Dataset Information

Impact of advanced (open) access scheduling on patients with chronic diseases: an evidence-based analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The goal of advanced access scheduling is to eliminate wait times for physician visits by ensuring access to same-day appointments, regardless of urgency or health care need. The intent is to reduce delays in access, leading to improvements in clinical care and patient satisfaction, and reductions in the use of urgent care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether implementation of an advanced access scheduling system reduced other types of health service utilization and/or improved clinical measures and patient satisfaction among adults with chronic diseases. DATA SOURCES AND REVIEW METHODS: A literature search was performed on January 29, 2012, for studies published from 1946 (OVID) or 1980 (EMBASE) to January 29, 2012. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and observational studies were eligible if they evaluated advanced access implementation in adults with chronic diseases and reported health resource utilization, patient outcomes, or patient satisfaction. Results were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: One systematic review in a primary care population and 4 observational studies (5 papers) in chronic disease and/or geriatric populations were identified. The systematic review concluded that advanced access did not improve clinical outcomes, but there was no evidence of harm. Findings from the observational studies in chronic disease populations were consistent with those of the systematic review. Advanced access implementation was not consistently associated with changes in clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, or health service utilization. LIMITATIONS: All studies were retrospective: 3 studies (4 papers) included historical controls only, and 1 included contemporaneous controls. Findings were inconsistent across studies for a number of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on low to very low quality evidence, advanced access did not have a statistically (or clinically) significant impact on health service utilization among patients with diabetes and/or coronary artery disease (CAD). Very low quality evidence showed a significant reduction in the proportion of patients with diabetes and CAD admitted to hospital whose length of stay was greater than 3 days. Evidence was inconsistent for changes in clinical outcomes for patients with diabetes or CAD. Very low quality evidence showed no increase in patient satisfaction with an advanced access scheduling system.

SUBMITTER: Degani N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3796762 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of advanced (open) access scheduling on patients with chronic diseases: an evidence-based analysis.

Degani N N

Ontario health technology assessment series 20130901 7

<h4>Background</h4>The goal of advanced access scheduling is to eliminate wait times for physician visits by ensuring access to same-day appointments, regardless of urgency or health care need. The intent is to reduce delays in access, leading to improvements in clinical care and patient satisfaction, and reductions in the use of urgent care.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate whether implementation of an advanced access scheduling system reduced other types of health service utilization and/or improv ...[more]

PMID: 24133569

Similar Datasets

Project description:When designing interventions and policies to implement evidence based healthcare, tailoring strategies to the targeted individuals and organizations has been recommended. We aimed to gather insights into the ideas of a variety of people for implementing evidence-based practice for patients with chronic diseases, which were generated in five European countries.A qualitative study in five countries (Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, United Kingdom) was done, involving overall 115 individuals. A purposeful sample of four categories of stakeholders (healthcare professionals, quality improvement officers, healthcare purchasers and authorities, and health researchers) was involved in group interviews in each of the countries to generate items for improving healthcare in different chronic conditions per country: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, depression in elderly people, multi-morbidity, obesity. A disease-specific standardized list of determinants of practice in these conditions provided the starting point for these groups. The content of the suggested items was categorized in a pre-defined framework of 7 domains and specific themes in the items were identified within each domain.The 115 individuals involved in the study generated 812 items, of which 586 addressed determinants of practice. These largely mapped onto three domains: individual health professional factors, patient factors, and professional interactions. Few items addressed guideline factors, incentives and resources, capacity of organizational change, or social, political and legal factors. The relative numbers of items in the different domains were largely similar across stakeholder categories within each of the countries. The analysis identified 29 specific themes in the suggested items across countries.The type of suggestions for improving healthcare practice was largely similar across different stakeholder groups, mainly addressing healthcare professionals, patient factors and professional interactions. As this study is one of the first of its kind, it is important that more research is done on tailored implementation strategies.

Project description:Ongoing debates surrounding Open Access to the scholarly literature are multifaceted and complicated by disparate and often polarised viewpoints from engaged stakeholders. At the current stage, Open Access has become such a global issue that it is critical for all involved in scholarly publishing, including policymakers, publishers, research funders, governments, learned societies, librarians, and academic communities, to be well-informed on the history, benefits, and pitfalls of Open Access. In spite of this, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the potential pros and cons of Open Access at multiple levels. This review aims to be a resource for current knowledge on the impacts of Open Access by synthesizing important research in three major areas: academic, economic and societal. While there is clearly much scope for additional research, several key trends are identified, including a broad citation advantage for researchers who publish openly, as well as additional benefits to the non-academic dissemination of their work. The economic impact of Open Access is less well-understood, although it is clear that access to the research literature is key for innovative enterprises, and a range of governmental and non-governmental services. Furthermore, Open Access has the potential to save both publishers and research funders considerable amounts of financial resources, and can provide some economic benefits to traditionally subscription-based journals. The societal impact of Open Access is strong, in particular for advancing citizen science initiatives, and leveling the playing field for researchers in developing countries. Open Access supersedes all potential alternative modes of access to the scholarly literature through enabling unrestricted re-use, and long-term stability independent of financial constraints of traditional publishers that impede knowledge sharing. However, Open Access has the potential to become unsustainable for research communities if high-cost options are allowed to continue to prevail in a widely unregulated scholarly publishing market. Open Access remains only one of the multiple challenges that the scholarly publishing system is currently facing. Yet, it provides one foundation for increasing engagement with researchers regarding ethical standards of publishing and the broader implications of 'Open Research'.

Project description:BackgroundAs chronic cardiac and pulmonary diseases often coexist, there is a need for combined physical home-based rehabilitation programs, specifically addressing older patients with advanced disease stages.ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study is to evaluate the completion and adherence rates of an 8-week, home-based exercise program for patients with advanced cardiopulmonary disease. The secondary end points include patient satisfaction; adverse events; and program efficacy in terms of change in functional capacity, level of dyspnea, and health-related quality of life.MethodsThe participants received a goal-oriented, home-based exercise program, and they used a wrist-worn activity tracker to record their exercise sessions. Activity tracker data were made visible on a digital platform, which was also equipped with several other features such as short instruction videos on how to perform specific exercises. The participants received weekly coaching by a physiotherapist and an occupational therapist through video communication.ResultsIn all, 10 patients with advanced combined cardiopulmonary disease participated (median age 71, IQR 63-75 years), and 50% (5/10) were men. Of the 10 participants, 9 (90%) completed the 8-week program. Median adherence to the exercise prescription was 75% (IQR 37%-88%), but it declined significantly when the program was divided into 2-week periods (first 2 weeks: 86%, IQR 51%-100%, and final 2 weeks: 57%, IQR 8%-75%; P=.03). The participants were highly satisfied with the program (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire: median score 29, IQR 26-32, and Purpose-Designed Questionnaire: median score 103, IQR 92-108); however, of the 9 participants, 4 (44%) experienced technical issues. The Patient-Specific Complaints Instrument scores declined, indicating functional improvement (from median 7.5, IQR 6.1-8.9, to median 5.7, IQR 3.8-6.7; P=.01). Other program efficacy metrics showed a trend toward improvement.ConclusionsHome-based cardiopulmonary telerehabilitation for patients with severe combined cardiopulmonary disease is feasible in terms of high completion and satisfaction rates. Nevertheless, a decrease in adherence during the program was observed, and some of the participants reported difficulties with the technology, indicating the importance of the integration of behavior change techniques, using appropriate technology.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NL9182; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9182.

Project description:Background: Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines. It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter of time before all disciplines fully and relatively homogeneously implemented OA. Recent large-scale bibliometric studies show, however, that the uptake of OA differs substantially across disciplines. We aimed to answer two questions: First, how do different disciplines adopt and shape OA publishing practices? Second, what discipline-specific barriers to and potentials for OA can be identified? Methods: In a first step, we identified and synthesized relevant bibliometric studies that assessed OA prevalence and publishing patterns across disciplines. In a second step, and adopting a social shaping of technology perspective, we studied evidence on the socio-technical forces that shape OA publishing practices. We examined a variety of data sources, including, but not limited to, publisher policies and guidelines, OA mandates and policies and author surveys. Results: Over the last three decades, scholarly publishing has experienced a shift from "closed" access to OA as the proportion of scholarly literature that is openly accessible has increased continuously. Estimated OA levels for publication years after 2010 varied between 29.4% and 66%. The shift towards OA is uneven across disciplines in two respects: first, the growth of OA has been uneven across disciplines, which manifests itself in varying OA prevalence levels. Second, disciplines use different OA publishing channels to make research outputs OA. Conclusions: We conclude that historically rooted publishing practices differ in terms of their compatibility with OA, which is the reason why OA can be assumed to be a natural continuation of publishing cultures in some disciplines, whereas in other disciplines, the implementation of OA faces major barriers and would require a change of research culture.

Project description:The 2011 United Nations (UN) General Assembly Political Declaration on Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) brought NCDs to the global health agenda. Essential medicines are central to treating chronic diseases such as hypertension and diabetes. Our study aimed to quantify access to essential medicines for people with chronic conditions in five low- and middle-income countries and to evaluate how household socioeconomic status and perceptions about medicines availability and affordability influence access. We analysed data for 1867 individuals with chronic diseases from national surveys (Ghana, Jordan, Kenya, Philippines and Uganda) conducted in 2007-10 using a standard World Health Organization (WHO) methodology to measure medicines access and use. We defined individuals as having access to medicines if they reported regularly taking medicine for a diagnosed chronic disease and data collectors found a medicine indicated for that disease in their homes. We used logistic regression models accounting for the clustered survey design to investigate determinants of keeping medicines at home and predictors of access to medicines for chronic diseases. Less than half of individuals previously diagnosed with a chronic disease had access to medicines for their condition in every country, from 16% in Uganda to 49% in Jordan. Other than reporting a chronic disease, higher household socioeconomic level was the most significant predictor of having any medicines available at home. The likelihood of having access to medicines for chronic diseases was higher for those with medicines insurance coverage [highest adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.12 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.38, 7.07)] and lower for those with past history of borrowing money to pay for medicines [lowest adjusted OR 0.56 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.92)]. Our study documents poor access to essential medicines for chronic conditions in five resource-constrained settings. It highlights the importance of financial risk protection and consumer education about generic medicines in global efforts towards improving treatment of chronic diseases.

Dataset Information

Impact of advanced (open) access scheduling on patients with chronic diseases: an evidence-based analysis.

Publications

Impact of advanced (open) access scheduling on patients with chronic diseases: an evidence-based analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets