Which features of primary care affect unscheduled secondary care use? A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Huntley A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4039790 | biostudies-other | 2014 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Which features of primary care affect unscheduled secondary care use? A systematic review.
Huntley Alyson A Lasserson Daniel D Wye Lesley L Morris Richard R Checkland Kath K England Helen H Salisbury Chris C Purdy Sarah S
BMJ open 20140523 5
<h4>Objectives</h4>To conduct a systematic review to identify studies that describe factors and interventions at primary care practice level that impact on levels of utilisation of unscheduled secondary care.<h4>Setting</h4>Observational studies at primary care practice level.<h4>Participants</h4>Studies included people of any age of either sex living in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries with any health condition.<h4>Primary and secondary outcome measures</h ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTo receive the best care, people share their health data (HD) with their health practitioners (known as sharing HD for primary purposes). However, during the past two decades, sharing for other (i.e., secondary) purposes has become of great importance in numerous fields, including public health, personalized medicine, research, and development. We aimed to conduct the first comprehensive overview of all studies that investigated people's HD sharing attitudes-along with associated barriers/motivators and significant influencing factors-for all data types and across both primary and secondary uses.MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL for relevant studies published in English between database inception and February 28, 2023, using a predefined set of keywords. Studies were included, regardless of their design, if they reported outcomes related to attitudes towards sharing HD. We extracted key data from the included studies, including the type of HD involved and findings related to: HD sharing attitudes (either in general or depending on type of data/user); barriers/motivators/benefits/concerns of the study participants; and sociodemographic and other variables that could impact HD sharing behaviour. The qualitative synthesis was conducted by dividing the studies according to the data type (resulting in five subgroups) as well as the purpose the data sharing was focused on (primary, secondary or both). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of non-randomised studies. This work was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023413822.FindingsOf 2109 studies identified through our search, 116 were included in the qualitative synthesis, yielding a total of 228,501 participants and various types of HD represented: person-generated HD (n = 17 studies and 10,771 participants), personal HD in general (n = 69 studies and 117,054 participants), Biobank data (n = 7 studies and 27,073 participants), genomic data (n = 13 studies and 54,716 participants), and miscellaneous data (n = 10 studies and 18,887 participants). The majority of studies had a moderate level of quality (83 [71.6%] of 116 studies), but varying levels of quality were observed across the included studies. Overall, studies suggest that sharing intentions for primary purposes were observed to be high regardless of data type, and it was higher than sharing intentions for secondary purposes. Sharing for secondary purposes yielded variable findings, where both the highest and the lowest intention rates were observed in the case of studies that explored sharing biobank data (98% and 10%, respectively). Several influencing factors on sharing intentions were identified, such as the type of data recipient, data, consent. Further, concerns related to data sharing that were found to be mutual for all data types included privacy, security, and data access/control, while the perceived benefits included those related to improvements in healthcare. Findings regarding attitudes towards sharing varied significantly across sociodemographic factors and depended on data type and type of use. In most cases, these findings were derived from single studies and therefore warrant confirmations from additional studies.InterpretationSharing health data is a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (the type of health data, the intended use, the data recipient, among others) and these insights could be used to overcome barriers, address people's concerns, and focus on spreading awareness about the data sharing process and benefits.FundingNone.
| S-EPMC10963197 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) benefits patients with primary immuno deficiency (PID) originating from the innate or polygenic defects in the immune system. However, evidence supporting their therapeutic role is not as explicit in secondary immuno deficiency (SID) resulting from the treatment of haematological malignancies.ObjectivesThis study aimed to (1) create a dataset of relevant research papers, which explore the use of IgRT in SID for analysis, (2) assess the risk of bias within this dataset and (3) study the characteristics of these papers.DesignThis systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. In addition to the risk of bias, the study characteristics explored in this article included study design, study geographical location and year of publication.Data sources and methodsTo identify studies relevant to the research question, EMBASE and PubMed databases were searched. The Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) framework was used to assess study quality. Risk of bias and quality of studies were assessed in accordance with the study design. As one model was not appropriate to assess bias in all articles, several tools were used.ResultsA total of 43 studies were identified from the literature search as relevant to the research objective. The most common study design was a retrospective case-control cohort study (n = 16/43), and randomised trials were among the least commonly used approaches (n = 1). Research in this area is occurring around the globe including the United States (n = 7), Italy (n = 7), China, India, Japan and throughout Europe. The annual number of papers in this area has varied from 2012 (n = 1) to 2021 (n = 7). The studies in this article demonstrated a varied risk of bias, with 9 of the 20 cohort studies scoring less than 5 out of 9 stars.ConclusionsRandomised controlled trials are less frequently used to assess access and use of immunoglobulins. More commonly, a retrospective case-control cohort study was used which correlates with the higher risk of bias seen in the studies in this article. Most of the research concerning immunoglobulin use and access occurs in higher-income countries.
| S-EPMC10576927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBoth incidence of breast cancer and survival have increased in recent years and there is a need to review follow up strategies. This study aims to assess the evidence for benefits of follow-up in different settings for women who have had treatment for early breast cancer.MethodA systematic review to identify key criteria for follow up and then address research questions. Key criteria were: 1) Risk of second breast cancer over time - incidence compared to general population. 2) Incidence and method of detection of local recurrence and second ipsi and contra-lateral breast cancer. 3) Level 1-4 evidence of the benefits of hospital or alternative setting follow-up for survival and well-being. Data sources to identify criteria were MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PSYCHINFO, ZETOC, Health Management Information Consortium, Science Direct. For the systematic review to address research questions searches were performed using MEDLINE (2011). Studies included were population studies using cancer registry data for incidence of new cancers, cohort studies with long term follow up for recurrence and detection of new primaries and RCTs not restricted to special populations for trials of alternative follow up and lifestyle interventions.ResultsWomen who have had breast cancer have an increased risk of a second primary breast cancer for at least 20 years compared to the general population. Mammographically detected local recurrences or those detected by women themselves gave better survival than those detected by clinical examination. Follow up in alternative settings to the specialist clinic is acceptable to women but trials are underpowered for survival.ConclusionsLong term support, surveillance mammography and fast access to medical treatment at point of need may be better than hospital based surveillance limited to five years but further large, randomised controlled trials are needed.
| S-EPMC3502561 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper examines the causal impact of retirement on preventive care use by focusing on breast cancer screening. It contributes to a better understanding of the puzzling results in the literature reporting mixed effects on health care consumption at retirement. We use five waves of data from the Eurobarometer surveys conducted between 1996 and 2006, covering 25 different European countries. We address the endogeneity of retirement by using age thresholds for pension eligibility as instrumental variables in a bivariate probit model. We find that retirement reduces mammography use and other secondary preventive care use. Our results suggest that health status, income, and knowledge on cancer prevention and treatment contribute little to our understanding of the effects of retirement. Instead, our evidence suggests important effect heterogeneity based on the generosity of the social health insurance system and organized screening programs.
| S-EPMC8683749 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary care-based models for Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) have been shown to reduce mortality for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and have equivalent efficacy to MAT in specialty substance treatment facilities.The objective of this study is to systematically analyze current evidence-based, primary care OUD MAT interventions and identify program structures and processes associated with improved patient outcomes in order to guide future policy and implementation in primary care settings.PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsychInfo.We included randomized controlled or quasi experimental trials and observational studies evaluating OUD treatment in primary care settings treating adult patient populations and assessed structural domains using an established systems engineering framework.We included 35 interventions (10 RCTs and 25 quasi-experimental interventions) that all tested MAT, buprenorphine or methadone, in primary care settings across 8 countries. Most included interventions used joint multi-disciplinary (specialty addiction services combined with primary care) and coordinated care by physician and non-physician provider delivery models to provide MAT. Despite large variability in reported patient outcomes, processes, and tasks/tools used, similar key design factors arose among successful programs including integrated clinical teams with support staff who were often advanced practice clinicians (nurses and pharmacists) as clinical care managers, incorporating patient "agreements," and using home inductions to make treatment more convenient for patients and providers.The findings suggest that multidisciplinary and coordinated care delivery models are an effective strategy to implement OUD treatment and increase MAT access in primary care, but research directly comparing specific structures and processes of care models is still needed.
