Dataset Information

Systematic review of recent innovations in service provision to improve access to primary care.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In England, there are particularly pressing problems concerning access to adequate primary care services. Consequently, innovative ways of delivering primary care have been introduced to facilitate and broaden access.

Aims

The aim of this study was to review the evidence of seven recent innovations in service provision to improve access or equity in access to primary care, by performing a systematic review of the literature.

Design of study

Systematic review.

Setting

Primary care in the United Kingdom (UK).

Method

Seven electronic databases were searched and key journals were hand-searched. Unpublished and 'grey' literature were sought via the Internet and through professional contacts. Intervention studies addressing one of seven recent innovations and conducted in the UK during the last 20 years were included. Two researchers independently assessed the quality of papers.

Results

Thirty studies (32 papers and two reports) were identified overall. Variation in study design and outcome measures made comparisons difficult. However, there was some evidence to suggest that access is improved by changing the ways in which primary care is delivered. First-wave personal medical services pilots facilitated improvements in access to primary care in previously under-served areas and/or populations. Walk-in centres and NHS Direct have provided additional access to primary care for white middle-class patients; there is some evidence suggesting that these innovations have increased access inequalities. There is some evidence that telephone consultations with GPs or nurses can safely substitute face-to-face consultations, although it is not clear that this reduces the number of face-to-face consultations over time. Nurse practitioners and community pharmacists can manage common conditions without the patient consulting a general practitioner.

Conclusion

The evidence is insufficient to make clear recommendations regarding ways to improve access to primary care. In the future, it is important that, as new initiatives are planned, well-designed evaluations are commissioned simultaneously.

SUBMITTER: Chapman JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1266174 | biostudies-literature | 2004 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of recent innovations in service provision to improve access to primary care.

Chapman Jenifer L JL Zechel Annegret A Carter Yvonne H YH Abbott Stephen S

The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 20040501 502

<h4>Background</h4>In England, there are particularly pressing problems concerning access to adequate primary care services. Consequently, innovative ways of delivering primary care have been introduced to facilitate and broaden access.<h4>Aims</h4>The aim of this study was to review the evidence of seven recent innovations in service provision to improve access or equity in access to primary care, by performing a systematic review of the literature.<h4>Design of study</h4>Systematic review.<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 15113523

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIndividuals experiencing disadvantage or marginalisation often face difficulty accessing primary health care. Overcoming access barriers is important for improving the health of these populations. Brokers can empower and enable people to access resources; however, their role in increasing access to health services has not been well-defined or researched in the literature. This review aims to identify whether a health service broker working with health and social service providers in the community can (a) identify individuals experiencing vulnerability who may benefit from improved access to quality primary care, and (b) link these individuals with an appropriate primary care provider for enduring, appropriate primary care.MethodsSix databases were searched for studies published between January 2008 and August 2015 that evaluated a health service broker intervention linking adults experiencing vulnerability to primary care. Relevant websites were also searched. Included studies were analysed using candidacy theory and a realist matrix was developed to identify mechanisms that may have contributed to changes in response to the interventions in different contexts.ResultsEleven studies were included in the review. Of the eight studies judged to provide detailed description of the programs, the interventions predominately addressed two domains of candidacy (identification of candidacy and navigation), with limited applicability to the third and fourth dimensions (permeability of services and appearances at health services). Six of the eight studies were judged to have successfully linked their target group to primary care. The majority of the interventions focused on assisting patients to reach services and did not look at ways that providers or health services could alter the way they deliver care to improve access.ConclusionsWhile specific mechanisms behind the interventions could not be identified, it is suggested that individual advocacy may be a key element in the success of these types of interventions. The interventions were found to address some dimensions of candidacy, with health service brokers able to help people to identify their need for care and to access, navigate and interact with services. More consideration should be given to the influence of providers on patient candidacy, rather than placing the onus on patients.

Project description:BackgroundInnovations are proliferating at the primary-secondary care interface, affecting referral to secondary care and resource use. Evidence about the range of effects and implications for the healthcare system of different types of innovation have not previously been summarised.AimTo review the available evidence on initiatives affecting primary care referral to specialist secondary care.SettingStudies of primary-secondary care interface.MethodSystematic review of trials, using adapted Cochrane Collaboration (effective practice and organisation of care) criteria. Studies from 1980 to 2001 were identified from a wide range of sources. Strict inclusion criteria were applied, and relevant clinical, service and cost data extracted using an agreed protocol. The main outcome measures were referral rates to specialist secondary care.ResultsOf the 139 studies initially identified. 34 met the review criteria. An updated search added a further 10 studies. Two studies provided economic analysis only. Referral was not the primary outcome of interest in the majority of included studies. Professional interventions generally had an impact on referral rates consistent with the intended change in clinician behaviour. Similarly, specialist 'outreach' or other primary care-based specialist provider schemes had at least a small effect upon referral rates to secondary care with the direction of effect being that intended or rational from a clinical and sociological perspective. Of the financial interventions, one was aimed primarily at changing the numbers or proportion of referrals from primary to specialist secondary care, and the direction of change was as expected in all cases. The quality of the reporting of the economic components of the 14 studies giving economic data was poor in many cases. When grouped by intervention type, no overall pattern of change in referral costs or total costs emerged.ConclusionThe studies identified were extremely diverse in methodology, clinical subject, organisational form, and quality of evidence. The number of good quality evaluations of innovative schemes to enhance the existing capacity of primary care was small, but increasing. Well-evaluated service initiatives in this area should be supported. Organisational innovations in the structure of service provision need not increase total costs to the National Health Service (NHS), even though costs associated with referral may increase. This review provides limited, partial, and conditional support for current primary care-oriented NHS policy developments in the United Kingdom.

Project description:ObjectivesTo review and synthesize the existing evidence on bereavement care, within the United Kingdom (UK), for ethnic minority communities in terms of barriers and facilitators to access; models of care; outcomes from, and satisfaction with, service provision.DesignA systematic review adopting a framework synthesis approach was conducted. An electronic search of the literature was undertaken in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstract and CINAHL via EBSCO, Global Health, Cochrane library, the Trip database and ProQuest between 1995 and 2020. Search terms included bereavement care, ethnic minority populations and the UK setting.ResultsFrom 3,185 initial records, following screening for eligibility, and full-text review of 164 articles, seven studies were identified. There was no research literature outlining the role of family, friends and existing networks; and a real absence of evidence about outcomes and levels of satisfaction for those from an ethnic minority background who receive bereavement care. From the limited literature, the overarching theme for barriers to bereavement care was 'unfamiliarity and irregularities'. Four identified subthemes were 'lack of awareness'; 'variability in support'; 'type and format of support'; and 'culturally specific beliefs'. The overarching theme for facilitators for bereavement care was 'accessibility' with the two subthemes being 'readily available information' and 'inclusive approaches'. Three studies reported on examples of different models of care provision.ConclusionsThis review reveals a stark lack of evidence about bereavement care for ethnic minority populations. In particular, understanding more about the role of family, friends and existing support systems, alongside outcomes and satisfaction will begin to develop the evidence base underpinning current provision. Direct user-representation through proactive engagement and co-design approaches may begin to determine the most appropriate models and format of bereavement care for ethnic minority communities to inform service design and delivery.

