The Impact of Virtual Consultations on the Quality of Primary Care: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of virtual consultations, catalyzed by the COVID-19 pandemic, has transformed the delivery of primary care services. Owing to their rapid global proliferation, there is a need to comprehensively evaluate the impact of virtual consultations on all aspects of care quality. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of virtual consultations on the quality of primary care. METHODS: A total of 6 databases were searched. Studies that evaluated the impact of virtual consultations, for any disease, were included. Title and abstract screening and full-text screening were performed by 2 pairs of investigators. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A narrative synthesis of the results was performed. RESULTS: In total, 30 studies (5,469,333 participants) were included in this review. Our findings suggest that virtual consultations are equally effective to or more effective than face-to-face care for the management of certain conditions, including mental illness, excessive smoking, and alcohol consumption. Overall, 4 studies indicated positive impacts on some aspects of patient-centeredness; however, a negative impact was noted on patients' perceived autonomy support (ie, the degree to which people perceive those in positions of authority to be autonomy supportive). Virtual consultations may reduce waiting times, lower patient costs, and reduce rates of follow-up in secondary and tertiary care settings. Evidence for the impact on clinical safety is extremely limited. Evidence regarding equity was considerably mixed. Overall, it appears that virtual care is more likely to be used by younger, female patients, with disparities among other subgroups depending on contextual factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review demonstrated that virtual consultations may be as effective as face-to-face care and have a potentially positive impact on the efficiency and timeliness of care; however, there is a considerable lack of evidence on the impacts on patient safety, equity, and patient-centeredness, highlighting areas where future research efforts should be devoted. Capitalizing on real-world data, as well as clinical trials, is crucial to ensure that the use of virtual consultations is tailored according to patient needs and is inclusive of the intended end users. Data collection methods that are bespoke to the primary care context and account for patient characteristics are necessary to generate a stronger evidence base to inform future virtual care policies.

Economic evaluations of interventional opportunities for the management of mental-physical multimorbidity: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Economic evaluations of interventions for people with mental-physical multimorbidity, including a depressive disorder, are sparse. This study examines whether such interventions in adults are cost-effective. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science and NHS EED databases were searched until 5 March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies involving people aged ≥18 with two or more chronic conditions (one being a depressive disorder). Economic evaluation studies that compared costs and outcomes of interventions were included, and those that assessed only costs or effects were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently assessed risk of bias in included studies using recommended checklists. A narrative analysis of the characteristics and results by type of intervention and levels of healthcare provision was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies, all undertaken in high-income countries, met inclusion criteria. Four intervention types were reported: collaborative care, self-management, telephone-based and antidepressant treatment. Most (14 of 19) interventions were implemented at the organisational level and were potentially cost-effective, particularly, the collaborative care for people with depressive disorder and diabetes, comorbid major depression and cancer and depression and multiple long-term conditions. Cost-effectiveness ranged from £206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for collaborative care programmes for older adults with diabetes and depression at primary care clinics (USA) to £79 723 per QALY for combining collaborative care with improved opportunistic screening for adults with depressive disorder and diabetes (England). Conclusions on cost-effectiveness were constrained by methodological aspects of the included studies: choice of perspectives, time horizon and costing methods. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluations of interventions to manage multimorbidity with a depressive disorder are non-existent in low-income and middle-income countries. The design and reporting of future economic evaluations must improve to provide robust conclusions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022302036.

Evaluating the implementation and impact of a new model of care for integrating children and young people's acute mental healthcare in a paediatric setting: a protocol for a realist, mixed-methods approach.

INTRODUCTION: The mental health of children and young people in the UK has been declining and has continued to worsen throughout the pandemic, leading to an increase in mental health-related emergencies. In response, the Best for You programme was developed as a new service designed to integrate mental healthcare for children and young people between acute hospital and community services. The programme is comprised of four new services: a rapid assessment young people's centre with dual-trained staff, a co-located day service offering family-based care,a digital hub, designed to integrate with the fourth element of the model, namely community support and mental health services. This evaluation protocol aims to assess the development, implementation and outcomes of the Best for You programme and develops a scalable model that could be implemented in other parts of the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-methods realist evaluation aims to delineate the components of the system to assess their interdependent relationships within a wider context. Data collection will include interviews, participant observations, focus groups and the collection of local quantitative healthcare data. The research will be conducted across four phases. Phase 1-captures the development of the underlying programme theory. Phase 2-a process evaluation testing the programme theory. Phase 3- an outcome and economic evaluation. Phase 4-consolidation of learning from phases 1-3 to identify barriers, facilitators and wider contextual factors that have shaped implementation drawing on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the evaluation was received from the NHS local ethics committee. Embedded within the evaluation is a formative review to feedback and share learning with stakeholders to scale-up the programme. Findings from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentations to be useful to service user organisations and networks.

Comparing registered and resident populations in Primary Care Networks in England: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Primary Care Networks (PCNs) were established in England in 2019 and will play a key role in providing care at a neighbourhood level within integrated care systems (ICSs). AIM: To identify PCN 'catchment' areas and compare the overlap between registered and resident populations of PCNs. DESIGN & SETTING: Observational study using publicly available data on the number of people within each Lower layer Super Output Area (LSOA) registered to each general practice in England in April 2021. METHOD: LSOAs were assigned to the PCN to which the majority of residents were registered. The PCN catchment population was defined as the total number of people resident in all LSOAs assigned to that PCN. The PCN catchment populations were compared with the population of people registered to a GP practice in each PCN. RESULTS: In April 2021, 6506 GP practices were part of 1251 PCNs, with 56.1% of PCNs having 30 000-50 000 registered patients. There was a strong correlation (0.91) between the total registered population size and catchment population size. Significant variation was found in the percentage of residents in each LSOA registered to a GP practice within the same PCN catchment, and strong associations were found with both urban and rural status, and socioeconomic deprivation. CONCLUSION: There exists significant variation across England in the overlap between registered and resident (catchment) populations in PCNs, which may impact on integration of care in some areas. There was less overlap in urban and more deprived areas, which could exacerbate existing health inequalities.

Characteristics of frequently attending children in hospital emergency departments: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the literature on frequent attendances to hospital emergency departments (EDs) and describe sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of children who attend EDs frequently. SETTING: Hospital EDs. PARTICIPANTS: Children <21 years, attending hospital EDs frequently. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes measures were defined separately in each study, and were predominantly the number of ED attendances per year. RESULTS: We included 21 studies representing 6 513 627 children. Between 0.3% and 75% of all paediatric ED users were frequent users. Most studies defined four or more visits per year as a 'frequent ED' usage. Children who were frequent ED users were more likely to be less than 5 years old. In the USA, patients with public insurance were more likely to be frequent attenders. Frequent ED users more likely to be frequent users of primary care and have long-term conditions; the most common diagnoses were infections and gastroenteritis. CONCLUSIONS: The review included a wide range of information across various health systems, however, children who were frequent ED users have some universal characteristics in common. Policies to reduce frequent attendance might usefully focus on preschool children and supporting primary care in responding to primary care oriented conditions.

Clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of individual mental health workers colocated within primary care practices: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: Mental health disorders contribute significantly to the global burden of disease and lead to extensive strain on health systems. The integration of mental health workers into primary care has been proposed as one possible solution, but evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness of this approach is unclear. We reviewed the clinical and cost effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: We searched the Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthcare Management Information Consortium (HMIC) and Global Health databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All quantitative studies published before July 2019 were eligible for the review; participants of any age and gender were included. Studies did not need to report a certain outcome measure or comparator in order to be eligible. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using a standardised table; however, pooled analysis proved unfeasible. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool and the Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. RESULTS: Fifteen studies from four countries were included. Mental health worker integration was associated with mental health benefits to varied populations, including minority groups and those with comorbid chronic diseases. Furthermore, the interventions were correlated with high patient satisfaction and increases in specialist mental health referrals among minority populations. However, there was insufficient evidence to suggest clinical outcomes were significantly different from usual general practitioner care. CONCLUSIONS: While there appear to be some benefits associated with mental health worker integration in primary care practices, we found insufficient evidence to conclude that an onsite primary care mental health worker is significantly more clinically or cost effective when compared with usual general practitioner care. There should therefore be an increased emphasis on generating new evidence from clinical trials to better understand the benefits and effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices.

Ethics education and moral decision-making in clinical commissioning: an interview study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical commissioning involves ethically challenging decisions about health resource allocation. However, commissioners come from a range of professional backgrounds with varying levels of training and expertise in ethical decision-making. Hence, they may lack the relevant training and resources to feel fully prepared for this increasingly demanding role. AIM: This study aims to provide insight into how prepared commissioners feel in making ethical decisions; what ethics learning needs they might have; and how these might be addressed. DESIGN AND SETTING: This qualitative interview study explored the experiences of commissioners working for clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England. METHOD: Eighteen participants were interviewed between December 2017 and July 2018 using a purposive sampling approach to participant selection. Transcriptions were coded and analysed using the constant comparative method of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most participants had not received ethics training in preparation for, or during, their commissioning role, and reported difficulties identifying and analysing ethical issues. Participants often felt uncomfortable about decisions they were involved in, attributing this to a number of factors: a sense of moral unease; concerns that CCGs' decision-making processes were not sufficiently transparent; and that CCGs were not fully accountable to the population served. CONCLUSION: Commissioners face complex decisions involving ethical issues, and associated moral unease is exacerbated by a lack of ethics training and lack of confidence in identifying and analysing these. This study shows a clear need for additional support and ethics training for commissioners to support them in this area of decision-making.

Impact of integrating pharmacists into primary care teams on health systems indicators: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that pharmacists integrated into primary care can improve patient outcomes and satisfaction, but their impact on healthcare systems is unclear. AIM: To identify the key impacts of pharmacists' integration into primary care on health system indicators, such as healthcare utilisation and costs. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of literature. METHOD: Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, the Health Management Information Consortium, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were examined, along with reference lists of relevant studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published up until June 2018, which considered health system outcomes of the integration of pharmacists into primary care, were included. The Cochrane risk of bias quality assessment tool was used to assess risk of bias for RCTs; the National Institute of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool was used for observational studies. Data were extracted from published reports and findings synthesised. RESULTS: Searches identified 3058 studies, of which 28 met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies were of fair quality. Pharmacists in primary care resulted in reduced use of GP appointments and reduced emergency department (ED) attendance, but increased overall primary care use. There was no impact on hospitalisations, but some evidence of savings in overall health system and medication costs. CONCLUSION: Integrating pharmacists into primary care may reduce GP workload and ED attendance. However, further higher quality studies are needed, including research to clarify the cost-effectiveness of the intervention and the long-term impact on health system outcomes.

Impact of GP gatekeeping on quality of care, and health outcomes, use, and expenditure: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: GPs often act as gatekeepers, authorising patients' access to specialty care. Gatekeeping is frequently perceived as lowering health service use and health expenditure. However, there is little evidence suggesting that gatekeeping is more beneficial than direct access in terms of patient- and health-related outcomes. AIM: To establish the impact of GP gatekeeping on quality of care, health use and expenditure, and health outcomes and patient satisfaction. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review. METHOD: The databases MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant articles using a search strategy. Two authors independently screened search results and assessed the quality of studies. RESULTS: Electronic searches identified 4899 studies (after removing duplicates), of which 25 met the inclusion criteria. Gatekeeping was associated with better quality of care and appropriate referral for further hospital visits and investigation. However, one study reported unfavourable outcomes for patients with cancer under gatekeeping, and some concerns were raised about the accuracy of diagnoses made by gatekeepers. Gatekeeping resulted in fewer hospitalisations and use of specialist care, but inevitably was associated with more primary care visits. Patients were less satisfied with gatekeeping than direct-access systems. CONCLUSION: Gatekeeping was associated with lower healthcare use and expenditure, and better quality of care, but with lower patient satisfaction. Survival rate of patients with cancer in gatekeeping schemes was significantly lower than those in direct access, although primary care gatekeeping was not otherwise associated with delayed patient referral. The long-term outcomes of gatekeeping arrangements should be carefully studied before devising new gatekeeping policies.

Integrating a nationally scaled workforce of community health workers in primary care: a modelling study.

OBJECTIVE: To model cost and benefit of a national community health worker workforce. DESIGN: Modelling exercise based on all general practices in England. SETTING: United Kingdom National Health Service Primary Care. PARTICIPANTS: Not applicable. DATA SOURCES: Publicly available data on general practice demographics, population density, household size, salary scales and screening and immunisation uptake. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We estimated numbers of community health workers needed, anticipated workload and likely benefits to patients. RESULTS: Conservative modelling suggests that 110,585 community health workers would be needed to cover the general practice registered population in England, costing £2.22bn annually. Assuming community health workerss could engage with and successfully refer 20% of eligible unscreened or unimmunised individuals, an additional 753,592 cervical cancer screenings, 365,166 breast cancer screenings and 482,924 bowel cancer screenings could be expected within respective review periods. A total of 16,398 additional children annually could receive their MMR1 at 12 months and 24,716 their MMR2 at five years of age. Community health workerss would also provide home-based health promotion and lifestyle support to patients with chronic disease. CONCLUSION: A scaled community health worker workforce integrated into primary care may be a valuable policy alternative. Pilot studies are required to establish feasibility and impact in NHS primary care.

Age-related decline in antibiotic prescribing for uncomplicated respiratory tract infections in primary care in England following the introduction of a national financial incentive (the Quality Premium) for health commissioners to reduce use of antibiotics in the community: an interrupted time series analysis.

Objectives: To assess the impact of the 2015/16 NHS England Quality Premium (which provided a financial incentive for Clinical Commissioning Groups to reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care) on antibiotic prescribing by General Practitioners (GPs) for respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Methods: Interrupted time series analysis using monthly patient-level consultation and prescribing data obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) between April 2011 and March 2017. The study population comprised patients consulting a GP who were diagnosed with an RTI. We assessed the rate of antibiotic prescribing in patients (both aggregate and stratified by age) with a recorded diagnosis of uncomplicated RTI, before and after the implementation of the Quality Premium. Results: Prescribing rates decreased over the 6 year study period, with evident seasonality. Notably, there was a 3% drop in the rate of antibiotic prescribing (equating to 14.65 prescriptions per 1000 RTI consultations) (P < 0.05) in April 2015, coinciding with the introduction of the Quality Premium. This reduction was sustained, such that after 2 years there was a 3% decrease in prescribing relative to that expected had the pre-intervention trend continued. There was also a concurrent 2% relative reduction in the rate of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing. Antibiotic prescribing for RTIs diagnosed in children showed the greatest decline with a 6% relative change 2 years after the intervention. Of the RTI indications studied, the greatest reductions in antibiotic prescribing were seen for patients with sore throats. Conclusions: Community prescribing of antibiotics for RTIs significantly decreased following the introduction of the Quality Premium, with the greatest reduction seen in younger patients.