scholarly journals Multimorbidity within households and use of health and social care

BJGP Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. BJGPO.2020.0134
Author(s):  
Mai Stafford ◽  
Sarah Deeny ◽  
Kathryn Dreyer ◽  
Shand Jenny
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Clinical Practice Research Datalink ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Care Activity ◽  
The Impact

Background: The daily management of long-term conditions falls primarily on individuals and informal carers, but the impact of household context on health and social care activity among people with multimorbidity is understudied. Aim: To test whether co-residence with a multimorbid person (compared with a non-multimorbid co-resident) is associated with utilisation and cost of primary, community and secondary health care and formal social care. Design and Setting: Linked data from health providers and local government in Barking and Dagenham for a retrospective cohort of people aged 50+ in two-person households in 2016-2018. Methods: Two-part regression models were applied to estimate annualised use and cost of hospital, primary, community, mental health and social care by multimorbidity status of individuals and co-residents, adjusted for age, gender and deprivation. Applicability at the national level was tested using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Results: Over 45% of multimorbid people in two-person households were co-resident with another multimorbid person. They were 1.14 (95% CI 1.00, 1.30) times as likely to have community care activity and 1.24 (95% CI 0.99,1.54) times as likely to have mental health care activity compared to those co-resident with a healthy person. They had more primary care visits (8.5 (95% CI 8.2,8.8) vs 7.9 (95% CI 7.7,8.2)) and higher primary care costs. Outpatient care and elective admissions did not differ. Findings in national data were similar. Conclusions: Care utilisation for people with multimorbidity varies by household context. There may be potential for connecting health and community service input across household members.

scholarly journals Multimorbidity within households and health and social care utilisation and cost: retrospective cohort study using administrative data

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mai Stafford ◽  
Sarah R. Deeny ◽  
Kathryn Dreyer ◽  
Jenny Shand
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Clinical Practice Research Datalink ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Care Utilisation ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Care Activity

AbstractBackgroundThe daily management of long-term conditions falls primarily on individuals and their informal carers, but the household context and its impact on health and social care activity among people with multimorbidity is understudied.MethodsLinked data from health providers and local government in Barking and Dagenham provided a retrospective cohort of people aged 50+ in two-person households between April 2016 and March 2018. Two-part regression models were applied to estimate annualised use and cost of hospital, primary, community, mental health and social care by multimorbidity status of individuals and co-residents, adjusted for age, gender and deprivation. Applicability at the national level was tested using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.ResultsOver 45% of multimorbid people in two-person households were co-resident with another multimorbid person. They were 1.14 (95% CI 1.00, 1.30) times as likely to have any community care activity and 1.24 (95% CI 0.99,1.54) times as likely to have any mental health care activity compared to those co-resident with a healthy person. They had more primary care visits (8.5 (95% CI 8.2,8.8) vs 7.9 (95% CI 7.7,8.2)) and higher primary care costs. Outpatient care and elective admissions did not differ between these groups. Findings in the national data were similar.ConclusionsCare utilisation for people with multimorbidity varies by household context. There may be potential for connecting health and other community service input across household members.

scholarly journals Primary care teams’ experiences of delivering mental health care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachelle Ashcroft ◽  
Catherine Donnelly ◽  
Maya Dancey ◽  
Sandeep Gill ◽  
Simon Lam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Mental Health Care ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Virtual Care ◽  
Primary Care Teams ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Integrated primary care teams are ideally positioned to support the mental health care needs arising during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding how COVID-19 has affected mental health care delivery within primary care settings will be critical to inform future policy and practice decisions during the later phases of the pandemic and beyond. The objective of our study was to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care teams’ delivery of mental health care. Methods A qualitative study using focus groups conducted with primary care teams in Ontario, Canada. Focus group data was analysed using thematic analysis. Results We conducted 11 focus groups with 10 primary care teams and a total of 48 participants. With respect to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health care in primary care teams, we identified three key themes: i) the high demand for mental health care, ii) the rapid transformation to virtual care, and iii) the impact on providers. Conclusions From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care quickly responded to the rising mental health care demands of their patients. Despite the numerous challenges they faced with the rapid transition to virtual care, primary care teams have persevered. It is essential that policy and decision-makers take note of the toll that these demands have placed on providers. There is an immediate need to enhance primary care’s capacity for mental health care for the duration of the pandemic and beyond.

Is co-production working well in recovery colleges? Emergent themes from a systematic narrative review

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Louise Bester ◽  
Anne McGlade ◽  
Eithne Darragh
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Social Care ◽  
The Body ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practitioner Attitudes ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Impact

Purpose “Co-production” is a process in health and social care wherein service users and practitioners work in partnership. Recovery colleges (RCs) are educational establishments offering mental health education; a cornerstone feature is that courses are designed and delivered in parity by both mental health practitioners and “peers” – people with lived experience of mental illness. This paper aims to consider, through the identification of key themes, whether co-production within RCs is operating successfully. Design/methodology/approach The paper is a systematic review of qualitative literature. Relevant concept groups were systematically searched using three bibliographic databases: Medline, Social Care Online and Scopus. Articles were quality appraised and then synthesised through inductive thematic analysis and emergent trends identified. Findings Synthesis identified three key themes relating to the impact of co-production in RCs: practitioner attitudes, power dynamics between practitioners and service users, and RCs’ relationships with their host organisations. As a result of RC engagement, traditional practitioner/patient hierarchies were found to be eroding. Practitioners felt they were more person-centred. RCs can model good co-productive practices to their host organisations. The review concluded, with some caveats, that RC co-production was of high fidelity. Originality/value RC research is growing, but the body of evidence remains relatively small. Most of what exists examine the impact of RCs on individuals’ overall recovery and mental health; there is a limited empirical investigation into whether their flagship feature of parity between peers and practitioners is genuine.

scholarly journals The impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, services and society

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 481-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Crowther ◽  
A. Taylor ◽  
R. Toney ◽  
S. Meddings ◽  
T. Whale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Mechanisms Of Action ◽  
Advisory Panel ◽  
Health Staff ◽  
Mental Health Staff ◽  
Social Care Service ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Impact

AbstractAimsRecovery Colleges are opening internationally. The evaluation focus has been on outcomes for Recovery College students who use mental health services. However, benefits may also arise for: staff who attend or co-deliver courses; the mental health and social care service hosting the Recovery College; and wider society. A theory-based change model characterising how Recovery Colleges impact at these higher levels is needed for formal evaluation of their impact, and to inform future Recovery College development. The aim of this study was to develop a stratified theory identifying candidate mechanisms of action and outcomes (impact) for Recovery Colleges at staff, services and societal levels.MethodsInductive thematic analysis of 44 publications identified in a systematised review was supplemented by collaborative analysis involving a lived experience advisory panel to develop a preliminary theoretical framework. This was refined through semi-structured interviews with 33 Recovery College stakeholders (service user students, peer/non-peer trainers, managers, community partners, clinicians) in three sites in England.ResultsCandidate mechanisms of action and outcomes were identified at staff, services and societal levels. At the staff level, experiencing new relationships may change attitudes and associated professional practice. Identified outcomes for staff included: experiencing and valuing co-production; changed perceptions of service users; and increased passion and job motivation. At the services level, Recovery Colleges often develop somewhat separately from their host system, reducing the reach of the college into the host organisation but allowing development of an alternative culture giving experiential learning opportunities to staff around co-production and the role of a peer workforce. At the societal level, partnering with community-based agencies gave other members of the public opportunities for learning alongside people with mental health problems and enabled community agencies to work with people they might not have otherwise. Recovery Colleges also gave opportunities to beneficially impact on community attitudes.ConclusionsThis study is the first to characterise the mechanisms of action and impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, mental health and social care services, and wider society. The findings suggest that a certain distance is needed in the relationship between the Recovery College and its host organisation if a genuine cultural alternative is to be created. Different strategies are needed depending on what level of impact is intended, and this study can inform decision-making about mechanisms to prioritise. Future research into Recovery Colleges should include contextual evaluation of these higher level impacts, and investigate effectiveness and harms.

scholarly journals Primary Care Consultations after Hospitalisation for Pneumonia: A Large Population-based Cohort Study

2020 ◽  
pp. BJGP.2020.0890
Author(s):  
Vadsala Baskaran ◽  
Fiona Pearce ◽  
Rowan H Harwood ◽  
Tricia McKeever ◽  
Wei Shen Lim
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Clinical Practice Research Datalink ◽  
Respiratory Disorder ◽  
The Impact

Background: Up to 70% of patients report ongoing symptoms four weeks after hospitalisation for pneumonia, and the impact on primary care is poorly understood. Aim: To investigate the frequency of primary care consultations after hospitalisation for pneumonia, and the reasons for consultation. Design: Population-based cohort study. Setting: UK primary care database of anonymised medical records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), England. Methods: Adults with the first ICD-10 code for pneumonia (J12-J18) recorded in HES between July 2002-June 2017 were included. Primary care consultation within 30 days of discharge was identified as the recording of any medical Read code (excluding administration-related codes) in CPRD. Competing-risks regression analyses were conducted to determine the predictors of consultation and antibiotic use at consultation; death and readmission were competing events. Reasons for consultation were examined. Results: Of 56,396 adults, 55.9% (n=31,542) consulted primary care within 30 days of discharge. The rate of consultation was highest within 7 days (4.7 per 100 person-days). The strongest predictor for consultation was a higher number of primary care consultations in the year prior to index admission (adjusted sHR 8.98, 95% CI 6.42-12.55). The commonest reason for consultation was for a respiratory disorder (40.7%, n=12,840), 12% for pneumonia specifically. At consultation, 31.1% (n=9,823) received further antibiotics. Penicillins (41.6%, n=5,753) and macrolides (21.9%, n=3,029) were the commonest antibiotics prescribed. Conclusion: Following hospitalisation for pneumonia, a significant proportion of patients consulted primary care within 30 days, highlighting the morbidity experienced by patients during recovery from pneumonia.

