Dataset Information

Do virtual renal clinics improve access to kidney care? A preliminary impact evaluation of a virtual clinic in East London.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Early identification of people with CKD in primary care, particularly those with risk factors such as diabetes and hypertension, enables proactive management and referral to specialist services for progressive disease. The 2019 NHS Long Term Plan endorses the development of digitally-enabled services to replace the 'unsustainable' growth of the traditional out-patient model of care.Shared views of the complete health data available in the primary care electronic health record (EHR) can bridge the divide between primary and secondary care, and offers a practical solution to widen timely access to specialist advice. METHODS:We describe an innovative community kidney service based in the renal department at Barts Health NHS Trust and four local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in east London. An impact evaluation of the changes in service delivery used quantitative data from the virtual CKD clinic and from the primary care electronic health records (EHR) of 166 participating practices. Survey and interview data from health professionals were used to explore changes to working practices. RESULTS:Prior to the start of the service the general nephrology referral rate was 0.8/1000 GP registered population, this rose to 2.5/1000 registered patients by the second year of the service. The majority (>?80%) did not require a traditional outpatient appointment, but could be managed with written advice for the referring clinician. The wait for specialist advice fell from 64 to 6?days. General practitioners (GPs) had positive views of the service, valuing the rapid response to clinical questions and improved access for patients unable to travel to clinic. They also reported improved confidence in managing CKD, and high levels of patient satisfaction. Nephrologists valued seeing the entire primary care record but reported concerns about the volume of referrals and changes to working practices. CONCLUSIONS:'Virtual' specialist services using shared access to the complete primary care EHR are feasible and can expand capacity to deliver timely advice. To use both specialist and generalist expertise efficiently these services require support from community interventions which engage primary care clinicians in a data driven programme of service improvement.

SUBMITTER: Hull SA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6954525 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do virtual renal clinics improve access to kidney care? A preliminary impact evaluation of a virtual clinic in East London.

Hull S A SA Rajabzadeh V V Thomas N N Hoong S S Dreyer G G Rainey H H Ashman N N

BMC nephrology 20200110 1

<h4>Background</h4>Early identification of people with CKD in primary care, particularly those with risk factors such as diabetes and hypertension, enables proactive management and referral to specialist services for progressive disease. The 2019 NHS Long Term Plan endorses the development of digitally-enabled services to replace the 'unsustainable' growth of the traditional out-patient model of care.Shared views of the complete health data available in the primary care electronic health record ...[more]

PMID: 31924178

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThis paper examines one of the NHS England Pioneers programmes of Integrated Care, which was implemented in three localities in East London, covering the area served by one of the largest hospital groups in the UK and bringing together commissioners, providers and local authorities. The partners agreed to build a model of integrated care that focused on the whole person. This qualitative and participatory evaluation looked at how an ambitious vision translated into the delivery of integrated care on the ground. The study explored the micro-mechanisms of integrated care relationships based on the experience of health and social care professionals working in acute and community care settings.MethodsWe employed a participatory approach, the Researcher in Residence model, whereby the researcher was embedded in the organisations she evaluated and worked alongside managers and clinicians to build collaboration across the full range of stakeholders, develop shared learning, and find common ground through competing interests, while trying to address power imbalances. A number of complementary qualitative methods of data generation were used, including documentary analysis, participant observations, semi-structured interviews, and coproduction workshops with frontline health and social care professionals to interpret the data and develop recommendations.ResultsOur fieldwork exposed persistent organisational fragmentation, despite the dominant rhetoric of integration and efforts to build a shared vision at senior governance levels. The evaluation identified several important themes, including: a growing barrier between acute and community services; a persisting difficulty experienced by health and social care staff in working together because of professional and cultural differences, as well as conflicting organisational priorities and guidelines; and a lack of capacity and support to deliver a genuine multidisciplinary approach in practice, despite the ethos of multiagency being embraced widely.DiscussionBy focusing on professionals' working routines, we detailed how and why action taken by organisational leaders failed to have tangible impact. The inability to align organisational priorities and guidelines on the ground, as well as a failure to acknowledge the impact of structural incentives for organisations to compete at the expense of cooperation, in a context of limited financial and human resources, acted as barriers to more coordinated working. Within an environment of continuous reconfigurations, staff were often confused about the functions of new services and did not feel they had influence on change processes. Investing in a genuine bottom-up approach could ensure that the range of activities needed to generate system-wide cultural transformation reflect the capacity of the organisations and systems and address genuine local needs.LimitationsThe authors acknowledge several limitations of this study, including the focus on one geographical area, East London, and the timing of the evaluation, with several new interventions and programmes introduced more or less simultaneously. Some of the intermediate care services under evaluation were still at pilot stage and some teams were undergoing new reconfigurations, reflecting the fast-pace of change of the past decade. This created confusion at times, for instance when discussing specific roles and activities with participants. We tried to address some of these challenges by organising several workshops with different teams to co-interpret and discuss the findings.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe and evaluate a secure video call system combined with a suite of iPad vision testing apps to improve access to vision rehabilitation assessment for inpatients.DesignRetrospective.SettingTwo acute care inpatient rehabilitation hospitals and 1 long-term acute care (LTAC) hospital.ParticipantsRecords of inpatients seen by the vision service.InterventionsRecords from a 1-year telemedicine pilot performed at acute rehabilitation (AR) hospital 1 and then expanded to AR hospital 2 and LTAC hospital during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were reviewed. In the virtual visits, an occupational therapist measured the patients' vision with the iPad applications and forwarded results to the off-site Doctor of Optometry (OD) for review prior to a video visit. The OD provided diagnosis and education, press-on prism application supervision, strategies and modifications, and follow-up recommendations. Providers completed the telehealth usability questionnaire (10-point scale).Main outcome measuresVision examinations per month at AR hospital 1 before and with telemedicine.ResultsWith telemedicine at AR hospital 1, mean visits per month significantly increased from 10.7±5 to 14.9±5 (P=.002). Prism was trialed in 40% of cases of which 83% were successful, similar to previously reported in-person success rates. COVID-19 caused only a marginal decrease in visits per month (P=.08) at AR1, whereas the site without an established program (AR hospital 2) had a 3-4 week gap in care while the program was initiated. Cases at the LTAC hospital tended to be more complex and difficult to manage virtually. The telehealth usability questionnaire median category scores were 7 for Ease of Use, 8 for Interface Quality, 6 for Reliability, and 9 for Satisfaction and Future Use.ConclusionsThe virtual vision clinic process improved inpatient access to eye and visual neurorehabilitation assessment before and during the COVID-19 quarantine and was well accepted by providers and patients.

Dataset Information

Do virtual renal clinics improve access to kidney care? A preliminary impact evaluation of a virtual clinic in East London.

Publications

Do virtual renal clinics improve access to kidney care? A preliminary impact evaluation of a virtual clinic in East London.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets