Creation of a core competency framework for clinical informatics: From genesis to maintaining relevance.

BACKGROUND: The United Kingdom's Faculty of Clinical Informatics (FCI) embarked on the creation of a core competency framework in response to the need to provide support to those working in clinical and health and social care that also hold informatics roles. METHODS: The work spanned several phases and utilised a mixed-methods approach consisting of interviews, surveys, job listing analysis, expert discussions and a systematic literature review. The work presented here explores the lessons learnt from the process of creating the framework and the next steps for ensuring its use and continued relevance. RESULTS: A core competency framework was generated with six domains, 36 sub-domains and 111 individual competency statements. A discussion and eight key recommendations are presented based on the development of this framework. CONCLUSION: Definition of the target audience is important to manage scope and define purpose. The use of robust reproducible methods helps to establish a strong evidence base. Competency frameworks should be living documents, ideally presented in an accessible digital form to enable easy use and embedding in other tools (e.g. for accreditation or to search competencies).

Development of a core competency framework for clinical informatics.

OBJECTIVES: Until this point there was no national core competency framework for clinical informatics in the UK. We report on the final two iterations of work carried out in the formation of a national core competency framework. This follows an initial systematic literature review of existing skills and competencies and a job listing analysis.MethodsAn iterative approach was applied to framework development. Using a mixed-methods design we carried out semi-structured interviews with participants involved in informatics (n=15). The framework was updated based on the interview findings and was subsequently distributed as part of a bespoke online digital survey for wider participation (n=87). The final version of the framework is based on the findings of the survey. RESULTS: Over 102 people reviewed the framework as part of the interview or survey process. This led to a final core competency framework containing 6 primary domains with 36 subdomains containing 111 individual competencies. CONCLUSIONS: An iterative mixed-methods approach for competency development involving the target community was appropriate for development of the competency framework. There is some contention around the depth of technical competencies required. Care is also needed to avoid professional burnout, as clinicians and healthcare practitioners already have clinical competencies to maintain. Therefore, how the framework is applied in practice and how practitioners meet the competencies requires careful consideration.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of opportunistic screening and stepped care interventions for older hazardous alcohol users in primary care (AESOPS) - a randomised control trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: There is a wealth of evidence regarding the detrimental impact of excessive alcohol consumption. In older populations excessive alcohol consumption is associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease, hypertension, stroke and a range of cancers. Alcohol consumption is also associated with an increased risk of falls, early onset of dementia and other cognitive deficits. Physiological changes that occur as part of the ageing process mean that older people experience alcohol related problems at lower consumption levels. There is a strong evidence base for the effectiveness of brief psychosocial interventions in reducing alcohol consumption in populations identified opportunistically in primary care settings. Stepped care interventions involve the delivery of more intensive interventions only to those in the population who fail to respond to less intensive interventions and provide a potentially resource efficient means of meeting the needs of this population. METHODS/DESIGN: The study design is a pragmatic prospective multi-centre two arm randomised controlled trial. The primary hypothesis is that stepped care interventions for older hazardous alcohol users reduce alcohol consumption compared with a minimal intervention at 12 months post randomisation. Potential participants are identified using the AUDIT questionnaire. Eligible and consenting participants are randomised with equal probability to either a minimal intervention or a three step treatment approach. The step treatment approach incorporates as step 1 behavioural change counselling, step 2 three sessions of motivational enhancement therapy and step 3 referral to specialist services. The primary outcome is measured using average standard drinks per day and secondary outcome measures include the Drinking Problems Index, health related quality of life and health utility. The study incorporates a comprehensive economic analysis to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of the interventions. DISCUSSION: The paper presents a protocol for the first pragmatic randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stepped care interventions for older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN52557360.

Systematic review of scope and quality of electronic patient record data in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review measures of data quality in electronic patient records (EPRs) in primary care. DESIGN: Systematic review of English language publications, 1980-2001. DATA SOURCES: Bibliographic searches of medical databases, specialist medical informatics databases, conference proceedings, and institutional contacts. STUDY SELECTION: Studies selected according to a predefined framework for categorising review papers. DATA EXTRACTION: Reference standards and measurements used to judge quality. RESULTS: Bibliographic searches identified 4589 publications. After primary exclusions 174 articles were classified, 52 of which met the inclusion criteria for review. Selected studies were primarily descriptive surveys. Variability in methods prevented meta-analysis of results. Forty eight publications were concerned with diagnostic data, 37 studies measured data quality, and 15 scoped EPR quality. Reliability of data was assessed with rate comparison. Measures of sensitivity were highly dependent on the element of EPR data being investigated, while the positive predictive value was consistently high, indicating good validity. Prescribing data were generally of better quality than diagnostic or lifestyle data. CONCLUSION: The lack of standardised methods for assessment of quality of data in electronic patient records makes it difficult to compare results between studies. Studies should present data quality measures with clear numerators, denominators, and confidence intervals. Ambiguous terms such as "accuracy" should be avoided unless precisely defined.

Barriers to developing the nurse practitioner role in primary care-the GP perspective.

BACKGROUND: Opportunities exist to develop an advanced nursing role in general practice and there is growing evidence that appropriately trained nurses can reduce cost and GP workload without compromising quality of care or patient satisfaction. Despite the shortfall of doctors entering British general practice and the difficulties doctors report in managing an increasing workload in primary care, few British practices have chosen to adopt this potential solution. An exploration of the barriers to the development of a nurse practitioner role is therefore timely. OBJECTIVE: To explore the views of British GPs regarding their attitudes towards developing an advanced nursing role in general practice. METHODS: A focus group study of GPs from four general practices in Yorkshire selected purposefully to represent a spectrum of experience in working with different nursing roles in general practice. Each focus group consisted of between 6 and 8 participants. A structured framework was used to elicit views, the group meetings were recorded and subjected to content analysis by two independent assessors. Inter-rater reliability was high (K = 0.921; 95% confidence limits 0.86-0.98). RESULTS: The study highlighted significant concerns by GPs with regard to the nurse practitioner role in general practice. Four themes were identified that may be impeding the development of advanced nursing roles in general practice. These are concerned with threats to GP status, including job and financial security, nursing capabilities, including training and scope of responsibility, and structural and organizational barriers. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to acknowledge GP concerns and encourage a more widespread debate about the appropriate mix of skills required in primary care. Joint educational events and the development of GP preceptorship may help to develop a greater understanding of the potential value of advanced nursing roles in general practice.