Dataset Information

The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care--the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways Project.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

A comparison of glaucoma referral refinement schemes (GRRS) in the UK during a time period of considerable change in national policy and guidance.

Design

Retrospective multisite review.

Setting

The outcomes of clinical examinations by optometrists with a specialist interest in glaucoma (OSIs) were compared with optometrists with no specialist interest in glaucoma (non-OSIs). Data from Huntingdon and Nottingham assessed non-OSI findings, while Manchester and Gloucestershire reviewed OSI findings.

Participants

1086 patients. 434 patients were from Huntingdon, 179 from Manchester, 204 from Gloucestershire and 269 from Nottingham.

Results

The first-visit discharge rate (FVDR) for all time periods for OSIs was 14.1% compared with 36.1% from non-OSIs (difference 22%, CI 16.9% to 26.7%; p<0.001). The FVDR increased after the April 2009 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) glaucoma guidelines compared with pre-NICE, which was particularly evident when pre-NICE was compared with the current practice time period (OSIs 6.2-17.2%, difference 11%, CI -24.7% to 4.3%; p=0.18, non-OSIs 29.2-43.9%, difference 14.7%, CI -27.8% to -0.30%; p=0.03). Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) was the commonest reason for referral for OSIs and non-OSIs, 28.7% and 36.1%, respectively, of total referrals. The proportion of referrals for elevated IOP increased from 10.9% pre-NICE to 28.0% post-NICE for OSIs, and from 19% to 45.1% for non-OSIs.

Conclusions

In terms of 'demand management', OSIs can reduce FVDR of patients reviewed in secondary care; however, in terms of 'patient safety' this study also shows that overemphasis on IOP as a criterion for referral is having an adverse effect on both the non-OSIs and indeed the OSIs ability to detect glaucomatous optic nerve features. It is recommended that referral letters from non-OSIs be stratified for risk, directing high-risk patients straight to secondary care, and low-risk patients to OSIs.

SUBMITTER: Ratnarajan G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3717451 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care--the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways Project.

Ratnarajan Gokulan G Newsom Wendy W Vernon Stephen A SA Fenerty Cecilia C Henson David D Spencer Fiona F Wang Yanfang Y Harper Robert R McNaught Andrew A Collins Lisa L Parker Mike M Lawrenson John J Hudson Robyn R Khaw Peng Tee PT Wormald Richard R Garway-Heath David D Bourne Rupert R

BMJ open 20130721 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>A comparison of glaucoma referral refinement schemes (GRRS) in the UK during a time period of considerable change in national policy and guidance.<h4>Design</h4>Retrospective multisite review.<h4>Setting</h4>The outcomes of clinical examinations by optometrists with a specialist interest in glaucoma (OSIs) were compared with optometrists with no specialist interest in glaucoma (non-OSIs). Data from Huntingdon and Nottingham assessed non-OSI findings, while Manchester and Glouc ...[more]

PMID: 23878172

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe Diabetes Prevention Program, an intensive lifestyle change program, effectively reduces the risk of progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes but is underutilized. An implementation study using formative research was undertaken to increase Diabetes Prevention Program referrals at a primary care clinic.Study designA pragmatic, cluster randomized, mixed-methods study.Setting/particpantsClusters were teams of primary care clinicians from 2 primary care clinics. The 3 intervention clusters had 8-11 clinicians, and the 3 control clusters had 7-20 clinicians.InterventionImplementation activities occurred from December 2017 to February 2019. The activities included targeted clinician education, a prediabetes clinician champion, and a custom electronic health record report identifying patients with prediabetes.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was referral of patients with prediabetes to the institutional Diabetes Prevention Program. Study data, including patient demographic and clinical variables, came from electronic health record. Interviews with clinicians evaluated the implementation strategies. Generalized estimating equation analyses that accounted for multiple levels of correlation and interview content analysis occurred in 2019.ResultsStudy clinicians cared for 2,992 patients with a prediabetes diagnosis or HbA1c indicative of prediabetes (5.7%-6.4%). Clinicians in the intervention clusters referred 6.9% (87 of 1,262) of patients with prediabetes to the Diabetes Prevention Program and those in the control clusters referred 1.5% (26 of 1,730). When adjusted for patient age, sex, race, HbA1c value, HbA1c test location, and insurance type, intervention clinicians had 3.85 (95% CI=0.40, 36.78) greater odds of referring a patient with prediabetes to the Diabetes Prevention Program. The 11 interviewed intervention clinicians had mixed opinions about the utility of the interventions, reporting the prediabetes clinic champion (n=7, 64%) and educational presentations (n=6, 55%) as most helpful.ConclusionsIntervention clinicians were more likely to make Diabetes Prevention Program referrals; however, the study lacked power to achieve statistical significance. Clinician interviews suggested that intervention components that triggered Diabetes Prevention Program referrals varied among clinicians.