Project description:BackgroundAn unmet medical need exists for many oncology patients who cannot be treated satisfactorily by available therapeutic options. Early access provision (EAP) is endorsed by competent authorities to improve patient access to innovative medicinal products (InMPs). This paper determined awareness and understanding among practicing physicians of integrated EAP protocols, and of the procedures involved in EAP applications for oncology trials prior to marketing authorization.MethodsAn on-line, fully anonymous survey reaching out to more than 3,258 physicians (including practicing oncologists) was initiated between November 2020 - January 2021. Participants were questioned about their knowledge and understanding of EAP and the decision processes involved, level of experience, interest for further educational activities and opportunities to improve the process, both in general and specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. The frequency of EAP protocols for oncology InMPs was identified by a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials registers.ResultsSurvey results (75% oncologists) indicated 75% of respondents were 'very comfortable' or 'comfortable' with using EAP for their patients, but only 54.5% correctly answered the specific knowledge-based question related to the EAP definition. For 56% of respondents, experience with EAP in daily practice was very limited. Two-thirds indicated an average or lower level of understanding about the application process and regulatory requirements involved (65.2% and 66.0%, respectively). Knowledge on data collection and serious adverse event reporting under EAP was lower at 57.8% and 50.5% of respondents, respectively. Awareness of physician responsibilities was high in 59.7% of respondents, but fewer understood roles and responsibilities of manufacturing companies (31.2%). Most indicated they would consider clinical efficacy and safety data from comparative phase III randomized controlled trials as of high importance to support their decision to apply for EAP (93.4% and 86.8%, respectively). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of respondents highlighted the need to improve and adapt EAP with regard to the application process and documentation (83.8%), InMP supply and logistics (88.4), and safety reporting process (78.0%). Of identified oncology trials with a ClinicalTrials.gov protocol, only 149 (0.4%) included EAP, and 23 used the data to receive a marketing authorization during the period Jan 2015 to December 2020. Of oncology trials with a EudraCT protocol, only 21 (0.23%) included EAP, of which 6 were used to receive a conditional or full marketing authorisation over the same period.ConclusionUse of EAP in daily practice remains limited. Challenges posed by the EAP process, together with a lack of education on this topic, might contribute to its under-utilization and influence access of oncology patients to care. Continuous educational efforts from different stakeholders are required to better inform and support practicing oncologists during the EAP application process and regulatory framework follow up. Education should also be provided on EAP roles and responsibilities, monitoring, and potential adaptations when faced with specific challenges, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundAchieving global targets of adherence to treatment, retention in care, and treatment success remains a challenge. Health system investment to make antiretroviral therapy services more responsive to patients' needs and values could address these impediments. Appropriate resource allocation to implement differentiated HIV treatment services demands research evidence. This study aimed to provide an overview of the patients' preferences for antiretroviral therapy service delivery features.MethodsElectronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL) and search engines (Google and Google Scholar) were searched. This review has followed a convergent segregated approach to synthesis and integration. Data from the included studies were systematically extracted, tabulated, and summarised in a narrative review. Studies that analysed preferences for antiretroviral therapy regardless of the method used and published in the English language in any year across the world and HIV positive clients who were 15 years and above on 4th February 2021 were included for this review. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. A thematic synthesis of the data from the findings section of the main body of the qualitative study was undertaken. ATLAS.ti software version 7 was used for qualitative synthesis.ResultsFrom the 1054 retrieved studies, only 23 studies (16 quantitative, three qualitative, and four mixed-methods) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median number of attributes used in all included quantitative studies was 6 (Inter Quartile Range 3). In this review, no study has fulfilled the respective criteria in the methodological quality assessment. In the quantitative synthesis, the majority of participants more valued the outcome, whereas, in the qualitative synthesis, participants preferred more the structure aspect of antiretroviral therapy service. The thematic analysis produced 17 themes, of which ten themes were related to structure, three to process, and four to outcome dimension of Donabedian's quality of care model. The findings from individual quantitative and qualitative syntheses complement each other.ConclusionsIn this review, participants' value for antiretroviral therapy service characteristics varied across included studies. Priorities and values of people living with HIV should be incorporated in the policy, practice, research, and development efforts to improve the quality of antiretroviral therapy service hence avoid poor patient outcomes.

