The role of primary care in service provision for people with severe mental illness in the United Kingdom.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Severe mental illness is a serious and potentially life changing set of conditions. This paper describes and analyses patient characteristics and service usage over one year of a representative cohort of people with a diagnosis of severe mental illness across England, including contacts with primary and secondary care and continuity of care.Methods and findings
Data were collected from primary care patient notes (n = 1150) by trained nurses from 64 practices in England, covering all service contacts from 1(st) April 2008 to 31st March 2009. The estimated national rate of patients seen only in primary care in the period was 31.1% (95% C.I. 27.2% to 35.3%) and the rates of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder were 56.8% (95% C.I. 52.3% to 61.2%) and 37.9% (95% C.I. 33.7% to 42.2%). In total, patients had 7,961 consultations within primary care and 1,993 contacts with mental health services (20% of the total). Unemployed individuals diagnosed more recently were more likely to have contact with secondary care. Of those seen in secondary care, 61% had at most two secondary care contacts in the period. Median annual consultation rates with GPs were lower than have been reported for previous years and were only slightly above the general population. Relational continuity in primary care was poor for 21% of patients (Modified Modified Continuity Index = <0.5), and for almost a third of new referrals to mental health services the primary care record contained no information on the referral outcome.Conclusions
Primary care is centrally involved in the care of people with serious mental illness, but primary care and cross-boundary continuity is poor for a substantial proportion. Research is needed to determine the impact of poor continuity on patient outcomes, and above all, the impact of new collaborative ways of working at the primary/secondary care interface.
SUBMITTER: Reilly S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3352919 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundStrategies are needed to better address the physical health needs of people with serious mental illness (SMI). Enhanced primary care for people with SMI has the potential to improve care of people with SMI, but evidence is lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the effect of a novel enhanced primary care model for people with SMI on service use and screening.DesignUsing North Carolina Medicaid claims data, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis comparing healthcare use and screening receipt of people with SMI newly receiving enhanced primary care to people with SMI newly receiving usual primary care. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate average differences in outcomes between the treatment and comparison groups adjusting for observed baseline characteristics.ParticipantsPeople with SMI newly receiving primary care in North Carolina.InterventionsEnhanced primary care that includes features tailored for individuals with SMI.Main measuresOutcome measures included outpatient visits, emergency department (ED) visits, inpatient stays and days, and recommended screenings 18 months after the initial primary care visit.Key resultsCompared to usual primary care, enhanced primary care was associated with an increase of 1.2 primary care visits (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 2.1) in the 18 months after the initial visit and decreases of 0.33 non-psychiatric inpatient stays (CI: - 0.49 to - 0.16) and 3.0 non-psychiatric inpatient days (CI: - 5.3 to - 0.60). Enhanced primary care had no significant effect on psychiatric service and ED use. Enhanced primary care increased the probability of glucose and HIV screening, decreased the probability of lipid screening, and had no effect on hemoglobin A1c and colorectal cancer screening.ConclusionsEnhanced primary care for people with SMI can increase receipt of some preventive screening and decrease use of non-psychiatric inpatient care compared to usual primary care.
| S-EPMC8041990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease among patients with severe mental illness in England is a major preventable contributor to premature mortality. To address this, a nurse and peer-coach delivered service (Primrose-A) was implemented in three London general practices from 2019 (implementation continued during COVID-19). This study aimed to conduct interviews with patient and staff to determine the acceptability of, and experiences with, Primrose-A.MethodsSemi-structured audio-recorded interviews with eight patients who had received Primrose-A, and 3 nurses, 1 GP, and 1 peer-coach who had delivered Primrose-A in three London-based GP surgeries were conducted. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes from the transcribed interviews.FindingsOverall, Primrose-A was viewed positively by patients and staff, with participants describing success in improving patients' mental health, isolation, motivation, and physical health. Therapeutic relationships between staff and patients, and long regular appointments were important facilitators of patient engagement and acceptance of the intervention. Several barriers to the implementation of Primrose-A were identified, including training, administrative and communication issues, burden of time and resources, and COVID-19.ConclusionsIntervention acceptability could be enhanced by providing longer-term continuity of care paired with more peer-coaching sessions to build positive relationships and facilitate sustained health behaviour change. Future implementation of Primrose-A or similar interventions should consider: (1) training sufficiency (covering physical and mental health, including addiction), (2) adequate staffing to deliver the intervention, (3) facilitation of clear communication pathways between staff, and (4) supporting administrative processes.
| S-EPMC10900648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interventions: We are assessing the impact of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) by comparing participation rates of people with and without Severe Mental Illness (SMI) and looking at health outcomes. We will be using data collected from Aug 2006 - latest available.
