for the development of a patient-held health file (PHF).

BACKGROUND

Increasing rates of chronic disease lead to health care being delivered by multiple care providers often at distributed geographic locations. As a way of increasing the availability of patient information to care providers our project will trial a PHF. Patients carry these files to doctors' appointments where clinicians record data for other doctors or the patient. Increasing the availability of patient information is anticipated to enhance the safety and quality of care delivery and improve health outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 patients. Participants were evenly distributed in terms of gender, aged 60 years or greater and visited at least two specialists and one general practitioner.

FINDINGS

In this exploratory study, patients who were currently active in decision making about their own health already recorded some health information. They were receptive to carrying their information and thought they should take some responsibility for their health. Patients who were more passive in making decisions about their health did not perceive a need to carry their own information and felt that their doctors communicated adequately.

CONCLUSION

Patient-held health files provide an opportunity for patients to access their health information. Such files have the potential to improve health outcomes for patients who adopt both active and passive roles in relation to their own health and engaging with their health information.

Building a shared patient record for breast cancer management: a French Delphi study

Before electronic records become operational, patient-held records provide an opportunity to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals. Our aim was to design the appropriate organization, layout and content for such a shared record for breast cancer management, based on a consensus between the various stakeholders. We therefore conducted a Delphi study within a working group of 48 members, including patients, oncologists, general practitioners, nurses and other professionals. The procedure featured three rounds during which participants' judgements were collected via mailed questionnaires and quantitative and qualitative feedback was provided on a regular basis. These three rounds were followed by an evaluation phase. Forty members (83%) participated in the three rounds. According to the agreement reached, the shared record was expected to include a front summary card, four sections for groups of users authorized to write down or insert information in the record (patient, physicians, medical auxiliaries and other healthcare professionals), and one section for medical imaging files. In addition, the record was to include specific categories of information as subsections within each of the various user sections. The participant satisfaction rate was over 90% for all aspects of the procedure, with the exception of interaction within the working group (79%).

Implementation of integrated care for patients with cancer: a systematic review of interventions and effects

PURPOSE

To review integrated care interventions and their effects on the quality of care for patients with cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Search in Medline and Cochrane Library databases from January 1996 to October 2006.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials and controlled before-after studies in which the intervention focused on at least one of the three principles of integrated care: patient-centredness, organization of care and multidisciplinary care. DATA EXTRACTION AND RESULTS: Of the 1397 references, 33 studies were included and analysed. No study focused on all three principles of integrated care: 16 studies focused on patient-centredness (48%), 14 on the organization of care (42%), 1 on multidisciplinary care and 2 on both patient-centredness and organization of care. There was a large variation in interventions reported and in outcomes used for evaluation. Effective interventions to improve patient-centredness are the 'provision of an audiotape of the consultation to the patient', 'provision of information to patients' and 'use of a decision aid'. Effective interventions to improve the organization of care can be 'follow-up' and 'case management', especially by nurses and 'one-stop clinics'.

CONCLUSION

To improve integrated care for patients with cancer, a multicomponent intervention programme is required focusing on patients, professionals and the organization of care. The promising interventions found in this review should be part of this programme. This programme should be evaluated using rigorous methods and unequivocal outcome measures linked to the intervention.

Challenges in multidisciplinary cancer care among general surgeons in Canada

Background

While many factors can influence the way that cancer care is delivered, including the way that evidence is packaged and disseminated, little research has evaluated how health care professionals who manage cancer patients seek and use this information to identify whether and how this could be supported. Through interviews we identified that general surgeons experience challenges in coordinating care for complex cancer patients whose management is not easily addressed by guidelines, and conducted a population-based survey of general surgeon information needs and information seeking practices to extend these findings.

Methods

General surgeons with privileges at acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada were mailed a questionnaire to solicit information needs (task, importance), information seeking (source, frequency of and reasons for use), key challenges and suggested solutions. Non-responders received up to three reminder packages. Significant differences among sub-groups (age, setting) were examined statistically (Kruskal Wallis, Mann Whitney, Chi Square). Standard qualitative methods were used to thematically analyze open-ended responses.

Results

The response rate was 44.2% (170/385) representing all 14 health regions. System resource constraints (60.4%), comorbidities (56.4%) and physiologic factors (51.8%) were top-ranked issues creating information needs. Local surgical colleagues (84.6%), other local colleagues (82.2%) and the Internet (81.1%) were top-ranked sources of information, primarily due to familiarity and speed of access. No resources were considered to be highly applicable to patient care. Challenges were related to limitations in diagnostics and staging, operative resources, and systems to support multidisciplinary care, together accounting for 76.0% of all reported issues. Findings did not differ significantly by surgeon age or setting of care.

Conclusion

General surgeons appear to use a wide range of information resources but they may not address the complex needs of many cancer patients. Decision-making is challenged by informational and logistical issues related to the coordination of multidisciplinary care. This suggests that limitations in system capacity may, in part, contribute to variable guideline compliance. Further research is required to evaluate the appropriateness of information seeking, and both concurrent and consecutive mechanisms by which to achieve multidisciplinary care.

The Blue Card: a hand-held health record card for mental health consumers with comorbid physical health risk

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the effectiveness of a hand-held record (the 'Blue Card') for seriously mentally ill consumers by investigating effects on consumer knowledge of physical health risk factors, consumer involvement in care and communication with healthcare professionals.

METHOD

Consumers were given and educated in the use of the Blue Card, which contained information regarding their physical health. Consumers completed a pre- and post-knowledge questionnaire and commented on the effectiveness of the Blue Card with respect to their knowledge of physical health risks.

RESULTS

Statistically significant improvements in consumer knowledge were shown at the 3-month follow-up, with high retention of the Blue Card being demonstrated. Consumers that used the card described their use of the card positively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results are very encouraging. Further studies of this low-cost intervention are warranted to establish its effectiveness and utility.

Shared medical information: Expectations of breast cancer patients

Allowing cancer patients to hold medical records containing essential information for managing their disease may improve their satisfaction and the coordination of their medical care.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to determine breast cancer patients' interest in and expectations of such medical records and the exchange of information during their treatment.

METHODS

Eighty-six hospital physicians were selected to distribute an anonymous questionnaire to all of the breast cancer patients they saw in consultations.

RESULTS

Out of 194 patients asked, 140 (72%) participated in the survey. Forty-eight percent were "highly satisfied", 47% were "quite satisfied" with their involvement in their treatment and 43% preferred to play a relatively passive role in decisions concerning treatments. When offered, 79% agreed to hold paper medical records containing test results, reports and letters. Many found these medical records to be useful and a possible means for improving communication. Others, however, expressed reservations concerning privacy or losing or forgetting the records.

CONCLUSION

The principle of shared medical records could satisfy the majority of breast cancer patients. Experimenting with this concept in the field would enable practitioners to better determine the content of the records and how they can be used on a practical basis.

Does the patient-held record improve continuity and related outcomes in cancer care: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of the patient-held record (PHR) in cancer care.

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer may receive care from different services resulting in gaps. A PHR could provide continuity and patient involvement in care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Relevant literature was identified through five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl, CCTR and CDSR) and hand searches.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Patient-held records in cancer care with the purpose of improving communication and information exchange between and within different levels of care and to promote continuity of care and patients' involvement in their own care.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction recorded characteristics of intervention, type of study and factors that contributed to methodological quality of individual studies. Data were then contrasted by setting, objectives, population, study design, outcome measures and changes in outcome, including knowledge, satisfaction, anxiety and depression. Methodological quality of randomized control trials and non-experimental studies were assessed with separate standard grading scales.

MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Seven randomized control trials and six non-experimental studies were identified. Evaluations of the PHR have reached equivocal findings. Randomized trials found an absence of effect, non-experimental evaluations shed light on the conditions for its successful use. Most patients welcomed introduction of a PHR. Main problems related to its suitability for different patient groups and the lack of agreement between patients and health professionals regarding its function. Further research is required to determine the conditions under which the PHR can realize its potential as a tool to promote continuity of care and patient participation.

