‘Working with the team’ : an exploratory study of improved type 2 diabetes management in a new model of integrated primary/secondary care

This study aimed to explore how a new model of integrated primary/secondary care for type 2 diabetes management, the Brisbane South Complex Diabetes Service (BSCDS), related to improved diabetes management in a selected group of patients. We used a qualitative research design to obtain detailed accounts from the BSCDS via semi-structured interviews with 10 patients. The interviews were fully transcribed and systematically coded using a form of thematic analysis. Participants’ responses were grouped in relation to: (1) Patient-centred care; (2) Effective multiprofessional teamwork; and (3) Empowering patients. The key features of this integrated primary/secondary care model were accessibility and its delivery within a positive health care environment, clear and supportive interpersonal communication between patients and health care providers, and patients seeing themselves as being part of the team-based care. The BSCDS delivered patient-centred care and achieved patient engagement in ways that may have contributed to improved type 2 diabetes management in these participants.

Integrated chronic disease management in primary-secondary care : a systematic literature review of the evidence

Introduction: Diabetes has traditionally been managed as a single chronic disease state, but it exists with co-morbidities such as depression and metabolic syndrome. Treatment is multifaceted, requiring both primary and secondary care, however, the delivery of diabetes care is often fragmented. Integrated chronic disease management is a growing model of interest, and is underpinned by the chronic care model (CCM), devised as a guide for primary care management of patients with chronic conditions. The model identifies six key elements for effective care, and has shown promise in improving the management of diabetes. Aim: To find empirical evidence of integrated care interventions targeted at co-morbidities including diabetes, across primary/secondary care. Method: A systematic review of peer reviewed literature from PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs was performed. Studies were reviewed according to inclusion criteria- studies published in English, between 2004-2014, empirical studies, studies with evidence of primary/secondary implementation, and those dealing with chronic co-morbid disease states. Results: 51 studies met the inclusion criteria. Included studies were mostly from the US (38), with five from Australia, UK (2), Canada (2), Netherlands (1), Norway (1), Ireland (1), and one multi-country study. It was found that all interventions adopted at least one (average 3-4) of the chronic care model, with the majority implementing delivery system redesign activities within the primary care practice/s. We found evidence of interventions which significantly reduced emergency department and hospital admissions, improved processes of care, patient health outcomes such as HbA1c, improved patient satisfaction, and reduced costs. Conclusion/Implications for practice: Diabetes exists as a co-morbid disease, requiring both primary and secondary care. We found that integrated care interventions adopting elements of the chronic care model positively impacted on patient outcomes, service utilisation, as well as costs. This review has highlighted that it may not be necessary to adopt all CCM elements to improve clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction and costs.

Evaluation of a partnership between primary and secondary care providing an accessible Level 1 sexual health service in the community

Comprehensive testing for asymptomatic sexually transmitted infections in Northern Ireland has traditionally been provided by genitourinary medicine clinics. As patient demand for services has increased while budgets have remained limited, there has been increasing difficulty in accommodating this demand. In May 2013, the newly commissioned specialist Sexual Health service in the South Eastern Trust sought to pilot a new model of care working alongside a GP partnership of 12 practices. A training programme to enable GPs and practice nurses to deliver Level 1 sexual health care to heterosexual patients aged >16 years, in accordance with the standards of BASHH, was developed. A comprehensive care pathway and dedicated community health advisor supported this new model with close liaison between primary and secondary care. Testing for Chlamydia, gonorrhoea, HIV and syphilis was offered. The aims of the pilot were achieved, namely to provide accessible, cost-effective sexual health care within a framework of robust clinical governance. Furthermore, it uncovered a high positivity rate for Chlamydia, especially in young men attending their general practice, and demonstrated a high level of patient satisfaction. Moreover the capacity of secondary care to deliver Levels 2 and 3 services was increased.

Medicines reconciliation in comparison with NICE guidelines across secondary care mental health organisations

Background Medicines reconciliation-identifying and maintaining an accurate list of a patient's current medications-should be undertaken at all transitions of care and available to all patients. Objective A self-completion web survey was conducted for chief pharmacists (or equivalent) to evaluate medicines reconciliation levels in secondary care mental health organisations. Setting The survey was sent to secondary care mental health organisations in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Method The survey was launched via Bristol Online Surveys. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data was collected through respondents free-text answers to specific questions. Main outcomes measure Investigate how medicines reconciliation is delivered, incorporate a clear description of the role of pharmacy staff and identify areas of concern. Results Forty-two (52 % response rate) surveys were completed. Thirty-seven (88.1 %) organisations have a formal policy for medicines reconciliation with defined steps. Results show that the pharmacy team (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) are the main professionals involved in medicines reconciliation with a high rate of doctors also involved. Training procedures frequently include an induction by pharmacy for doctors whilst the pharmacy team are generally trained by another member of pharmacy. Mental health organisations estimate that nearly 80 % of medicines reconciliation is carried out within 24 h of admission. A full medicines reconciliation is not carried out on patient transfer between mental health wards; instead quicker and less exhaustive variations are implemented. 71.4 % of organisations estimate that pharmacy staff conduct daily medicine reconciliations for acute admission wards (Monday to Friday). However, only 38 % of organisations self-report to pharmacy reconciling patients' medication for other teams that admit from primary care. Conclusion Most mental health organisations appear to be complying with NICE guidance on medicines reconciliation for their acute admission wards. However, medicines reconciliation is conducted less frequently on other units that admit from primary care and rarely completed on transfer when it significantly differs to that on admission. Formal training and competency assessments on medicines reconciliation should be considered as current training varies and adherence to best practice is questionable.

Development of a prescribing indicator for objective quantification of antibiotic usage in secondary care

Objectives: To compare the recognized defined daily dose per 100 bed-days (DDD/100 bed-days) measure with the defined daily dose per finished consultant episode (DDD/FCE) in a group of hospitals with a variety of medicines management strategies. To compare antibiotic usage using the above indicators in hospitals with and without electronic prescribing systems. Methods: Twelve hospitals were used in the study. Nine hospitals were selected and split into three cohorts (three high-scoring, three medium-scoring and three low-scoring) by their 2001 medicines management self-assessment scores (MMAS). An additional cohort of three electronic prescribing hospitals was included for comparison. MMAS were compared to antibiotic management scores (AMS) developed from a questionnaire relating specifically to control of antibiotics. FCEs and occupied bed-days were obtained from published statistics and statistical analyses of the DDD/100 bed-days and DDD/FCE were carried out using SPSS. Results: The DDD/100 bed-days varied from 81.33 to 189.37 whilst the DDD/FCE varied from 2.88 to 7.43. The two indicators showed a high degree of correlation with r = 0.74. MMAS were from 9 to 22 (possible range 0-23) and the AMS from 2 to 13 (possible range 0-22). The two scores showed a high degree of correlation with r = 0.74. No correlation was established between either indicator and either score. Conclusions: The WHO indicator for medicines utilization, DDD/100 bed-days, exhibited the same level of conformity as that exhibited from the use of the DDD/FCE indicating that the DDD/FCE is a useful additional indicator for identifying hospitals which require further study. The MMAS can be assumed to be an accurate guide to antibiotic medicines management controls. No relationship has been found between a high degree of medicines management control and the quantity of antibiotic prescribed. © The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy; 2004 all rights reserved.

Development and validaton of an indicator to compare antibiotic usage in secondary care in England

The use of antibiotics was investigated in twelve acute hospitals in England. Data was collected electronically and by questionnaire for the financial years 2001/2, 2002/3 and 2003/4. Hospitals were selected on the basis of their Medicines Management Self-Assessment Scores (MMAS) and included a cohort of three hospitals with integrated electronic prescribing systems. The total sample size was 6.65% of English NHS activity for 2001/2 based on Finished Consultant Episode (FCE) numbers. Data collected included all antibiotics dispensed (ATC category J01), hospital activity FCE's and beddays, Medicines Management Self-assessment scores, Antibiotic Medicines Management scores (AMS), Primary Care Trust (PCT) of origin of referral populations, PCT antibiotic prescribing rates, Index of Multiple Deprivation for each PCT. The DDD/FCE (Defined Daily Dose/FCE) was found to correlate with the DDD 100beddays (r = 0.74 pcare antibiotic prescribing rates but not between primary and secondary care antibiotic prescribing rates for the same referral population or between the weighted mean IMD 2000 for each hospital's referral population and the hospital antibiotic prescribing rate.

A comparison of antibiotic prescribing indicators and medicines management scoring in secondary care

Poster: - Robust prescribing indicators analogous to those used in primary care are not available currently in NHS hospital trusts - The Department of Health has recently implemented a scheme for self-assessment scoring medicines management processes (maximum 23) in NHS hospitals - There is no clear relationship between average values for two antibiotic prescribing indicators obtained in ten NHS hospital trusts in the West Midlands - There is no clear relationship between either indicator value and the corresponding self-assessment medicines management score - This study highlights the difficulties involved in assessing the medicines management processes in NHS hospitals; better medicines management evaluation systems are needed