We are linking data using Commonwealth data (NBCSP, Medicare Benefits Schedule, Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, Australian Cancer Database & the National Death Index) to compare bowel cancer screening participation in people with SMI to those from the general population. We will additionally link these to the NSW cancer registry and hospital data to examine care pathways from diagnosis through treatment and end-of-life care.
We will also conduct a consultation with people with experience of SMI and Colorectal cancer and people with SMI in peer support roles who can provide their perspective on the barriers faced by people with SMI to gaining timely screening, diagnosis and optimal care.
These participants will be recruited from New South Wales consumer organisations and organisations with a strong focus on provision of peer support and advocacy. We will use a semi structured group interview schedule to facilitate discussion of a single focus group of 15 people. The group will consist of both people with lived experience who have direct experience of bowel cancer (n=10), as well as other people with lived experience who have supported people in this situation – as peer support workers or in other consumer advocacy/support roles (n=5). We will use this qualitative arm of the study to further develop our understanding of the quantitative findings. The consultation will also develop ideas on how to improve access to care.
Primary outcome(s): Participation rates in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program assessed using data from the NBCSP.[Person-years will be calculated from entry into the study (2006) (the date of commencement of the NBCSP) or from the year that people become eligible for screening (i.e. age 50), whichever occurs later.. This is a retrospective cohort study, so all of the outcomes have already occurred and were recorded in the administrative data. This will be assessed when we receive the data.];Colonoscopy rates assessed using data from the NBCSP [Person-years will be calculated from entry into the study (2006 the date of commencement of the NBCSP), or from the year that people become eligible for screening (i.e. age 50), whichever occurs later, until colonoscopy. This is a retrospective cohort study, so all of the outcomes have already occurred and have been recorded in the administrative data.];Cancer diagnosis using data from the Australian Cancer Database[Person-years will be calculated from entry into the study (2006 the date of commencement of the NBCSP), or from the year that people become eligible for screening (i.e. age 50), whichever occurs later, until cancer diagnosis. This is a retrospective cohort study, so all of the outcomes have already occurred and have been recorded in the administrative data.]
Study Design: Purpose: Screening;Duration: Longitudinal;Selection: Case control;Timing: Both
| 2470998 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BACKGROUND:An advance directive is a document specifying a person's preferences for treatment, should he or she lose capacity to make such decisions in the future. They have been used in end-of-life settings to direct care but should be well suited to the mental health setting. OBJECTIVES:To examine the effects of advance treatment directives for people with severe mental illness. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (February 2008), the Cochrane Library (Issue 1 2008), BIOSIS (1985 to February 2008), CINAHL (1982 to February 2008), EMBASE (1980 to February 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2008), PsycINFO (1872 to February 2008), as well as SCISEARCH and Google - Internet search engine (February 2008). We inspected relevant references and contacted first authors of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), involving adults with severe mental illness, comparing any form of advance directive with standard care for health service and clinical outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:We extracted data independently. For homogenous dichotomous data we calculated fixed-effect relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) and their 95% confidence interval again using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS:We were able to include two trials involving 321 people with severe mental illnesses. There was no significant difference in hospital admission (n=160, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 0.5 to 1.0), or number of psychiatric outpatient attendances between participants given advanced treatment directives or usual care. Similarly, no significant differences were found for compliance with treatment, self harm or number of arrests. Participants given advanced treatment directives needed less use of social workers time (n=160, 1 RCT, WMD -106.00 CI -156.2 to -55.8) than the usual care group, and violent acts were also lower in the advanced directives group (n=160, 1 RCT, RR 0.27 CI 0.1 to 0.9, NNT 8 CI 6 to 92). The number of people leaving the study early were not different between groups (n=321, 2 RCTs, RR 0.92 CI 0.6 to 1.6). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:There are too few data available to make definitive recommendations. More intensive forms of advance directive appear to show promise, but currently practice must be guided by evidence other than that derived from randomised trials. More trials are indicated to determine whether higher intensity interventions, such as joint crisis planning, have an effect on outcomes of clinical relevance.