Interventions for improving older patients' involvement in primary care episodes

BACKGROUND

There is a growing expectation among patients that they should be involved in the delivery of medical care. Accumulating evidence from empirical studies shows that patients of average age who are encouraged to participate more actively in treatment decisions have more favourable health outcomes, in terms of both physiological and functional status, than those who do not. Interventions to encourage more active participation may be focused on different stages, including: the use of health care; preparation for contact with a care provider; contact with the care provider; or feedback about care. However, it is unclear whether the benefits of these interventions apply to the elderly as well.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions in primary medical care that improve the involvement of older patients (>=65 years) in their health care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group Specialised Register (May 2003); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2004; MEDLINE (Ovid) (1966 to June 2004); EMBASE (1988 to June 2004); PsycINFO (1872 to June 2004); DARE, The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2004; ERIC (1966 to June 2004); CINAHL (1982 to June 2004); Sociological Abstracts (1963 to June 2004); Dissertation Abstracts International (1861 to June 2004); and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials of interventions to improve the involvement of older patients (>= 65 years) in single consultations or episodes of primary medical care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Results are presented narratively as meta-analysis was not possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three studies involving 433 patients. Overall, the quality of studies was not high, and there was moderate to high risk of bias. Interventions of a pre-visit booklet and a pre-visit session (either combined or pre-visit session alone) led to more questioning behaviour and more self-reported active behaviour in the intervention group (3 studies). One study (booklet and pre-visit session) showed no difference in consultation length and time engaged in talk between the intervention and control groups. The booklet and pre-visit session in one study was associated with more satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of care for the intervention group although no difference in overall satisfaction between intervention and control. There was no long-term follow up to see if effects were sustained. No studies measured outcomes relating to the use of health care, health status and wellbeing, or health behaviour.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall this review shows some positive effects of specific methods to improve the involvement of older people in primary care episodes. Because the evidence is limited, however, we can not recommend the use of the reviewed interventions in daily practice. There should be a balance between respecting patients' autonomy and stimulating their active participation in health care. Face-to-face coaching sessions, whether or not complemented with written materials, may be the way forward. As this is impractical for the whole population, it could be worthwhile to identify a subgroup of older patients who might benefit the most from enhanced involvement, ie. those who want to be involved, but lack the necessary skills. This group could be coached either individually or, more practically, in group sessions.

Continuity of care and quality care outcomes for people experiencing chronic conditions: A literature review

Continuity of patient care is frequently linked to quality care outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the clinical trial literature in order to determine the extent to which informational, management, and relational continuity of care are associated with quality care indicators. A MEDLINE search of the literature via PubMed was conducted for clinical trials that were carried out from 1 January 1996-1 June 2005. Analyses of 32 unduplicated citations revealed a focus on one or more aspects of continuity and its association with quality care outcomes. Management continuity interventions were identified most often, followed by informational and relational continuity interventions. The outcomes were primarily patient-focused with a wide range of functional status, quality of life, and patient satisfaction indicators. This analysis provides implications for research that could contribute to an understanding of the types of continuity of patient care and their relationships to quality care.

Patient participation in the consultation process: a structured review of intervention strategies

OBJECTIVE

To describe the range and effectiveness of intervention strategies designed to enhance patient participation in the consultation process.

METHODS

A systematic review of published literature (1976-2004) was undertaken. Controlled trials in English were included. Data regarding study design, intervention characteristics, patient populations and study results were extracted.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-six articles describing 137 trials were reviewed. A pragmatic categorisation of intervention strategies and study outcomes supported data synthesis. Patient-targeted coaching and educational materials, and provider-targeted communication skills training have a substantial impact on communication. Information feedback to providers from patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) benefits provider diagnosis and management of patient conditions. Communication and provider diagnosis and management benefit most from the reviewed interventions. Although patient satisfaction and health status were two of the most frequently measured outcomes, overall, the interventions appeared to have less impact on patient self-efficacy, attitudes and behaviours, patient satisfaction, health status and resource use.

CONCLUSION

Evidence is insufficient to strongly advocate one approach to enhancing patient participation in the consultation process. More rigorous research design with clearly specified intervention strategies and appropriately defined outcomes assessed over both the short and long term is required.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Although limited and inconclusive, the most extensive and most encouraging evidence to enhance patient participation in the consultation process is available for three patient-targeted intervention strategies (coaching, educational materials and PROMs feedback to providers) and one provider-targeted intervention strategy (communication skills training).

Parent-held child health records do not improve care: a randomized controlled trial in Norway

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects of a parent-held child health record (PHCHR) that was created by the Norwegian Board of Health with the purpose of introducing this to the whole country.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Maternal and child health centres in 10 municipalities in Norway.

SUBJECTS

Parents of 309 children attending the National Preschool Health Surveillance Programme.

INTERVENTION

Half of the parents were given a PHCHR and short instructions on how it was expected to be used.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Parent-professional collaboration, healthcare utilization, and parents' knowledge about child health matters and illness.

RESULTS

Some 73% of the intervention group used the PHCHR regularly when visiting the health centres, 79% reported that their own writing in the record was helpful, and 92% favoured the PHCHR being permanently adopted. Use of the record did not influence the utilization of healthcare services, parents' knowledge of their child's health, or parents' satisfaction with information or communication with professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

The PHCHR was well accepted by parents and professionals but it had no effects on collaboration, healthcare utilization, or other measures that could justify the costs of introducing the record into common use. Therefore, the introduction of a parent-held child health record in Norway is being postponed.

