Primary-care-based social prescribing for mental health: an analysis of financial and environmental sustainability

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. 114-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel L. Maughan ◽  
Alisha Patel ◽  
Tahmina Parveen ◽  
Isobel Braithwaite ◽  
Jonathan Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Environmental Costs ◽  
Healthcare Use ◽  
Social Prescribing ◽  
The Impact

AimTo assess the effects of a social prescribing service development on healthcare use and the subsequent economic and environmental costs.BackgroundSocial prescribing services for mental healthcare create links with support in the community for people using primary care. Social prescribing services may reduce future healthcare use, and therefore reduce the financial and environmental costs of healthcare, by providing structured psychosocial support. The National Health Service (NHS) is required to reduce its carbon footprint by 80% by 2050 according to the Climate Change Act (2008). This study is the first of its kind to analyse both the financial and environmental impacts associated with healthcare use following social prescribing. The value of this observational study lies in its novel methodology of analysing the carbon footprint of a service at the primary-care level.MethodAn observational study was carried out to assess the impact of the service on the financial and environmental impacts of healthcare use. GP appointments, psychotropic medications and secondary-care referrals were measured.FindingsResults demonstrate no statistical difference in the financial and carbon costs of healthcare use between groups. Social prescribing showed a trend towards reduced healthcare use, mainly due to a reduction in secondary-care referrals compared with controls. The associations found did not achieve significance due to the small sample size leading to a large degree of uncertainty regarding differences. This study demonstrates that these services are potentially able to pay for themselves through reducing future healthcare costs and are effective, low-carbon interventions, when compared with cognitive behavioral therapy or antidepressants. This is an important finding in light of Government targets for the NHS to reduce its carbon footprint by 80% by 2050. Larger studies are required to investigate the potentials of social prescribing services further.

scholarly journals Association between National Early Warning Scores in primary care and clinical outcomes: an observational study in UK primary and secondary care

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (695) ◽  
pp. e374-e380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren J Scott ◽  
Niamh M Redmond ◽  
Alison Tavaré ◽  
Hannah Little ◽  
Seema Srivastava ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Early Warning ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Early Warning Score ◽  
Medical Review ◽  
News Values ◽  
Process Measures ◽  
Sepsis Diagnosis

BackgroundNHS England has mandated use of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), more recently NEWS2, in acute settings, and suggested its use in primary care. However, there is reluctance from GPs to adopt NEWS/NEWS2.AimTo assess whether NEWS calculated at the point of GP referral into hospital is associated with outcomes in secondary care.Design and settingAn observational study using routinely collected data from primary and secondary care.MethodNEWS values were prospectively collected for 13 047 GP referrals into acute care between July 2017 and December 2018. NEWS values were examined and multivariate linear and logistic regression used to assess associations with process measures and clinical outcomes.ResultsHigher NEWS values were associated with faster conveyance for patients travelling by ambulance, for example, median 94 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 69–139) for NEWS ≥7; median 132 minutes, (IQR 84–236) for NEWS = 0 to 2); faster time from hospital arrival to medical review (54 minutes [IQR 25–114] for NEWS ≥7; 78 minutes [IQR 34–158] for NEWS = 0 to 2); as well as increased length of stay (5 days [IQR 2–11] versus 1 day [IQR 0–5]); intensive care unit admissions (2.0% versus 0.5%); sepsis diagnosis (11.7% versus 2.5%); and mortality, for example, 30-day mortality 12.0% versus 4.1% for NEWS ≥7 versus NEWS = 0 to 2, respectively. On average, for patients referred without a NEWS value (NEWS = NR), most clinical outcomes were comparable with patients with NEWS = 3 to 4, but ambulance conveyance time and time to medical review were comparable with patients with NEWS = 0 to 2.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated that higher NEWS values calculated at GP referral into hospital are associated with a faster medical review and poorer clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Cross-sectional observation study to investigate the impact of risk-based stratification on care pathways for patients with chronic kidney disease: protocol paper

