Improving access to MSK services in primary care: How applying quality improvement methodology can optimise the implementation of remote consultations

Physiotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. e139
Author(s):  
T. Warner ◽  
S. Ingram
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle M. Nash ◽  
Zohra Bhimani ◽  
Jennifer Rayner ◽  
Merrick Zwarenstein

Abstract Background Learning health systems have been gaining traction over the past decade. The purpose of this study was to understand the spread of learning health systems in primary care, including where they have been implemented, how they are operating, and potential challenges and solutions. Methods We completed a scoping review by systematically searching OVID Medline®, Embase®, IEEE Xplore®, and reviewing specific journals from 2007 to 2020. We also completed a Google search to identify gray literature. Results We reviewed 1924 articles through our database search and 51 articles from other sources, from which we identified 21 unique learning health systems based on 62 data sources. Only one of these learning health systems was implemented exclusively in a primary care setting, where all others were integrated health systems or networks that also included other care settings. Eighteen of the 21 were in the United States. Examples of how these learning health systems were being used included real-time clinical surveillance, quality improvement initiatives, pragmatic trials at the point of care, and decision support. Many challenges and potential solutions were identified regarding data, sustainability, promoting a learning culture, prioritization processes, involvement of community, and balancing quality improvement versus research. Conclusions We identified 21 learning health systems, which all appear at an early stage of development, and only one was primary care only. We summarized and provided examples of integrated health systems and data networks that can be considered early models in the growing global movement to advance learning health systems in primary care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e000839
Author(s):  
Heather Cassie ◽  
Vinay Mistry ◽  
Laura Beaton ◽  
Irene Black ◽  
Janet E Clarkson ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEnsuring that healthcare is patient-centred, safe and harm free is the cornerstone of the NHS. The Scottish Patient Safety Programme (SPSP) is a national initiative to support the provision of safe, high-quality care. SPSP promotes a coordinated approach to quality improvement (QI) in primary care by providing evidence-based methods, such as the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Breakthrough Series Collaborative methodology. These methods are relatively untested within dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact to inform the development and implementation of improvement collaboratives as a means for QI in primary care dentistry.DesignA multimethod study underpinned by the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Kirkpatrick model. Quantitative data were collected using baseline and follow-up questionnaires, designed to explore beliefs and behaviours towards improving quality in practice. Qualitative data were gathered using interviews with dental team members and practice-based case studies.ResultsOne hundred and eleven dental team members completed the baseline questionnaire. Follow-up questionnaires were returned by 79 team members. Twelve practices, including two case studies, participated in evaluation interviews. Findings identified positive beliefs and increased knowledge and skills towards QI, as well as increased confidence about using QI methodologies in practice. Barriers included time, poor patient and team engagement, communication and leadership. Facilitators included team working, clear roles, strong leadership, training, peer support and visible benefits. Participants’ knowledge and skills were identified as an area for improvement.ConclusionsFindings demonstrate increased knowledge, skills and confidence in relation to QI methodology and highlight areas for improvement. This is an example of partnership working between the Scottish Government and NHSScotland towards a shared ambition to provide safe care to every patient. More work is required to evaluate the sustainability and transferability of improvement collaboratives as a means for QI in dentistry and wider primary care.


Author(s):  
Sarah Stalder ◽  
Aimee Techau ◽  
Jenny Hamilton ◽  
Carlo Caballero ◽  
Mary Weber ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: The specific aims of this project were to create a fully integrated, nurse-led model of a psychiatric nurse practitioner and behavioral health care team within primary care to facilitate (1) patients receiving an appropriate level of care and (2) care team members performing at the top of their scope of practice. METHOD: The guiding model for process implementation was Rapid Cycle Quality Improvement. Three task forces were established to develop interventions in the areas of Roles and Responsibilities, Training and Implementation, and the electronic health record. INTERVENTION: The four interventions that emerged from these task forces were (1) the establishment of patient tiers based on diagnosis, medications, and risk assessment; (2) the creation of process maps to engage care team members; (3) just-in-time education regarding psychiatric medication management for primary care providers; and (4) use of a registry to track patients. RESULTS: The process measures of referrals to the psychiatric care team and psychiatric assessment intakes performed as expected. Both measures were higher at the onset of the project and lower 1 year later. The outcome indicator, number of case reviews, increased dramatically over time. CONCLUSIONS: For psychiatric nurse practitioners, this quality improvement effort provides evidence that a consultative role can be effective in supporting primary care providers. Through providing education, establishing patient tiers, and establishing an effective workflow, more patients may have access to psychiatric services.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. A541
Author(s):  
S. Molony ◽  
A. O’Leary ◽  
C. Usher ◽  
D. Molony

2001 ◽  
Vol 58 (7) ◽  
pp. 696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathy D. Sherbourne ◽  
Kenneth B. Wells ◽  
Naihua Duan ◽  
Jeanne Miranda ◽  
Jürgen Unützer ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey Ufholz ◽  
Amy Sheon ◽  
Daksh Bhargava ◽  
Goutham Rao

BACKGROUND Since the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine appointments have replaced many in-person healthcare visits [1 2]. However, older people are less likely to participate in telemedicine, preferring either in-person care or foregoing care altogether [3-6]. With a high prevalence of chronic conditions and vulnerability to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality through exposure to others in health care environments, (1-4), promoting telemedicine use should be a high priority for seniors. Seniors face significant barriers to participation in telemedicine, including lower internet and device access and skills, and visual, auditory, and tactile difficulties with telemedicine. OBJECTIVE Hoping to offer training to increase telemedicine use, we undertook a quality improvement survey to identify barriers to, and facilitators of telemedicine among seniors presenting to an outpatient family medicine teaching clinic which serves predominantly African American, economically disadvantaged adults with chronic illness in Cleveland, Ohio. METHODS Our survey, designated by the IRB as quality improvement, was designed based on a review of the literature, and input from our primary care providers and a digital equity expert (Figure 1). To minimize patient burden, the survey was limited to 10 questions. Because we were interested in technology barriers, data were collected on paper rather than a tablet or computer, with a research assistant available to read the survey questions. Patients presenting with needs that could be accomplished remotely were approached by a research assistant to complete the survey starting February 2021 until we reached the pre-determined sample size (N=30) in June 2021. Patients with known dementia, those who normally resident in a long-term care facility, and those presenting with an acute condition (e.g. fall or COPD exacerbation) were ineligible. Because of the small number of respondents, only univariate and bivariate tabulations were performed, in Excel. RESULTS 83% of respondents said they had devices that could be used for a telemedicine visit and that they went on the internet, but just 23% had had telemedicine visits. Few patients had advanced devices (iPhones, desktops, laptops or tablets); 46% had only a single device that was not IOS based mobile (Table 1). All participants with devices said they used them for “messaging on the internet,” but this was the only function used by 40%. No one used the internet for banking, shopping, and few used internet functions commonly needed for telemedicine (23.3% had email; 30% did video calling) (Table 1). 23.3% of respondents had had a telemedicine appointment. Many reported a loss of connection to their doctor as a concern. Participants who owned a computer or iPhone used their devices for a broader range of tasks, (Table 2 and 3), were aged 65-70 (Table 4), and were more likely to have had a telemedicine visit and to have more favorable views of telemedicine (Table 2). Respondents who had not had a telemedicine appointment endorsed a greater number of telemedicine disadvantages and endorsed less interest in future appointments (Table 2). Respondents who did not own an internet-capable device did not report using any internet functions and none had had a telemedicine appointment (Table 2). CONCLUSIONS This small survey revealed significant gaps in telemedicine readiness among seniors who said they had devices that could be used for telemedicine and that they went online themselves. No patients used key internet functions needed for staying safe during COVID, and few used internet applications that required skills needed for telemedicine. Few patients had devices that are optimal for seniors using telemedicine. Patients with more advanced devices used more internet functions and had more telemedicine experience and more favorable attitudes than others. Our results confirm previous studies [7-9] showing generally lower technological proficiency among older adults and some concerns about participating in telemedicine. However, our study is novel in pointing to subtle dimensions of telemedicine readiness that warrant further study—device capacity and use of internet in ways that build skills needed for telemedicine such as email and video calling. Before training seniors to use telemedicine, it’s important to ensure that they have the devices, basic digital skills and connectivity needed for telemedicine. Larger studies are needed to confirm our results and apply multivariate analysis to understand the relationships among age, device quality, internet skills and telemedicine attitudes. Development of validated scales of telemedicine readiness and telemedicine training to complement in-person care can help health systems offer precision-matched interventions to address barriers, facilitate increased adoption, and generally improve patients’ overall access to primary care and engagement with their primary care provider.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document