| S-EPMC4161493 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTo estimate the potential gain in life expectancy from addressing modifiable risk factors for all-cause mortality (excluding suicide and deaths from accidents or violence) across specific serious mental illness (SMI) subgroups, namely schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders, and bipolar disorders in a Western population.MethodsWe have used relative risks from recent meta-analyses to estimate the population attribution fraction (PAF) due to specific modifiable risk factors known to be associated with all-cause mortality within SMI. The potential gain in life expectancy at birth, age 50 and age 65 years were assessed by estimating the combined effect of modifiable risk factors from different contextual levels (behavioural, healthcare, social) and accounting for the effectiveness of existing interventions tackling these factors. Projections for annual gain in life expectancy at birth during a two-decade was estimated using the Annual Percentage Change (APC) formula. The predicted estimates were based on mortality rates for year 2014-2015.ResultsBased on the effectiveness of existing interventions targeting these modifiable risk factors, we estimated potential gain in life expectancy at birth of four (bipolar disorders), six (schizoaffective disorders), or seven years (schizophrenia). The gain in life expectancy at age 50 years was three (bipolar disorders) or five (schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders) years. The projected gain in life expectancy at age 65 years was three (bipolar disorders) or four (schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders) years.ConclusionsThe implementation of existing interventions targeting modifiable risk factors could narrow the current mortality gap between the general and the SMI populations by 24% (men) to 28% (women). These projections represent ideal circumstances and without the limitation of overestimation which often comes with PAFs.
| S-EPMC7100972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIncreasing attention to palliative care for the general population has led to the development of various evidence-based or consensus-based tools and interventions. However, specific tools and interventions are needed for people with severe mental illness (SMI) who have a life-threatening illness. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the scientific evidence on tools and interventions in palliative care for this group.MethodsSystematic searches were done in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Embase databases, supplemented by reference tracking, searches on the internet with free text terms, and consultations with experts to identify relevant literature. Empirical studies with qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods designs concerning tools and interventions for use in palliative care for people with SMI were included. Methodological quality was assessed using a critical appraisal instrument for heterogeneous study designs. Stepwise study selection and the assessment of methodological quality were done independently by two review authors.ResultsFour studies were included, reporting on a total of two tools and one multi-component intervention. One study concerned a tool to identify the palliative phase in patients with SMI. This tool appeared to be usable only in people with SMI with a cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, two related studies focused on a tool to involve people with SMI in discussions about medical decisions at the end of life. This tool was assessed as feasible and usable in the target group. One other study concerned the Dutch national Care Standard for palliative care, including a multi-component intervention. The Palliative Care Standard also appeared to be feasible and usable in a mental healthcare setting, but required further tailoring to suit this specific setting. None of the included studies investigated the effects of the tools and interventions on quality of life or quality of care.ConclusionsStudies of palliative care tools and interventions for people with SMI are scarce. The existent tools and intervention need further development and should be tailored to the care needs and settings of these people. Further research is needed on the feasibility, usability and effects of tools and interventions for palliative care for people with SMI.
| S-EPMC6446277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Influenza is rarely laboratory-confirmed and the outpatient influenza burden is rarely studied due to a lack of suitable data. We used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and surveillance data from Public Health England in a linear regression model to assess the number of persons consulting UK general practitioners (GP episodes) for respiratory illness, otitis media and antibiotic prescriptions attributable to influenza during 14 seasons, 1995-2009. In CPRD we ascertained influenza vaccination status in each season and risk status (conditions associated with severe influenza outcomes). Seasonal mean estimates of influenza-attributable GP episodes in the UK were 857 996 for respiratory disease including 68 777 for otitis media, with wide inter-seasonal variability. In an average season, 2·4%/0·5% of children aged <5 years and 1·3%/0·1% of seniors aged ⩾75 years had a GP episode for respiratory illness attributed to influenza A/B. Two-thirds of influenza-attributable GP episodes were estimated to result in prescription of antibiotics. These estimates are substantially greater than those derived from clinically reported influenza-like illness in surveillance programmes. Because health service costs of influenza are largely borne in general practice, these are important findings for cost-benefit assessment of influenza vaccination programmes.
| S-EPMC4714299 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Decisions to admit high-risk postoperative patients to critical care may be affected by resource availability. We aimed to quantify adult ICU/high-dependency unit (ICU/HDU) capacity in hospitals from the UK, Australia, and New Zealand (NZ), and to identify and describe additional 'high-acuity' beds capable of managing high-risk patients outside the ICU/HDU environment. METHODS:We used a modified Delphi consensus method to design a survey that was disseminated via investigator networks in the UK, Australia, and NZ. Hospital- and ward-level data were collected, including bed numbers, tertiary services offered, presence of an emergency department, ward staffing levels, and the availability of critical care facilities. RESULTS:We received responses from 257 UK (response rate: 97.7%), 35 Australian (response rate: 32.7%), and 17 NZ (response rate: 94.4%) hospitals (total 309). Of these hospitals, 91.6% reported on-site ICU or HDU facilities. UK hospitals reported fewer critical care beds per 100 hospital beds (median=2.7) compared with Australia (median=3.7) and NZ (median=3.5). Additionally, 31.1% of hospitals reported having high-acuity beds to which high-risk patients were admitted for postoperative management, in addition to standard ICU/HDU facilities. The estimated numbers of critical care beds per 100 000 population were 9.3, 14.1, and 9.1 in the UK, Australia, and NZ, respectively. The estimated per capita high-acuity bed capacities per 100 000 population were 1.2, 3.8, and 6.4 in the UK, Australia, and NZ, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Postoperative critical care resources differ in the UK, Australia, and NZ. High-acuity beds may have developed to augment the capacity to deliver postoperative critical care.
| S-EPMC6435907 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundKnowledge translation (KT) is an effective strategy that uses the best available research evidence to bring stakeholders together to develop solutions and improve public health policy-making. Despite progress, the process of deinstitutionalization in Brazil is still undergoing consolidation, and the changes and challenges that are involved in this process are complex and necessitate evidence-informed decision-making. Accordingly, this study used KT tools to support efforts that aim to improve the care that is available to deinstitutionalized people with severe mental disorders in Brazil.MethodsWe used the Supporting Policy Relevant Reviews and Trials tools for evidence-informed health policymaking and followed eight steps: 1) capacity building; 2) identification of a priority policy issue within a Brazilian public health system; 3) meetings with policy-makers, researchers and stakeholders; 4) development of an evidence brief (EB) that addresses the problem of deinstitutionalization; 5) facilitating policy dialogue (PD); 6) the evaluation of the EB and PD; 7) post-dialogue mini-interviews; and 8) dissemination of the findings.ResultsCapacity building and meetings with key informants promoted awareness about the gap between research and practice. Local findings were used to define the problem and develop the EB. Twenty-four individuals (policy-makers, stakeholders, researchers, representatives of the civil society, and public defense) participated in the PD. They received the EB to subsidise their deliberations during the PD, which in turn were used to validate and improve the EB. The PD achieved the objective of promoting an exhaustive discussion about the problem and proposed options and improved communication and interaction among those who are involved in mental health care. The features of both the EB and PD were considered to be favorable and helpful.ConclusionsThe KT strategy helped participants understand different perspectives and values, the interpersonal tensions that exist among those who are involved in the field of mental health, and the strategies that can bridge the gap between research and policy-making. The present findings suggest that PDs can influence practice by promoting greater engagement among stakeholders who formulate or revise mental health policies.
| S-EPMC6985550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn this protocol, we outline a mixed-methods randomized feasibility trial of Brief Relaxation, Education and Trauma Healing (BREATHE) Ethiopia. BREATHE Ethiopia is a culturally and contextually adapted intervention for PTSD in participants with severe mental illness. BREATHE Ethiopia maps onto the World Health Organization's guidelines for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in low- and middle-income country primary care settings.MethodsSpecifically, this study includes a non-randomized pre-pilot (n = 5) and a randomized feasibility trial comparing BREATHE Ethiopia to Treatment as Usual (n = 40) to assess trial procedures, acceptability, and feasibility of intervention delivery, and investigate potential effectiveness and implementation. In a process evaluation, we will collect data that will be critical for a future fully randomized controlled trial, including the numbers of participants who are eligible, who consent, who engage in treatment, and who complete the assessments, as well as the feasibility and acceptability of assessments and the intervention. Qualitative data on facilitators and barriers to intervention delivery and quantitative data on provider fidelity to the intervention and participant and provider satisfaction will also be collected. Quantitative assessments at baseline, post-treatment, 1-month follow-up, and 3-month follow-up will assess change in mental health symptoms and functional impairment and hypothesized intervention mechanisms, including knowledge about PTSD, stigma, trauma-related cognitions, and physiological arousal.DiscussionFindings from this study will inform a future fully-powered randomized controlled trial, and if found to be effective, the intervention has the potential to be integrated into mental healthcare scale-up efforts in other low-resource settings.Trial registrationRegistered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04385498) first posted May 13th, 2020; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04385498?term=ethiopia&cond=PTSD&draw=2&rank=1 .
| S-EPMC8323310 | biostudies-literature