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e027315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harjeet Kaur Bhachu ◽  
Paul Cockwell ◽  
Anuradhaa Subramanian ◽  
Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar ◽  
Derek Kyte ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Risk Equation ◽  
Failure Risk ◽  
The Health Improvement Network ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionChronic kidney disease (CKD) management in the UK is usually primary care based, with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines defining criteria for referral to secondary care nephrology services. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is commonly used to guide timing of referrals and preparation of patients approaching renal replacement therapy. However, eGFR lacks sensitivity for progression to end-stage renal failure; as a consequence, the international guideline group, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes has recommended the use of a risk calculator. The validated Kidney Failure Risk Equation may enable increased precision for the management of patients with CKD; however, there is little evidence to date for the implication of its use in routine clinical practice. This study will aim to determine the impact of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation on the redesignation of patients with CKD in the UK for referral to secondary care, compared with NICE CKD guidance.Method and analysisThis is a cross-sectional population-based observational study using The Health Improvement Network database to identify the impact of risk-based designation for referral into secondary care for patients with CKD in the UK. Adult patients registered in primary care and active in the database within the period 1 January 2016 to 31 March 2017 with confirmed CKD will be analysed. The proportion of patients who meet defined risk thresholds will be cross-referenced with the current NICE guideline recommendations for referral into secondary care along with an evaluation of urinary albumin–creatinine ratio monitoring.Ethics and disseminationApproval was granted by The Health Improvement Network Scientific Review Committee (Reference number: 18THIN061). Study outcomes will inform national and international guidelines including the next version of the NICE CKD guideline. Dissemination of findings will also be through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, presentation at conferences and inclusion in the core resources of the Think Kidneys programme.

scholarly journals COVID-19 at the Deep End: A Qualitative Interview Study of Primary Care Staff Working in the Most Deprived Areas of England during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (16) ◽  
pp. 8689
Author(s):  
Claire Norman ◽  
Josephine M. Wildman ◽  
Sarah Sowden
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Social Prescribing ◽  
Qualitative Interview Study ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Primary Care Staff ◽  
Deprived Areas

COVID-19 is disproportionately impacting people in low-income communities. Primary care staff in deprived areas have unique insights into the challenges posed by the pandemic. This study explores the impact of COVID-19 from the perspective of primary care practitioners in the most deprived region of England. Deep End general practices serve communities in the region’s most socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. This study used semi-structured interviews followed by thematic analysis. In total, 15 participants were interviewed (11 General Practitioners (GPs), 2 social prescribing link workers and 2 nurses) with Deep End careers ranging from 3 months to 31 years. Participants were recruited via purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews were conducted using video-conferencing software. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis through a social determinants of health lens. Our results are categorised into four themes: the immediate health risks of COVID-19 on patients and practices; factors likely to exacerbate existing deprivation; the role of social prescribing during COVID-19; wider implications for remote consulting. We add qualitative understanding to existing quantitative data, showing patients from low socioeconomic backgrounds have worse outcomes from COVID-19. Deep End practitioners have valuable insights into the impact of social distancing restrictions and remote consulting on patients’ health and wellbeing. Their experiences should guide future pandemic response measures and any move to “digital first” primary care to ensure that existing inequalities are not worsened.

scholarly journals Impact of rurality on processes and outcomes in melanoma care: results from a whole-Scotland melanoma cohort in primary and secondary care

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (673) ◽  
pp. e566-e575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Murchie ◽  
Rosalind Adam ◽  
Wei L Khor ◽  
Edwin A Raja ◽  
Lisa Iversen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Small Towns ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThose living in rural areas have poorer cancer outcomes, but current evidence on how rurality impacts melanoma care and survival is contradictory.AimTo investigate the impact of rurality on setting of melanoma excision and mortality in a whole-nation cohort.Design and settingAnalysis of linked routine healthcare data comprising every individual in Scotland diagnosed with melanoma, January 2005–December 2013, in primary and secondary care.MethodMultivariate binary logistic regression was used to explore the relationship between rurality and setting of melanoma excision; Cox proportional hazards regression between rurality and mortality was used, with adjustments for key confounders.ResultsIn total 9519 patients were included (54.3% [n = 5167] female, mean age 60.2 years [SD 17.5]). Of melanomas where setting of excision was known, 90.3% (n = 8598) were in secondary care and 8.1% (n = 771) in primary care. Odds of primary care excision increased with increasing rurality/remoteness. Compared with those in urban areas, those in the most remote rural locations had almost twice the odds of melanoma excision in primary care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33 to 2.77). No significant association was found between urban or rural residency and all-cause mortality. Melanoma-specific mortality was significantly lower in individuals residing in accessible small towns than in large urban areas (adjusted hazards ratio [HR] 0.53; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.87) with no trend towards poorer survival with increasing rurality.ConclusionPatients in Scottish rural locations were more likely to have a melanoma excised in primary care. However, those in rural areas did not have significantly increased mortality from melanoma. Together these findings suggest that current UK melanoma management guidelines could be revised to be more realistic by recognising the role of primary care in the prompt diagnosis and treatment of those in rural locations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document