Is the Far West Mental Health Integration Project Making a Difference? The General Practitioner Perspective

2005 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 32 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Perkins ◽  
David Lyle
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Mental Health Integration ◽  
Integration Project ◽  
The Impact

This paper reports on the evaluation of an Australian Government and NSW State funded Mental Health Integration Project in remote far western NSW. The project was part of the Mental Health Integration Program, developed from the Second National Mental Health Plan. The project implemented a model of community-based mental health services and used innovative financing arrangements to allow the provision of community-based specialist mental health teams to remote communities and to recruit visiting psychiatrists to support the local primary care providers. The evaluation strategy included a survey of general practitioners (GPs) in the Upper Western Sector and Broken Hill, designed to investigate their level and type of contact with psychiatrists and community-based specialist mental health care teams, their perceptions about the impact of the new services, and their interest in further professional development in mental health care.The project has shown that visiting specialists can be deployed in a primary care setting with a focus on meeting the needs of local GPs, primary health care staff and their patients.

scholarly journals Service user and carers perspectives of joint and integrated working between health and social care

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ailsa Cameron ◽  
Lisa Bostock ◽  
Rachel Lart
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Integrated Services ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an update to a review of the joint working literature in the field of health and social care for adults, with particular emphasis given to the experiences of users and carers. Design/methodology/approach – The aims of the literature review remained largely the same as those of the original, they were to identify: models of joint working, evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and the factors promoting or hindering the models. However, to reflect the growing interest in the experiences of users and carers a fourth aim was added to map these experiences. Given their prominence in terms of policy debates about integration, the review focused on jointly organised services for older people and people with mental health problems in the UK only. Findings – The review demonstrates tentative signs that some initiatives designed to join-up or integrate services can deliver outcomes desired by government. Importantly some studies that report the experiences of users of services and carers suggest that they perceive benefits from efforts to join-up or integrate services. However it is our contention that the evidence is less than compelling and does not justify the faith invested in the strategy by current or previous governments. Originality/value – The study updates our knowledge of the impact of joint working in the field of health and social care for adults. Importantly the paper highlights what is known about the experiences of users and carers of joint/integrated services.

scholarly journals Changing practices in mental health care: a lesson from America

1990 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 730-732
Author(s):  
Tom Butler ◽  
Philip Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Service Delivery ◽  
Mental Health Care ◽  
Social Care ◽  
The Political ◽  
Rehabilitation Services ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Changing Practices

Health and social care in Britain is undergoing the most profound changes in its structure and organisation since its inception (Griffiths, 1988); indeed, some would argue that it is about to change beyond recognition. The purpose of this article is to describe contemporary developments in the delivery of such services in the USA. Given that many of the political changes here have been directly influenced by thinking and practice in that country, it is argued that there are two important lessons to be learnt. The first concerns the coordination of service delivery between different agencies, the second involves an emphasis on the delivery of acute and rehabilitation services in the community. In short the traditional distinctions between the two would be blurred.

scholarly journals Outcomes of mental health pharmacist-managed electronic consults at a Veterans Affairs health care system

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Herbert ◽  
Holly Winkler ◽  
Troy A. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care System ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Veterans Health ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Mental Health Conditions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Care System

Abstract Introduction: The demand for mental health services has increased as more veterans have been diagnosed with—and sought care for—one or more mental health conditions. Within the South Texas Veterans Health Care System (STVHCS), providers may submit electronic consults (e-consults) to mental health clinical pharmacy specialists for medication review and recommendations. These consults aim to manage veterans with uncomplicated mental health conditions in primary care, making specialty mental health providers more available for those who need such services. Pharmacists have improved outcomes and access to care for conditions such as diabetes and hypertension, but currently, there is limited evidence demonstrating the impact of pharmacists in mental health. Methods: This quality improvement project assessed the effectiveness of the e-consult service. Information was collected through a retrospective chart review of STVHCS veterans with the corresponding consult note placed in their chart from May 2014 through December 2015. Numbers of recommendations implemented and veterans maintained in primary care were analyzed as markers of effectiveness. Time and cost savings were secondarily explored. Results: A total of 361 consults were submitted for 353 unique patients. Of the 322 patients included in analyses, a total of 301 unique patients (93.5%) were maintained in primary care for at least 3 months. Of the 21 not maintained in primary care, 15 recommendations were implemented; of those maintained in primary care, 271 recommendations were implemented. Discussion: This service improves mental health care—and patient access—by promoting successful management and maintenance of less complicated patients in primary care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document