Project description:BackgroundThis paper describes a methodology for comparing the effects of an eduentertainment strategy involving a music concert, and a participatory class experience involving the description and making of a healthy breakfast, as educational vehicles for delivering obesity-preventing/cardiovascular health messages to children aged 7-8 years.Methods/designThis study will involve a cluster-randomised trial with blinded assessment. The study subjects will be children aged 7-8 years of both sexes attending public primary schools in the Madrid Region. The participating schools (n=30) will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: 1) Group MC, in which the children will attend a music concert that delivers obesity-preventing/cardiovascular health messages, or 2) Group HB, in which the children will attend a participatory class providing the same information but involving the description and making of a healthy breakfast. The main outcome measured will be the increase in the number of correct answers scored on a knowledge questionnaire and in an attitudes test administered before and after the above interventions. The secondary outcome recorded will be the reduction in BMI percentile among children deemed overweight/obese prior to the interventions. The required sample size (number of children) was calculated for a comparison of proportions with an α of 0.05 and a β of 0.20, assuming that the Group MC subjects would show values for the measured variables at least 10% higher than those recorded for the subjects of Group HB. Corrections were made for the design effect and assuming a loss to follow-up of 10%. The maximum sample size required will be 2107 children. Data will be analysed using summary measurements for each cluster, both for making estimates and for hypothesis testing. All analyses will be made on an intention-to-treat basis.DiscussionThe intervention providing the best results could be recommended as part of health education for young schoolchildren.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT01418872.

Project description:BackgroundGiven persistent gaps in coordination of care for medically complex primary care patients, efficient strategies are needed to promote better care coordination.ObjectiveThe Coordination Toolkit and Coaching project compared two toolkit-based strategies of differing intensity to improve care coordination at VA primary care clinics.DesignMulti-site, cluster-randomized QI initiative.ParticipantsTwelve VA primary care clinics matched in 6 pairs.InterventionsWe used a computer-generated allocation sequence to randomize clinics within each pair to two implementation strategies. Active control clinics received an online toolkit with evidence-based tools and QI coaching manual. Intervention clinics received the online toolkit plus weekly assistance from a distance coach for 12 months.Main measuresWe quantified patient experience of general care coordination using the Health Care System Hassles Scale (primary outcome) mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to serial cross-sectional patient samples. We measured the difference-in-difference (DiD) in clinic-level-predicted mean counts of hassles between coached and non-coached clinics, adjusting for clustering and patient characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and bootstrapping to obtain 95% confidence intervals. Other measures included care coordination QI projects attempted, tools adopted, and patient-reported exposure to projects.Key resultsN = 2,484 (49%) patients completed baseline surveys and 2,481 (48%) completed follow-ups. Six coached clinics versus five non-coached clinics attempted QI projects. All coached clinics versus two non-coached clinics attempted more than one project or projects that were multifaceted (i.e., involving multiple components addressing a common goal). Five coached versus three non-coached clinics used 1-2 toolkit tools. Both the coached and non-coached clinics experienced pre-post reductions in hassle counts over the study period (- 0.42 (- 0.76, - 0.08) non-coached; - 0.40 (- 0.75, - 0.06) coached). However, the DiD (0.02 (- 0.47, 0.50)) was not statistically significant; coaching did not improve patient experience of care coordination relative to the toolkit alone.ConclusionAlthough coached clinics attempted more or more complex QI projects and used more tools than non-coached clinics, coaching provided no additional benefit versus the online toolkit alone in patient-reported outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03063294.

Dataset Information

The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care--the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways Project.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care--the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways Project.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets