Workplace-based knowledge exchange programmes between academics, policy-makers and providers of healthcare: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Workplace-based knowledge exchange programmes (WKEPs), such as job shadowing or secondments, offer potential for health and care providers, academics, and policy-makers to foster partnerships, develop local solutions and overcome key differences in practices. Yet opportunities for exchange can be hard to find and are poorly reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To understand the views of providers, academics and policy-makers regarding WKEPs, in particular, their motivations to participate in such exchanges and the perceived barriers and facilitators to participation. METHODS: A qualitative study involving semistructured interviews with 20 healthcare providers, academics and policy-makers in England. Rapid data collection and analysis techniques were employed. Interviews formed part of a wider scoping study that mapped the characteristics and existing literature related to WKEPs. RESULTS: Interviewees reported being motivated to develop, sponsor and/or participate in WKEPs with a clear purpose and defined outcomes that could demonstrate the value of the time out of work to their organisations. Perceived barriers included competitive application processes for national fellowships, a lack of knowing how to identify with whom to undertake an exchange (varying 'tribes'), and the burdens of time, costs and administration regarding arranging exchanges. WKEPs were reported to work best where there was a perceived sense of shared purpose, long-standing relationship and trust between organisations. Facilitators included existing confidentiality agreements and/or shared professional standards, as well as funding. CONCLUSION: WKEPs were reported to be valuable experiences but required significant organisational buy-in and cooperation to arrange and sustain. To benefit emerging partnerships, such as the new integrated care systems in England, more outcomes evaluations of existing WKEPs are needed, and research focused on overcoming barriers to participation, such as time and costs.

Barriers and facilitators to clinical behaviour change by primary care practitioners: a theory-informed systematic review of reviews using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the barriers and facilitators to behaviour change by primary care practitioners (PCPs) is vital to inform the design and implementation of successful Behaviour Change Interventions (BCIs), embed evidence-based medicine into routine clinical practice, and improve quality of care and population health outcomes. METHODS: A theory-led systematic review of reviews examining barriers and facilitators to clinical behaviour change by PCPs in high-income primary care contexts using PRISMA. Embase, MEDLINE, PsychInfo, HMIC and Cochrane Library were searched. Content and framework analysis was used to map reported barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and describe emergent themes. Intervention functions and policy categories to change behaviour associated with these domains were identified using the COM-B Model and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). RESULTS: Four thousand three hundred eighty-eight reviews were identified. Nineteen were included. The average quality score was 7.5/11. Reviews infrequently used theory to structure their methods or interpret their findings. Barriers and facilitators most frequently identified as important were principally related to 'Knowledge', 'Environmental context and resources' and 'Social influences' TDF domains. These fall under the 'Capability' and 'Opportunity' domains of COM-B, and are linked with interventions related to education, training, restriction, environmental restructuring and enablement. From this, three key areas for policy change include guidelines, regulation and legislation. Factors least frequently identified as important were related to 'Motivation' and other psychological aspects of 'Capability' of COM-B. Based on this, BCW intervention functions of persuasion, incentivisation, coercion and modelling may be perceived as less relevant by PCPs to change behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs commonly perceive barriers and facilitators to behaviour change related to the 'Capability' and 'Opportunity' domains of COM-B. PCPs may lack insight into the role that 'Motivation' and aspects of psychological 'Capability' have in behaviour change and/or that research methods have been inadequate to capture their function. Future research should apply theory-based frameworks and appropriate design methods to explore these factors. With no 'one size fits all' intervention, these findings provide general, transferable insights into how to approach changing clinical behaviour by PCPs, based on their own views on the barriers and facilitators to behaviour change. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: A protocol was submitted to the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine via the Ethics and CARE form submission on 16.4.2020, ref number 21478 (available on request). The project was not registered on PROSPERO.

Exploring the training and scope of practice of GPs in England, Germany and Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To explore general practitioner (GP) training, continuing professional development, scope of practice, ethical issues and challenges in the working environment in three European countries. METHOD: Qualitative study of 35 GPs from England, Germany and Spain working in urban primary care practices. Participants were recruited using convenience and snowball sampling techniques. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed by four independent researchers adopting a thematic approach. RESULTS: Entrance to and length of GP training differ between the three countries, while continuing professional development is required in all three, although with different characteristics. Key variations in the scope of practice include whether there is a gatekeeping role, whether GPs work in multidisciplinary teams or singlehandedly, the existence of appraisal processes, and the balance between administrative and clinical tasks. However, similar challenges, including the need to adapt to an ageing population, end-of-life care, ethical dilemmas, the impact of austerity measures, limited time for patients and gaps in coordination between primary and secondary care are experienced by GPs in all three countries. CONCLUSION: Primary health care variations have strong historical roots, derived from the different national experiences and the range of clinical services delivered by GPs. There is a need for an accessible source of information for GPs themselves and those responsible for safety and quality standards of the healthcare workforce. This paper maps out the current situation before Brexit is being implemented in the UK which could see many of the current EU arrangements and legislation to assure professional mobility between the UK and the rest of Europe dismantled.

Lessons for 'large-scale' general practice provider organisations in England from other inter-organisational healthcare collaborations.

Policymakers in England are increasingly encouraging the formation of 'large-scale' general practice provider collaborations with the expectation that this will help deliver better quality services and generate economies of scale. However, solid evidence that these expectations will be met is limited. This paper reviews evidence from other inter-organisational healthcare collaborations with similarities in their development or anticipated impact to identify lessons. Medline. SSCI, Embase and HMIC database searches identified a range of initiatives which could provide transferable evidence. Iterative searching was undertaken to identify further relevant evidence. Thematic analysis was used to identify areas to consider in the development of large-scale general practice providers. Framework analysis was used to identify challenges which may affect the ability of such providers to achieve their anticipated impact. A narrative approach was used to synthesise the evidence. Trade-offs exist in 'scaling-up' between mandated and voluntary collaboration; networks versus single organisations; small versus large collaborations; and different types of governance structures in terms of sustainability and performance. While positive impact seems plausible, evidence suggests that it is not a given that clinical outcomes or patient experience will improve, nor that cost savings will be achieved as a result of increasing organisational size. Since the impact and potential unintended consequences are not yet clear, it would be advisable for policymakers to move with caution, and be informed by ongoing evaluation.

The impact of new forms of large-scale general practice provider collaborations on England's NHS: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, collaboration between general practices in England to form new provider networks and large-scale organisations has been driven largely by grassroots action among GPs. However, it is now being increasingly advocated for by national policymakers. Expectations of what scaling up general practice in England will achieve are significant. AIM: To review the evidence of the impact of new forms of large-scale general practice provider collaborations in England. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. METHOD: Embase, MEDLINE, Health Management Information Consortium, and Social Sciences Citation Index were searched for studies reporting the impact on clinical processes and outcomes, patient experience, workforce satisfaction, or costs of new forms of provider collaborations between general practices in England. RESULTS: A total of 1782 publications were screened. Five studies met the inclusion criteria and four examined the same general practice networks, limiting generalisability. Substantial financial investment was required to establish the networks and the associated interventions that were targeted at four clinical areas. Quality improvements were achieved through standardised processes, incentives at network level, information technology-enabled performance dashboards, and local network management. The fifth study of a large-scale multisite general practice organisation showed that it may be better placed to implement safety and quality processes than conventional practices. However, unintended consequences may arise, such as perceptions of disenfranchisement among staff and reductions in continuity of care. CONCLUSION: Good-quality evidence of the impacts of scaling up general practice provider organisations in England is scarce. As more general practice collaborations emerge, evaluation of their impacts will be important to understand which work, in which settings, how, and why.

Time to go global: a consultation on global health competencies for postgraduate doctors.

BACKGROUND: Globalisation is having profound impacts on health and healthcare. We solicited the views of a wide range of stakeholders in order to develop core global health competencies for postgraduate doctors. METHODS: Published literature and existing curricula informed writing of seven global health competencies for consultation. A modified policy Delphi involved an online survey and face-to-face and telephone interviews over three rounds. RESULTS: Over 250 stakeholders participated, including doctors, other health professionals, policymakers and members of the public from all continents of the world. Participants indicated that global health competence is essential for postgraduate doctors and other health professionals. Concerns were expressed about overburdening curricula and identifying what is 'essential' for whom. Conflicting perspectives emerged about the importance and relevance of different global health topics. Five core competencies were developed: (1) diversity, human rights and ethics; (2) environmental, social and economic determinants of health; (3) global epidemiology; (4) global health governance; and (5) health systems and health professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Global health can bring important perspectives to postgraduate curricula, enhancing the ability of doctors to provide quality care. These global health competencies require tailoring to meet different trainees' needs and facilitate their incorporation into curricula. Healthcare and global health are ever-changing; therefore, the competencies will need to be regularly reviewed and updated.

Voluntary Health Insurance expenditure in low- and middle-income countries: Exploring trends during 1995-2012 and policy implications for progress towards universal health coverage.

BACKGROUND: Most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) rely significantly on private health expenditure in the form of out-of-pocket payments (OOP) and voluntary health insurance (VHI). This paper assesses VHI expenditure trends in LMIC and explores possible explanations. This illuminates challenges deriving from changes in VHI expenditure as countries aim to progress equitably towards universal health coverage (UHC). METHODS: Health expenditure data was retrieved from the WHO Global Health Expenditure Database to calculate VHI, OOP and general government health (GGHE) expenditure as a share of total health expenditure (THE) for the period of 1995-2012. A literature analysis offered potential reasons for trends in countries and regions. RESULTS: In 2012, VHI as a percentage of THE (abbreviated as VHI%) was below 1 % in 49 out of 138 LMIC. Twenty-seven countries had no or more than five years of data missing. VHI% ranged from 1 to 5 % in 39 LMIC and was above 5 % in 23 LMIC. There is an upwards average trend in VHI% across all regions. However, increases in VHI% cannot be consistently linked with OOP falling or being redirected into private prepayment. There are various countries which exhibit rising VHI alongside a rise in OOP and fall in GGHE, which is a less desirable path in order to equitably progress towards UHC. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Reasons for the VHI expenditure trends across LMIC include: external influences; government policies on the role of VHI and its regulation; and willingness and ability of the population to enrol in VHI schemes. Many countries have paid insufficient attention to the potentially risky role of VHI for equitable progress towards UHC. Expanding VHI markets bear the risk of increasing fragmentation and inequities. To avoid this, health financing strategies need to be clear regarding the role given to VHI on the path towards UHC.

Improving primary care through information. A Wonca keynote paper.

Information from health care encounters across the entire health care spectrum, when consistently collected, analysed and applied can provide a clearer picture of patients' history as well as current and future needs through a better understanding of their morbidity burden and health care experiences. It can facilitate clinical activity to target limited resources to those patients most in need through risk adjustment mechanisms that consider the morbidity burden of populations, and it can help target quality improvement and cost saving activities in the right places. It can also open the door to a new chapter of evidence-based medicine around multi-morbidity. In summary, it can support a better integrated health system where primary care can provide continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive person-centred care to those who could benefit most. This paper explores the potential uses of information collected in electronic health records (EHRs) to inform case-mix and predictive modelling, as well as the associated challenges, with a particular focus on their application to primary care.