| S-EPMC5645096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn secondary care, antimicrobial use (AMU) must be monitored to reduce the risk of antimicrobial resistance and infection-related complications. However, there is variation in how hospitals address this challenge, partly driven by each site's level of digital maturity, expertise and resources available. This systematic review investigated approaches to measuring AMU to explore how these structural differences may present barriers to engagement with AMU surveillance.MethodsWe searched four digital databases and the websites of relevant organizations for studies in high-income, inpatient hospital settings that estimated AMU in adults. Excluded studies focused exclusively on antiviral or antifungal therapies. Data were extracted data on 12 fields (study description, data sources, data extraction methods and professionals involved in surveillance). Proportions were estimated with 95% CIs.ResultsWe identified 145 reports of antimicrobial surveillance from Europe (63), North America (53), Oceania (14), Asia (13) and across more than continent (2) between 1977 and 2018. Of 145 studies, 47 carried out surveillance based on digital data sources. In regions with access to electronic patient records, 26/47 studies employed manual methods to extract the data. The majority of identified professionals involved in these studies were clinically trained (87/93).ConclusionsEven in regions with access to electronic datasets, hospitals rely on manual data extraction for this work. Data extraction is undertaken by healthcare professionals, who may have conflicting priorities. Reducing barriers to engagement in AMU surveillance requires investment in methods, resources and training so that hospitals can extract and analyse data already contained within electronic patient records.
| S-EPMC8283733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary care settings are uniquely positioned to reach individuals at risk of alcohol use disorder through technology-delivered behavioral health interventions. Despite emerging effectiveness data, few efforts have been made to summarize the collective findings from these delivery approaches. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to review recent literature on the use of technology to deliver, enhance, or support the implementation of alcohol-related interventions in primary care. We focused on addressing questions related to (1) categorization or target of the intervention, (2) descriptive characteristics and context of delivery, (3) reported efficacy, and (4) factors influencing efficacy. METHODS:We conducted a comprehensive search and systematic review of completed studies at the intersection of primary care, technology, and alcohol-related problems published from January 2000 to December 2018 within EBSCO databases, ProQuest Dissertations, and Cochrane Reviews. Of 2307 initial records, 42 were included and coded independently by 2 investigators. RESULTS:Compared with the years of 2000 to 2009, published studies on technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care nearly tripled during the years of 2010 to 2018. Of the 42 included studies, 28 (64%) were randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, studies were rated on risk of bias and found to be predominantly low risk (n=18), followed by moderate risk (n=16), and high risk (n=8). Of the 24 studies with primary or secondary efficacy outcomes related to drinking and drinking-related harms, 17 (71%) reported reduced drinking or harm in all primary and secondary efficacy outcomes. Furthermore, of the 31 studies with direct comparisons with treatment as usual (TAU), 13 (42%) reported that at least half of the primary and secondary efficacy outcomes of the technology-based interventions were superior to TAU. High efficacy was associated with provider involvement and the reported use of an implementation strategy to deliver the technology-based intervention. CONCLUSIONS:Our systematic review has highlighted a pattern of growth in the number of studies evaluating technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care. Although these interventions appear to be largely beneficial in primary care, outcomes may be enhanced by provider involvement and implementation strategy use. This review enables better understanding of the typologies and efficacy of these interventions and informs recommendations for those developing and implementing technology-based alcohol interventions in primary care settings.
| S-EPMC6475823 | biostudies-other
Project description:Pneumonia results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. However, chest radiography may not be accessible in primary care setting. We aimed to evaluate clinical features and its diagnostic value to identify pneumonia among adults in primary care settings. Three academic databases were searched and included studies that assessed clinical predictors of pneumonia, adults without serious illness, have CXR and have conducted in primary care settings. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio of each index test and the pool estimates for index tests. We identified 2,397 articles, of which 13 articles were included. In our meta-analysis, clinical features with the best pooled positive likelihood ratios were respiratory rate ?20?min-1 (3.47; 1.46-7.23), temperature ?38?°C (3.21; 2.36-4.23), pulse rate >100?min-1 (2.79; 1.71-4.33), and crackles (2.42; 1.19-4.69). Laboratory testing showed highest pooled positive likelihood ratios with PCT >0.25?ng/ml (7.61; 3.28-15.1) and CRP?>?20?mg/l (3.76; 2.3-5.91). Cough, pyrexia, tachycardia, tachypnea, and crackles are limited as a single predictor for diagnosis of radiographic pneumonia among adults. Development of clinical decision rule that combine these clinical features together with molecular biomarkers may further increase overall accuracy for diagnosis of radiographic pneumonia among adults in primary care setting.
| S-EPMC6527561 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTelehealth was rapidly incorporated into primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is limited evidence on which primary care visits used telehealth.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to assess what visit types in primary care with use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic were reported; for each visit type identified in primary care, under what circumstances telehealth was suitable; and reported benefits and drawbacks of using telehealth in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis study was a systematic review using narrative synthesis. Studies were obtained from four databases (Ovid [MEDLINE], CINAHL Complete, PDQ-Evidence, and ProQuest) and gray literature (NSW Health, Royal Australian College of General Practitioners guidelines, and World Health Organization guidelines). In total, 3 independent reviewers screened studies featuring telehealth use during the COVID-19 pandemic in primary care. Levels of evidence were assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Critical appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Benefits and drawbacks of telehealth were assessed according to the National Quality Forum Telehealth Framework.ResultsA total of 19 studies, predominately cross-sectional surveys or interviews (13/19, 68%), were included. Seven primary care visit types were identified: chronic condition management (17/19, 89%), existing patients (17/19, 89%), medication management (17/19, 89%), new patients (16/19, 84%), mental health/behavioral management (15/19, 79%), post-test result follow-up (14/19, 74%), and postdischarge follow-up (7/19, 37%). Benefits and drawbacks of telehealth were reported across all visit types, with chronic condition management being one of the visits reporting the greatest use because of a pre-existing patient-provider relationship, established diagnosis, and lack of complex physical examinations. Both patients and clinicians reported benefits of telehealth, including improved convenience, focused discussions, and continuity of care despite social distancing. Reported drawbacks included technical barriers, impersonal interactions, and semi-established reimbursement models.ConclusionsTelehealth was used for different visit types during the COVID-19 pandemic in primary care, with most visits for chronic condition management, existing patients, and medication management. Further research is required to validate our findings and explore the long-term impact of hybrid models of care for different visit types in primary care.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022312202; https://tinyurl.com/5n82znf4.
| S-EPMC9745650 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite a substantial increase in the adoption of electronic medical records (EMRs) in primary health care settings, the use of advanced EMR features is limited. Several studies have identified both barriers and facilitating factors that influence primary care physicians' (PCPs) use of advanced EMR features and the maturation of their EMR use. The purpose of this study is to explore and identify the factors that impact PCPs' mature use of EMRs.MethodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook. The MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO electronic databases were searched from 1946 to June 13, 2019. Two independent reviewers screened the studies for eligibility; to be included, studies had to address factors influencing PCPs' mature use of EMRs. A narrative synthesis was conducted to collate study findings and to report on patterns identified across studies. The quality of the studies was also appraised.ResultsOf the 1893 studies identified, 14 were included in this study. Reported factors that influenced PCPs' mature use of EMRs fell into one of the following 5 categories: technology, people, organization, resources, and policy. Concerns about the EMR system's functionality, lack of physician awareness of EMR functionality, limited physician availability to learn more about EMRs, the habitual use of successfully completing clinical tasks using only basic EMR features, business-oriented organizational objectives, lack of vendor training, limited resource availability, and lack of physician readiness were reported as barriers to PCPs' mature use of EMRs. The motivation of physicians, user satisfaction, coaching and peer mentoring, EMR experience, gender, physician perception, transition planning for changes in roles and work processes, team-based care, adequate technical support and training, sharing resources, practices affiliated with an integrated delivery system, financial incentives, and policies to increase EMR use all had a favorable impact on PCPs' use of advanced EMR features.ConclusionsBy using a narrative synthesis to synthesize the evidence, we identified interrelated factors influencing the mature use of EMRs by PCPs. The findings underline the need to provide adequate training and policies that facilitate the mature use of EMRs by PCPs.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42019137526.
| S-EPMC7893965 | biostudies-literature