The Warwick Patient Experiences Framework: patient-based evidence in clinical guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the development of the Warwick Patient Experiences Framework (WaPEF) and describes how it informed the development of the NICE Guidance and Quality Standard, 'Patient experience in adult NHS services: improving the experience of care for people using adult NHS services'. DESIGN: The WaPEF was developed using a thematic qualitative overview that utilized a systematic review approach. Search strategies were developed, inclusion and exclusion criteria developed and data extracted from papers. RESULTS: The WaPEF identifies seven key generic themes that are important to a high-quality patient experience: patient as active participant, responsiveness of services, an individualized approach, lived experience, continuity of care and relationships, communication, information and support. CONCLUSIONS: The WaPEF is the first patient experiences framework with an explicit link to an underpinning patient evidence base, linking themes and sub-themes with specific references. The WaPEF informed the structure and content of the NICE Patient Experiences Guidance. The guidance, published in February 2012, will form a key part of the NHS Outcomes Framework in the UK for the future evaluation of health and social care. The proposed framework could be adapted to other country contexts and settings.

Development of an international glossary for clinical guidelines collaboration.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are often created through collaboration among organizations. The use of inconsistent terminology may cause poor communication and delays. This study aimed to develop a glossary of terms related to collaboration in guideline development. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A literature review of collaborative guidelines was performed to develop an initial list of terms related to guideline collaboration. The list of terms was presented to the members of the Guideline International Network Guidelines Collaboration Working Group, who provided presumptive definitions for each term and proposed additional terms to be included. The revised list was subsequently reviewed by an international, multidisciplinary panel of expert stakeholders. Recommendations received during this pre-Delphi review were implemented to augment an initial draft glossary. The glossary was then critically evaluated and refined through two rounds of Delphi surveys and a virtual consensus meeting with all panel members as Delphi participants. RESULTS: Forty-nine experts participated in the pre-Delphi survey, and 44 participated in the two-round Delphi process. Consensus was reached for 37 terms and definitions. CONCLUSION: Uptake and utilization of this guideline collaboration glossary by key organizations and stakeholder groups may facilitate collaboration among guideline-producing organizations by improving communication, minimizing conflicts, and increasing guideline development efficiency.

Commissioning health care in England: an evolving story.

The general election in the United Kingdom in May 2010 resulted in the election of a new government, a coalition between Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. Six weeks after the election, a white paper, "Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS," that proposed profound changes to the structure and organization of the health service was published. The change that generated the most discussion was the proposal that general practitioners be placed at the center of the system and given control of about 80% of the National Health Service's £100 billion budget. The proposals were greeted with considerable concern by many health care professionals, patient representatives, and the media. In response, the government organized an independent review, and proposals have been altered in response. This article outlines the current organization of the National Health Service, the rationale for change, and government proposals.

Menstrual symptoms: the importance of social factors in women's experiences.

BACKGROUND: Menstrual disorders are a common presentation in primary care. Heavy menstrual bleeding is the most common concern, and is often treated by medical and surgical means despite lack of pathology. AIM: To explore women's experiences of menstrual disorders. DESIGN OF STUDY: Two qualitative studies using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Inner-city London. METHOD: An initial study recruited women with heavy menstrual bleeding via their GPs. A follow-up study recruited women with a variety of menstrual problems via general practice and the community. Interviews were taped and transcribed then analysed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Management of menstruation was a prominent theme in interviews. Women acted to comply with a strong social message that menstruation should be concealed, although this behaviour was often 'taken for granted.' The need to conceal evidence or reminders of menstrual bleeding was particularly important. Onset of menstrual symptoms often challenged established strategies for menstrual management. Menstrual management then became a conscious problem and a source of continuing stress. The breakdown of management strategies, by real or threatened episodes of leaking or staining, influenced consultation behaviour and decisions about treatment. CONCLUSION: The social pressure to maintain concealment of menstruation is a strong influence on women's health-related behaviour in response to menstrual concerns. Women's choices may be better understood if attention is paid to the social context in which they live.

Does the achievement of medical identity limit the ability of primary care practitioners to be patient-centred? A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore primary care practitioners approach to and management of menstrual disorders using a sociological perspective. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews of primary care practitioners with an iterative approach to recruitment and analysis informed by grounded theory. RESULTS: Two broad approaches to patient care were described-a biomedical approach, which concentrated on medical history taking and the search for disease, and a patient-as-person approach where a patient's individual ideas and concerns were elicited. Practitioners believed they had a role in integrating these approaches. Activities intrinsic to the biomedical approach such as the performance of examinations, the ordering of tests and making decisions about biomedical aspects of care were however not available for shared decision-making. The exercise of these decisions by medical practitioners was necessary for them to achieve their professional identity. CONCLUSION: While practitioners accepted the ideology of patient-centred care the biomedical approach had the advantage of providing practitioners with a professional identity, which protected their status in relation to patients and colleagues. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The adoption of shared decision-making by medically qualified primary care practitioners is limited by practitioners need to achieve their medical identity. At present, this identity does not involve significant sharing of power and responsibility. A shift in perception of medical identity is required before more shared decision-making is seen in practice.

Headache in primary care: how important is diagnosis to management?

Headache is a common presentation in primary care. The classification of headache was overhauled by the International Headache Society (IHS) in 1988, and the past decade has seen rapid growth in the understanding of headache disorders. The IHS places particular importance on precise headache diagnosis. This paper discusses the relevance of such an approach to primary care. A review of the literature revealed a dearth of evidence regarding headache management in primary care settings. The evidence from other settings is considered and gaps in the literature highlighted.

Diagnosing menstrual disorders: a qualitative study of the approach of primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: Menstrual disorders are a common presentation in primary care. Wide variations in management as well as discordance between patient and practitioners in relation to presenting problems have been described. AIMS: To explore the model of menstrual disorders used by practitioners in practice. DESIGN OF STUDY: Semi-structured interviews with primary care practitioners. SETTING: One inner London health authority area. METHOD: Constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: Medical practitioners were critical of the guidance provided by gynaecological definitions and texts. Practitioners put more emphasis on defining normality than on defining disorder. Practitioners used a wide range of criteria to judge their patients' complaints and decide on a course of action. Female practitioners had access to personal and professional experience and used this to develop an understanding of women's complaints. Male practitioners in particular were limited by problems in discussing menstruation in detail. Because of the difficulties in assessing patient history, other non-gynaecological factors such as patient age and consulting behaviour informed practitioners' judgements. CONCLUSION: This study draws attention to practitioners' problems in using current definitions of menstrual disorders. The combination of unhelpful medical definitions, lack of standards of normality and difficulties in discussing menstruation resulted in individual practitioners making judgements in idiosyncratic ways. In the absence of a useful gynaecological model, practitioners develop individual, often subjective and gendered models to use in practice.