Barriers to effective communication across the primary/secondary interface: examples from the ovarian cancer patient journey (a qualitative study)

Effective communication across the primary/secondary interface is vital for the planning and delivery of appropriate patient care throughout the cancer patient journey. This study describes GPs' views of the communication issues across the primary/secondary interface in relation to ovarian cancer patients using qualitative interviews with purposively sampled general practitioners (GPs) and an audit of hospital medical records of 30 deceased ovarian cancer patients. Issues raised by the GPs related to the content and format of communications, but of most concern was the tardiness. The time lag between dictation and typing letters ranged from 0 to 27 days, with a delay of up to 8 days for signing before transit through various mail systems to the GP. Three stages in the patient journey were characterized by particular issues: (1) in the pre-diagnostic and diagnostic stage was a need for prompt information regarding the results of tests and diagnoses, and clearer guidance on the use of tests and fast-track referrals; (2) in the active treatment phase, when GPs could lose touch with their patients, they needed effective communication in order to provide moral support and crisis management; and (3) when oncology withdrew and the focus of care switched back to the community for the terminal phase, GPs needed information to enable them to pick up the baton of care. There is a need to develop and evaluate interventions aimed at improving the content and speed of communications between secondary and primary care. Such interventions are likely to be complex and might include the greater use of telephone or fax for more selected communications, a review of secretarial support, the use of email, the development of GP designed proformas, the feasibility of patient/carer letter delivery options, nurse-led communication, universal electronic patient records, or a revisiting of the patient-held record.

Entrusting patients with their own plain radiographs increases their availability in fracture clinic

Missing radiographs are a common cause of frustration in many fracture clinics. This can lead to unjustified delays and unnecessary radiation exposure. Patients were entrusted with their own radiographs and asked to bring them back to subsequent clinic consultations. We audited a 14-day-period and compared it with a similar period before implementation of this new protocol. The results showed a significant reduction in the number of missing radiographs by entrusting them with patients.

Retrieving physiotherapy patient records in selected health care facilities in South Africa--is record keeping compromised?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the process and feasibility of retrieving patient records in a variety of physiotherapy care settings in the Gauteng province in the Republic of South Africa.

METHODS

Thirteen public and private health care facilities providing physiotherapy services were studied. Multiple methods of data collection (facility walk-through observation aided by a researcher designed checklist, in-depth interviews and attempting to retrieve physiotherapy records) were employed to evaluate the process of retrieving physiotherapy patient records, determine physiotherapy record retrieval rates and to determine the factors that were influencing record retrieval.

RESULTS

The process of retrieving physiotherapy records was arduous and multi-faceted, with some health care facilities allowing patients to take their records home. A final retrieval rate of 46% (36.3% - 100%) was obtained. An odds ratio calculation revealed that it was 13.09 (CI: 8.99 - 19.13; p<0.001) times more possible to retrieve records of patients treated in private physiotherapy care settings (87.4% retrieval rate) than in public sector physiotherapy care settings (34.67% retrieval rate).

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that the process of retrieving physiotherapy records was arduous and lacked uniformity in public sector hospitals. Further a low physiotherapy record retrieval rate was obtained.

Long-term follow-up of survivors of childhood cancer in the UK

BACKGROUND

Childhood cancer is rare, but there are now good survival prospects and in the UK approximately 1 in 1,000 young adults is a survivor of childhood cancer. There are many adverse health outcomes associated with the treatment of childhood cancer often arising several years after completion of treatment. The aim of this study was to quantify the long-term clinical follow-up practices concerning survivors of childhood cancer.

PROCEDURE

A cross-sectional postal survey of 22 treatment centres of the United Kingdom Children's Cancer Study Group (UKCCSG) clinicians was carried out as well as a cross-sectional postal survey of general practitioners of most adult survivors of childhood cancer in Britain.

RESULTS

Subsequent to 5 years after the end of treatment: 52% of UKCCSG clinicians follow-up all survivors for life, while 45% discharge some patients. Of those clinicians discharging: over 50% discharged benign, stage I or tumors treated with surgery alone, in contrast 16% reported discharging all or most patients; almost all (97%) clinicians discharged to a general practitioner. Only 14% of clinicians reported nurses undertook a specialist role. Sixty-five percent of the 10,979 general practitioners reported that their patient was not on regular hospital follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

There are wide variations in the extent to which survivors of childhood cancer are discharged from hospital follow-up. There is a need for regularly updated national guidelines concerning the levels of follow-up required for specific groups of survivors defined principally by the treatment they received.

I am a good patient, believe it or not

What issues will the “good patient” of the future have to deal with?