Project description:This paper analyses the occurrence of governance innovations for forest ecosystem service (FES) provision in the forestry sector in Europe and the factors that influence innovation development. Based on a European-wide online survey, public and private forest owners and managers representing different property sizes indicate what type of governance innovation activities they engage in, and why. To investigate forestry innovations as systems, the analysis focuses on biophysical, social and technical factors influencing innovation development. The results of our exploratory quantitative analysis show that most innovation activities identified are largely oriented towards biomass production. Accordingly, most forest owners implement efficiency-driven optimisation strategies for forest management and technological improvement for provisioning service supply, to generate income. In contrast, the provision of regulating and cultural services is not yet a prominent part of forestry innovation activities.Reasons are rooted in a market-oriented economic rationale focusing on timber production, a lack of financial resources to compensate for other FES provisions or institutions to provide backup and security to forest owners and managers for engaging in innovation development. Given that the provision of a wide range of FES is a politically well-established objective for forest management in Europe, a strategy is needed that helps to align actors and sectors for supporting and co-financing related forest management approaches and business models. The current revision of the forest related policy framework on EU level under the EU Green deal poses a window of opportunity for better fostering novel governance approaches for more sustainable FES provision. Highlights • Sustainable provision of FES require a system- and innovation-based perspective.• Most innovation activities are characterised by optimisation strategies for biomass provision.• Lacking resources and institutions prevent foresters to engage in innovation activities.• New forms of communication, cooperation and financing are needed for providing non-wood FES.• Current revisions of EU policy frameworks pose possibilities for novel forms of FES governance.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review to address the following key questions: (1) what interventions have been successful in improving access for veterans with reduced health care access? (2) Have interventions that have improved health care access led to improvements in process and clinical outcomes?Data sourcesOVID MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO.Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventionsEnglish language articles published in peer-reviewed journals from 1990 to June 2010. All interventions designed to improve access to health care for US veterans that reported the impact of the intervention on perceived (e.g., satisfaction with access) or objective (e.g., travel time, wait time) access were included. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Investigators abstracted data on study design, study quality, intervention, and impact of the intervention on access, process outcomes, and clinical outcomes.ResultsNineteen articles (16 unique studies) met the inclusion criteria. While there were a small number of studies in support of any one intervention, all showed a positive impact on either perceived or objective measures of access. Implementation of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (n = 5 articles), use of Telemedicine (n = 5 articles), and Primary Care Mental Health Integration (n = 6 articles) improved access. All 16 unique studies reported process outcomes, most often satisfaction with care and utilization. Four studies reported clinical outcomes; three found no differences.LimitationsIncluded studies were largely of poor to fair methodological quality.Conclusions and implications of key findingsInterventions can improve access to health care for veterans. Increased access was consistently linked to increased primary care utilization. There was a lack of data regarding the link between access and clinical outcomes; however, the limited data suggest that increased access may not improve clinical outcomes. Future research should focus on the quality and appropriateness of care and clinical outcomes.

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic led to a dramatic increase in telemedicine use for direct patient care. Inequities in device/internet access can limit the extent to which patients can engage with telemedicine care and exacerbate health disparities. In this review, we examined existing literature on interventions designed to improve patient telemedicine access by providing digital devices including tablets, smartphones, and computers and/or internet connectivity.MethodsIn this systematic scoping review, we searched four databases for peer-reviewed studies published 1/1/2000-10/19/2021 that described healthcare interventions that provided patients with devices and/or internet connectivity and reported outcomes related to telemedicine access and/or usage. Data extraction elements included: study population, setting, intervention design, details on device/connectivity provision, and outcomes evaluated.ResultsTwelve articles reflecting seven unique interventions met inclusion criteria. Ten articles examined telemedicine utilization (83%) and reported improved patient show rates/utilization. Seven articles examined patient satisfaction with the interventions (58%) and reported positive experiences. Fewer articles examined health outcomes (17%; 2/12) though these also demonstrated positive results. Across included studies, study quality was low. There were no controlled trials, and the most rigorously designed studies (n = 4) involved pre/post-intervention assessments.DiscussionFindings from this review indicate that providing material technology supports to patients can facilitate telemedicine access, is acceptable to patients and clinicians, and can contribute to improved health outcomes. The low number and quality of existing studies limits the strength of this evidence. Future research should explore interventions that can increase equitable access to telemedicine services.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=183442, identifier, PROSPERO: CRD42020183442.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of recent innovations in service provision to improve access to primary care.

Background

Aims

Design of study

Setting

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Systematic review of recent innovations in service provision to improve access to primary care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets