ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: At least 10% of hospital admissions in high-income countries, including Australia, are associated with patient safety incidents, which contribute to patient harm ('adverse events'). When a patient is seriously harmed, an investigation or review is undertaken to reduce the risk of further incidents occurring. Despite 20 years of investigations into adverse events in healthcare, few evaluations provide evidence of their quality and effectiveness in reducing preventable harm.This study aims to develop consistent, informed and robust best practice guidance, at state and national levels, that will improve the response, learning and health system improvements arising from adverse events. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The setting will be healthcare organisations in Australian public health systems in the states of New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. We will apply a multistage mixed-methods research design with evaluation and in-situ feasibility testing. This will include literature reviews (stage 1), an assessment of the quality of 300 adverse event investigation reports from participating hospitals (stage 2), and a policy/procedure document review from participating hospitals (stage 3) as well as focus groups and interviews on perspectives and experiences of investigations with healthcare staff and consumers (stage 4). After triangulating results from stages 1-4, we will then codesign tools and guidance for the conduct of investigations with staff and consumers (stage 5) and conduct feasibility testing on the guidance (stage 6). Participants will include healthcare safety systems policymakers and staff (n=120-255) who commission, undertake or review investigations and consumers (n=20-32) who have been impacted by adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH02007 and 2023/ETH02341).The research findings will be incorporated into best practice guidance, published in international and national journals and disseminated through conferences.
Subject(s)
Patient Safety , Research Design , Humans , Australia , Patient Harm/prevention & control , Quality Improvement , Medical Errors/prevention & control , Focus Groups , Delivery of Health CareABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study explored potential quality measures to improve skin cancer management in primary care settings, and the barriers and facilitators associated with their implementation. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews and qualitative proforma surveys were conducted with skin cancer experts from a range of healthcare settings. Framework analysis was employed to identify key groups of quality measures within the domains of the Donabedian model of healthcare quality (structure, process, outcome). Interview and survey data were triangulated to identify common groups of quality measures, barriers and facilitators. PARTICIPANTS: We purposively recruited skin cancer experts from Australia and internationally with knowledge and experience in skin cancer management. The final sample consisted of 15 participants who had clinical or academic backgrounds. RESULTS: Participants unequivocally expressed the need for quality measures to guide skin cancer care. Ten groups of quality measures were identified: three groups related to the structural elements of care (eg, diagnostic tools), four related to the processes of care (eg, diagnostic process) and three related to outcomes of care (eg, treatment outcomes). Implementation barriers included clinician resistance, system inadequacies and external factors (eg, patient risk). Facilitators included incentives, education, agreed and feasible indicators and support and guidance. CONCLUSIONS: To service a growing population of skin cancer patients in Australia, the role of primary care needs to be more clearly specified, and its care providers supported and more engaged in quality improvement processes. Structure, process and outcome quality measures, derived from detailed guidance for primary care settings, can be used to track practitioner performance and facilitate ongoing improvement.
Subject(s)
Primary Health Care , Qualitative Research , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Primary Health Care/standards , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Skin Neoplasms/therapy , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Australia , Female , Male , Attitude of Health Personnel , Quality of Health Care , Interviews as Topic , Quality Improvement , Middle Aged , AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Individuals diagnosed with cancer via emergency admission are likely to have poor outcomes. This study aims to identify cancer diagnosed through an emergency hospital admission and examine predictors associated with mortality within 12-months. METHOD: A population-based retrospective 1:1 propensity-matched case-comparison study of people who had an emergency versus a planned hospital admission with a principal diagnosis of cancer during 2013-2020 in New South Wales, Australia using linked hospital, cancer registry and mortality records. Conditional logistic regression examined predictors of mortality at 12-months. RESULTS: There were 28,502 matched case-comparisons. Individuals who had an emergency admission were four times more likely to die within 12-months (Odds Ratio (OR) 3.93; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.75-4.13) compared to individuals who had a planned admission for cancer. Older individuals, diagnosed with lung (OR 1.89; 95 %CI 1.36-2.63) or digestive organ, excluding colorectal (OR1.78; 95 %CI 1.30-2.43) cancers, where the degree of spread was metastatic (OR 3.61; 95 %CI 2.62-4.50), who had a mental disorder diagnosis (OR 2.08; 95 %CI 1.89-2.30), lived in rural (OR 1.27; 95 %CI 1.17-1.37) or more disadvantaged neighbourhoods had a higher likelihood of death within 12-months following an unplanned admission compared to referent groups. Females (OR 0.87; 95 %CI 0.81-0.93) had an 13 % lower likelihood of mortality within 12-months compared to males. CONCLUSIONS: While some emergency cancer admissions are not avoidable, the importance of preventive screening and promotion of help-seeking for early cancer symptoms should not be overlooked as mechanisms to reduce emergency admissions related to cancer and to improve cancer survival.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Neoplasms , Humans , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Female , Retrospective Studies , Aged , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , New South Wales/epidemiology , Aged, 80 and over , Young Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Survival Rate , Registries , AdolescentABSTRACT
AIM: Oncology care provision by multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) is widely acknowledged as best practice. Formal team meetings, led by chairpersons, coordinate decisions on diagnosis, staging, treatment planning, and review. This study addresses a gap in meeting Chairs' perspectives on factors affecting functionality across the meeting cycle, from pre-meeting patient list triage to post-meeting dissemination of recommendations. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in person with Chairs within two urban geographical regions in New South Wales, Australia as part of a larger project. Though the population of oncology MDT Chairs in Australia is small, the richness and depth of data from nine Chairs were considered to be valuable knowledge in support of extant literature on meeting functionality. An integrated deductive-inductive approach was applied to data analysis. RESULTS: Perceived facilitators, barriers, and ideals relating to pre-meeting, in-meeting, and post-meeting functionality were identified across five pre-determined analytic categories: the team; meeting infrastructure; meeting organization and logistics; patient-centered clinical decision-making, and; team governance. Key barriers included inadequate information technology, limited support staff, and lack of dedicated time for Chair duties. Corresponding facilitators included robust Information Technology infrastructure and support, provision of clinically knowledgeable MDT meeting coordinators, and formal employment recognition of Chairs' responsibilities and skill sets. CONCLUSION: Chairs across various tumor streams develop workarounds to overcome barriers and ensure quality meeting outcomes. With more robust support they could enhance value by sharing evidence, conducting audits, and engaging in research. The findings highlight the need for healthcare systems to support tumor stream clinical networks by allocating greater resources to prioritize multidisciplinary meetings and cancer care decision-making.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Patient Care Team , Qualitative Research , Humans , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/methods , New South Wales , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/psychology , FemaleABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Keeping best practice guidelines up-to-date with rapidly emerging research evidence is challenging. 'Living guidelines' approaches enable continual incorporation of new research, assisting healthcare professionals to apply the latest evidence to their clinical practice. However, information about how living guidelines are developed, maintained and applied is limited. The Stroke Foundation in Australia was one of the first organisations to apply living guideline development methods for their Living Stroke Guidelines (LSGs), presenting a unique opportunity to evaluate the process and impact of this novel approach. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted to understand the experience of LSGs developers and end-users. We used thematic analysis of one-on-one semi-structured interview and online survey data to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and facilitators and barriers of the LSGs. Website analytics data were also reviewed to understand usage. RESULTS: Overall, the living guidelines approach was both feasible and acceptable to developers and users. Facilitators to use included collaboration with multidisciplinary clinicians and stroke survivors or carers. Increased workload for developers, workload unpredictability, and limited information sharing, and interoperability of technological platforms were identified as barriers. Users indicated increased trust in the LSGs (69%), likelihood of following the LSGs (66%), and frequency of access (58%), compared with previous static versions. Web analytics data showed individual access by 16,517 users in 2016 rising to 53,154 users in 2020, a threefold increase. There was also a fourfold increase in unique LSG pageviews from 2016 to 2020. CONCLUSIONS: This study, the first evaluation of living guidelines, demonstrates that this approach to stroke guideline development is feasible and acceptable, that these approaches may add value to developers and users, and may increase guideline use. Future evaluations should be embedded along with guideline implementation to capture data prospectively.
Subject(s)
Health Personnel , Stroke , Humans , Australia , Stroke/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Variation persists in the quality of end-of-life-care (EOLC) for people with cancer. This study aims to describe the characteristics of, and examine factors associated with, indicators of potentially burdensome care provided in hospital, and use of hospital services in the last 12 months of life for people who had a death from cancer. METHOD: A population-based retrospective cohort study of people aged ≥ 20 years who died with a cancer-related cause of death during 2014-2019 in New South Wales, Australia using linked hospital, cancer registry and mortality records. Ten indicators of potentially burdensome care were examined. Multinominal logistic regression examined predictors of a composite measure of potentially burdensome care, consisting of > 1 ED presentation or > 1 hospital admission or ≥ 1 ICU admission within 30 days of death, or died in acute care. RESULTS: Of the 80,005 cancer-related deaths, 86.9% were hospitalised in the 12 months prior to death. Fifteen percent had > 1 ED presentation, 9.9% had > 1 hospital admission, 8.6% spent ≥ 14 days in hospital, 3.6% had ≥ 1 intensive care unit admission, and 1.2% received mechanical ventilation on ≥ 1 occasion in the last 30 days of life. Seventeen percent died in acute care. The potentially burdensome care composite measure identified 20.0% had 1 indicator, and 10.9% had ≥ 2 indicators of potentially burdensome care. Compared to having no indicators of potentially burdensome care, people who smoked, lived in rural areas, were most socially economically disadvantaged, and had their last admission in a private hospital were more likely to experience potentially burdensome care. Older people (≥ 55 years), females, people with 1 or ≥ 2 Charlson comorbidities, people with neurological cancers, and people who died in 2018-2019 were less likely to experience potentially burdensome care. Compared to people with head and neck cancer, people with all cancer types (except breast and neurological) were more likely to experience ≥ 2 indicators of potentially burdensome care versus none. CONCLUSION: This study shows the challenge of delivering health services at end-of-life. Opportunities to address potentially burdensome EOLC could involve taking a person-centric approach to integrate oncology and palliative care around individual needs and preferences.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Terminal Care , Female , Humans , Aged , Retrospective Studies , Palliative Care , Hospitalization , Neoplasms/therapy , DeathABSTRACT
Increasing numbers of patients with cancer are considering or undergoing immunotherapy, however, little is known about patients' perspectives on this treatment. We undertook a systematic review for use by clinicians and researchers, consolidating published qualitative research studies on patient experience of checkpoint inhibitor therapy. A search of Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO was carried out for publications in English to 30 June 2022. Publications were selected if they reported a qualitative study of patient experience with checkpoint inhibitor therapy for cancer, either by patients or their families or carers. Quality was appraised using the Johanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. A thematic synthesis was conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standard was followed. We identified 17 eligible studies published between 2017 and 2022, 9 using mixed methods, and 8 solely using qualitative methods. Most studies reported on the experiences of patients with advanced stage melanoma and were using the earliest approved checkpoint inhibitors for cancer therapy. Studies met most formal quality criteria but varied in the extent of their qualitative explorations of data; some mixed methods studies had limited reporting of qualitative results. Through thematic synthesis, we categorized study findings into four domains: (1) treatment decision-making; (2) success with immunotherapy; (3) treatment-related adverse events (AEs); and (4) quality of life on immunotherapy. Our review identified several areas with potential for improving the care system. These include, for example: routinely linking patients to peers who have experienced this therapy; improving the capacity of patients and carers to identify and report AEs faster; and supporting patients and carers to live with changed circumstances after successful treatment. Most studies focused on patients who had successful treatment, effectively excluding those who do not respond or who discontinue due to serious side effects; future research targets are suggested.
Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Neoplasms , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Qualitative Research , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study estimated the prevalence of evidence-based care received by a population-based sample of Australian residents in long-term care (LTC) aged ≥ 65 years in 2021, measured by adherence to clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. METHODS: Sixteen conditions/processes of care amendable to estimating evidence-based care at a population level were identified from prevalence data and CPGs. Candidate recommendations (n = 5609) were extracted from 139 CPGs which were converted to indicators. National experts in each condition rated the indicators via the RAND-UCLA Delphi process. For the 16 conditions, 236 evidence-based care indicators were ratified. A multi-stage sampling of LTC facilities and residents was undertaken. Trained aged-care nurses then undertook manual structured record reviews of care delivered between 1 March and 31 May 2021 (our record review period) to assess adherence with the indicators. RESULTS: Care received by 294 residents with 27,585 care encounters in 25 LTC facilities was evaluated. Residents received care for one to thirteen separate clinical conditions/processes of care (median = 10, mean = 9.7). Adherence to evidence-based care indicators was estimated at 53.2% (95% CI: 48.6, 57.7) ranging from a high of 81.3% (95% CI: 75.6, 86.3) for Bladder and Bowel to a low of 12.2% (95% CI: 1.6, 36.8) for Depression. Six conditions (skin integrity, end-of-life care, infection, sleep, medication, and depression) had less than 50% adherence with indicators. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of adherence to evidence-based care for people in LTC using multiple conditions and a standardised method. Vulnerable older people are not receiving evidence-based care for many physical problems, nor care to support their mental health nor for end-of-life care. The six conditions in which adherence with indicators was less than 50% could be the focus of improvement efforts.
Subject(s)
Long-Term Care , Terminal Care , Humans , Aged , Australia/epidemiology , Health Facilities , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Addressing clinical variation in elective surgery is challenging. A key issue is how to gain consensus between largely autonomous clinicians. Understanding how the consensus process works to develop and implement perioperative pathways and the impact of these pathways on reducing clinical variation can provide important insights into the effectiveness of the consensus process. The primary objective of this study is to understand the implementation of an organisationally supported, consensus approach to implement perioperative care pathways in a private healthcare facility and to determine its impact. METHODS: A mixed-methods Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid (type III) pre-post study will be conducted in one Australian private hospital. Five new consensus-based perioperative care pathways will be developed and implemented for specific patient cohorts: spinal surgery, radical prostatectomy, cardiac surgery, bariatric surgery and total hip and knee replacement. The individual components of these pathways will be confirmed as part of a consensus-building approach and will follow a four-stage implementation process using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment framework. The process of implementation, as well as barriers and facilitators, will be evaluated through semistructured interviews and focus groups with key clinical and non-clinical staff, and participant observation. We anticipate completing 30 interviews and 15-20 meeting observations. Administrative and clinical end-points for at least 152 participants will be analysed to assess the effectiveness of the pathways. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethical approval from Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Medical Sciences Committee (Reference No: 520221219542374). The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and reports for key stakeholders.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Elective Surgical Procedures , Male , Humans , Consensus , Australia , Perioperative CareABSTRACT
Cancer is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, accounting for 250 Disability-Adjusted Life Years and 10 million deaths in 2019. Minimising unwarranted variation and ensuring appropriate cost-effective treatment across primary and tertiary care to improve health outcomes is a key health priority. There are few studies that have used linked data to explore healthcare utilisation prior to diagnosis in addition to post-diagnosis patterns of care. This protocol outlines the aims of the DaLECC project and key methodological features of the linked dataset. The primary aim of this project is to explore predictors of variations in pre- and post-cancer diagnosis care, and to explore the economic and health impact of any variation. The cohort of patients includes all South Australian residents diagnosed with cancer between 2011 and 2020, who were recorded on the South Australian Cancer Registry. These cancer registry records are being linked with state and national healthcare databases to capture health service utilisation and costs for a minimum of one-year prior to diagnosis and to a maximum of 10 years post-diagnosis. Healthcare utilisation includes state databases for inpatient separations and emergency department presentations and national databases for Medicare services and pharmaceuticals. Our results will identify barriers to timely receipt of care, estimate the impact of variations in the use of health care, and provide evidence to support interventions to improve health outcomes to inform national and local decisions to enhance the access and uptake of health care services.
Subject(s)
National Health Programs , Neoplasms , Aged , Humans , Australia/epidemiology , Health Care Costs , Information Storage and Retrieval , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Routinely Collected Health DataABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are designed to guide treatment decisions, yet adherence rates vary widely. To characterise perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence in Australia, and estimate the frequency of previous qualitative research findings, a survey was distributed to Australian oncologists. RESULTS: The sample is described and validated guideline attitude scores reported for different groups. Differences in mean CPG attitude scores across clinician subgroups and associations between frequency of CPG use and clinician characteristics were calculated; with 48 respondents there was limited statistical power to find differences. Younger oncologists (< 50 years) and clinicians participating in three or more Multidisciplinary Team Meetings were more likely to routinely or occasionally use CPGs. Perceived barriers and facilitators were identified. Thematic analysis was conducted on open-text responses. Results were integrated with previous interview findings and presented in a thematic, conceptual matrix. Most barriers and facilitators identified earlier were corroborated by survey results, with minor discordance. Identified barriers and facilitators require further exploration within a larger sample to assess their perceived impact on cancer treatment CPG adherence in Australia, as well as to inform future CPG implementation strategies. This research was Human Research Ethics Committee approved (2019/ETH11722 and 52019568810127, ID:5688).
Subject(s)
Guideline Adherence , Neoplasms , Humans , Australia , Surveys and Questionnaires , Neoplasms/therapy , Attitude of Health PersonnelABSTRACT
Adherence to cancer treatment clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) varies enormously across Australia, despite being associated with improved patient outcomes. This systematic review aims to characterize adherence rates to active-cancer treatment CPGs in Australia and related factors to inform future implementation strategies. Five databases were systematically searched, abstracts were screened for eligibility, a full-text review and critical appraisal of eligible studies performed, and data extracted. A narrative synthesis of factors associated with adherence was conducted, and the median adherence rates within cancer streams calculated. A total of 21,031 abstracts were identified. After duplicates were removed, abstracts screened, and full texts reviewed, 20 studies focused on adherence to active-cancer treatment CPGs were included. Overall adherence rates ranged from 29% to 100%. Receipt of guideline recommended treatments was higher for patients who were younger (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL], colorectal, lung, and breast cancer); female (breast and lung cancer), and male (DLBCL and colorectal cancer); never smokers (DLBCL and lung cancer); non-Indigenous Australians (cervical and lung cancer); with less advanced stage disease (colorectal, lung, and cervical cancer), without comorbidities (DLBCL, colorectal, and lung cancer); with good-excellent Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (lung cancer); living in moderately accessible places (colon cancer); and; treated in metropolitan facilities (DLBLC, breast and colon cancer). This review characterized active-cancer treatment CPG adherence rates and associated factors in Australia. Future targeted CPG implementation strategies should account for these factors, to redress unwarranted variation particularly in vulnerable populations, and improve patient outcomes (Prospero number: CRD42020222962).
Subject(s)
Guideline Adherence , Neoplasms , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Social Determinants of Health , Female , Humans , Male , Australasian People , Australia , Breast Neoplasms , Colonic Neoplasms , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasms/therapy , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: People with early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC), defined as colorectal cancer (CRC) before the age of 50, now constitute a significant patient population. In empirical and grey literature EOCRC patients report unsatisfactory experiences of care, especially in relation to protracted intervals from first help-seeking to diagnosis. This study is the first to investigate EOCRC patients' perspectives on ways to improve experiences of care. The objective is to provide foundational knowledge for the development of EOCRC-specific patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). DESIGN: The study was designed as qualitative Internet Mediated Research, involving a thematic analysis of unsolicited narratives recounting personal experiences of EOCRC care. We examined advice-giving statements in 120 online texts written by EOCRC patients and survivors. SETTING: The Internet is the broad research setting. The host websites of three prominent charitable CRC support organisations were selected as specific research sites: Bowel Cancer Australia, Bowel Cancer UK and Bowel Cancer New Zealand. RESULTS: We found that 90% of texts comprised statements of advice to new patients about the importance of self-advocacy in achieving quality care. Four key contexts for self-advocacy were identified: (1) accessing relevant diagnostic services; (2) driving diagnostic investigations when symptoms are not resolved; (3) involvement in treatment decision-making and (4) proactivity about preferred outcomes. Over 30% of advice-giving texts also directed statements of advice to healthcare providers, indicating that their youthfulness had been a barrier to timely diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Healthcare barriers to, and facilitators of, patient self-advocacy may be indicators of quality EORC care. There is a need for greater awareness of the impact of age bias on the responsiveness of clinicians and healthcare services in EOCRC care. Our findings support the development of EOCRC-specific PREMs that can guide age-appropriate policy and practice for this newly identified patient population.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Patients , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Australia , New ZealandABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in people aged <50 years has been increasing dramatically in the past three decades and such patients are known to face difficulties in diagnosis. The objective of this study was to better understand the diagnostic experiences of patients with CRC and explore age-related differences in the proportion with positive experiences. METHOD: A secondary analysis of the English National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) 2017 was conducted on the responses of patients with CRC, restricted to those likely to have been diagnosed in the preceding 12 months via pathways other than routine screening. Ten diagnosis-related experience questions were identified, with responses to them categorised as positive, negative or uninformative. Age group-related difference in positive experiences were described and ORs estimated, both raw and adjusted for selected characteristics. Sensitivity analysis was performed by weighting survey responses to 2017 cancer registrations by strata defined by age group, sex and cancer site, to assess whether differential response patterns by these characteristics affected the estimated proportion of positive experiences. RESULTS: The reported experiences of 3889 patients with CRC were analysed. There was a significant linear trend (p<0.0001) for 9 of 10 experience items, with older patients consistently displaying higher rates of positive experiences and patients aged 55-64 showing rates of positive experience intermediate between younger and older age groups. This was unaffected by differences in patient characteristics or CPES response rates. CONCLUSION: The highest rates of positive diagnosis-related experiences were reported by patients aged 65-74 or 75 years and older, and this is robust.
Subject(s)
Age Factors , Colorectal Neoplasms , Aged , Humans , Patient Outcome Assessment , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Skin cancer is a growing global problem and a significant health and economic burden. Despite the practical necessity for skin cancer to be managed in primary care settings, little is known about how quality of care is or should be measured in this setting. This scoping review aimed to capture the breadth and range of contemporary evidence related to the measurement of quality in skin cancer management in primary care settings. Six databases were searched for relevant texts reporting on quality measurement in primary care skin cancer management. Data from 46 texts published since 2011 were extracted, and quality measures were catalogued according to the three domains of the Donabedian model of healthcare quality (structure, process and outcome). Quality measures within each domain were inductively analysed into 13 key emergent groups. These represented what were deemed to be the most relevant components of skin cancer management as related to structure, process or outcomes measurement. Four groups related to the structural elements of care provision (e.g. diagnostic tools and equipment), five related to the process of care delivery (e.g. diagnostic processes) and four related to the outcomes of care (e.g. poor treatment outcomes). A broad range of quality measures have been documented, based predominantly on articles using retrospective cohort designs; systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials were limited.
Subject(s)
Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Skin Neoplasms/therapy , Primary Health CareABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To undertake a synthesis of evidence-based research for seven innovative models of care to inform the development of new hospitals. DESIGN: Umbrella review. SETTING: Interventions delivered inside and outside of acute care settings. PARTICIPANTS: Children and adults with one or more identified acute or chronic health conditions. DATA SOURCES: PsycINFO, Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical indicators and mortality, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, self-management and self-care and patient knowledge. RESULTS: A total of 66 reviews were included, synthesising evidence from 1272 primary studies across the 7 models of care. Virtual care was the most common model studied, addressed by 47 (73%) of the reviews. Common outcomes evaluated across reviews were clinical indicators and mortality, healthcare utilisation, self-care and self-management, patient knowledge, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The findings indicate that the innovative models of healthcare we identified in this review may be effective in managing patients with a range of acute and chronic conditions. Most of the included reviews reported evidence of comparable or improved care. CONCLUSIONS: A consideration of local infrastructure and individual patient characteristics, such as health literacy, may be critical in determining the suitability of models of care for patients and their implementation in local health systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/PS6ZU.
Subject(s)
Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Quality of Life , Adult , Child , Humans , Chronic Disease , Self CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People with early-onset colorectal cancer, under the age of 50, are more likely to experience diagnostic delay and to be diagnosed at later stages of the disease than older people. Advanced stage diagnosis potentially requires invasive therapeutic management at a time of life when these patients are establishing intimate relationships, raising families, building careers and laying foundations for financial stability. Barriers to timely diagnosis at primary care level have been identified but the patient perspective has not been investigated. METHODS: Personal accounts of cancer care are increasingly accessed as rich sources of patient experience data. This study uses mixed methods, incorporating quantitative content analysis and qualitative thematic analysis, to investigate patients' accounts of early-onset colorectal cancer diagnosis published on prominent bowel cancer support websites in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS: Patients' perceptions (n = 273) of diagnostic barriers at primary care level were thematically similar across the three countries. Patients perceived that GPs' low suspicion of cancer due to age under 50 contributed to delays. Patients reported that their GPs seemed unaware of early-onset colorectal cancer and that they were not offered screening for colorectal cancer even when 'red flag' symptoms were present. Patients described experiences of inadequate information continuity within GP practices and across primary, specialist and tertiary levels of care, which they perceived contributed to diagnostic delay. Patients also reported tensions with GPs over the patient-centredness of care, describing discord related to symptom seriousness and lack of shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Wider dissemination of information about early-onset colorectal cancer at primary care level is imperative given the increasing incidence of the disease, the frequency of diagnostic delay, the rates of late-stage diagnosis and the dissatisfaction with patient experience reported by patients whose diagnosis is delayed. Patient education about diagnostic protocols may help to pre-empt or resolve tensions between GPs' enactment of value-based care and patients' concerns about cancer. The challenges of diagnosing early-onset colorectal cancer are significant and will become more pressing for GPs, who will usually be the first point of access to a health system for this growing patient population.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Delayed Diagnosis , Humans , New Zealand , Qualitative Research , United Kingdom , Australia , Primary Health Care , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , InternetABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The burden of cancer is large in Australia, and rates of cancer Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) adherence is suboptimal across various cancers. METHODS: The objective of this study is to characterise clinician-perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer CPG adherence in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data from 33 oncology-focused clinicians (surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and haematologists). Clinicians were recruited in 2019 and 2020 through purposive and snowball sampling from 7 hospitals across Sydney, Australia, and interviewed either face-to-face in hospitals or by phone. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and qualitative thematic analysis of the interview data was undertaken. Human research ethics committee approval and governance approval was granted (2019/ETH11722, #52019568810127). RESULTS: Five broad themes and subthemes of key barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence were identified: Theme 1: CPG content; Theme 2: Individual clinician and patient factors; Theme 3: Access to, awareness of and availability of CPGs; Theme 4: Organisational and cultural factors; and Theme 5: Development and implementation factors. The most frequently reported barriers to adherence were CPGs not catering for patient complexities, being slow to be updated, patient treatment preferences, geographical challenges for patients who travel large distances to access cancer services and limited funding of CPG recommended drugs. The most frequently reported facilitators to adherence were easy accessibility, peer review, multidisciplinary engagement or MDT attendance, and transparent CPG development by trusted, multidisciplinary experts. CPGs provide a reassuring framework for clinicians to check their treatment plans against. Clinicians want cancer CPGs to be frequently updated utilising a wiki-like process, and easily accessible online via a comprehensive database, coordinated by a well-trusted development body. CONCLUSION: Future implementation strategies of cancer CPGs in Australia should be tailored to consider these context-specific barriers and facilitators, taking into account both the content of CPGs and the communication of that content. The establishment of a centralised, comprehensive, online database, with living wiki-style cancer CPGs, coordinated by a well-funded development body, along with incorporation of recommendations into point-of-care decision support would potentially address many of the issues identified.
Subject(s)
Guideline Adherence , Neoplasms , Humans , Qualitative Research , Medical Oncology , Hospitals , Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: To address the challenges of rapidly changing healthcare, governments and health services are increasingly emphasising healthcare delivery models that are flexible, person centred, cost-effective and integrate hospital services more closely with primary healthcare and social services. In addition, such models increasingly embed consumer codesign, integration of services, and leverage digital technologies such as telehealth and sophisticated medical records systems. OBJECTIVES: This paper provides a study protocol to describe a method to elicit consumer and healthcare provider needs and expectations for the development of innovative care models. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A literature review identified six key models of care, supported by a common theme of consumer-focused care, along with the international evidence supporting the efficacy of these models. A mixed-methods study of the needs and expectations of consumer members and health providers who reside or work in the area of a new hospital catchment will be undertaken. They will complete a community-specific and provider-specific, short demographic questionnaire (delivered during the recruitment process) and be assigned to facilitator-coordinated online workshops comprising small focus groups. Follow-up interviews will be offered. Culturally and linguistically diverse members and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders and their communities will also be consulted. Data will be analysed thematically (qualitative) and statistically (quantitative), and findings synthesised using a triangulated approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and in a report to stakeholders. This study was reviewed and approved by the relevant Ethics Committee in New South Wales, Australia.
Subject(s)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander , Research Design , Humans , Australia , Delivery of Health Care , HospitalsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People who live in aged care homes have high rates of illness and frailty. Providing evidence-based care to this population is vital to ensure the highest possible quality of life. OBJECTIVE: In this study (CareTrack Aged, CT Aged), we aimed to develop a comprehensive set of clinical indicators for guideline-adherent, appropriate care of commonly managed conditions and processes in aged care. METHODS: Indicators were formulated from recommendations found through systematic searches of Australian and international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Experts reviewed the indicators using a multiround modified Delphi process to develop a consensus on what constitutes appropriate care. RESULTS: From 139 CPGs, 5609 recommendations were used to draft 630 indicators. Clinical experts (n = 41) reviewed the indicators over two rounds. A final set of 236 indicators resulted, mapped to 16 conditions and processes of care. The conditions and processes were admission assessment; bladder and bowel problems; cognitive impairment; depression; dysphagia and aspiration; end of life/palliative care; hearing and vision; infection; medication; mobility and falls; nutrition and hydration; oral and dental care; pain; restraint use; skin integrity and sleep. CONCLUSIONS: The suite of CT Aged clinical indicators can be used for research and assessment of the quality of care in individual facilities and across organizations to guide improvement and to supplement regulation or accreditation of the aged care sector. They are a step forward for Australian and international aged care sectors, helping to improve transparency so that the level of care delivered to aged care consumers can be rigorously monitored and continuously improved.