Healthcare professional views about a prehospital redirection pathway for stroke thrombectomy: a multiphase deductive qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical thrombectomy for stroke is highly effective but time-critical. Delays are common because many patients require transfer between local hospitals and regional centres. A two-stage prehospital redirection pathway consisting of a simple ambulance screen followed by regional centre assessment to select patients for direct admission could optimise access. However, implementation might be challenged by the limited number of thrombectomy providers, a lack of prehospital diagnostic tests for selecting patients and whether finite resources can accommodate longer ambulance journeys plus greater central admissions. We undertook a three-phase, multiregional, qualitative study to obtain health professional views on the acceptability and feasibility of a new pathway. METHODS: Online focus groups/semistructured interviews were undertaken designed to capture important contextual influences. We purposively sampled NHS staff in four regions of England. Anonymised interview transcripts underwent deductive thematic analysis guided by the NASSS (Non-adoption, Abandonment and Challenges to Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability, Implementation) Implementation Science framework. RESULTS: Twenty-eight staff participated in 4 focus groups, 2 group interviews and 18 individual interviews across 4 Ambulance Trusts, 5 Hospital Trusts and 3 Integrated Stroke Delivery Networks (ISDNs). Five deductive themes were identified: (1) (suspected) stroke as a condition, (2) the pathway change, (3) the value participants placed on the proposed pathway, (4) the possible impact on NHS organisations/adopter systems and (5) the wider healthcare context. Participants perceived suspected stroke as a complex scenario. Most viewed the proposed new thrombectomy pathway as beneficial but potentially challenging to implement. Organisational concerns included staff shortages, increased workflow and bed capacity. Participants also reported wider socioeconomic issues impacting on their services contributing to concerns around the future implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Positive views from health professionals were expressed about the concept of a proposed pathway while raising key content and implementation challenges and useful 'real-world' issues for consideration.

Patients who call emergency ambulances for primary care problems: a qualitative study of the decision-making process.

BACKGROUND: Telephone calls for emergency ambulances are rising annually, increasing the pressure on ambulance resources for clinical problems that could often be appropriately managed in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To explore and understand patient and carer decision making around calling an ambulance for primary care-appropriate health problems. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients and carers who had called an ambulance for a primary care-appropriate problem. Participants were identified using a purposive sampling method by a non-participating research clinician attending '999' ambulance calls. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts was undertaken. RESULTS: A superordinate theme, patient and carer anxiety in urgent-care decision making, and four subthemes were explored: perceptions of ambulance-based urgent care; contrasting perceptions of community-based urgent care; influence of previous urgent care experiences in decision making; and interpersonal factors in lay assessment and management of medical risk and subsequent decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Many calls are based on fundamental misconceptions about the types of treatment other urgent-care avenues can provide, which may be amenable to educational intervention. This is particularly relevant for patients with chronic conditions with frequent exacerbations. Callers who have care responsibilities often default to the most immediate response available, with decision making driven by a lower tolerance of perceived risk. There may be a greater role for more detailed triage in these cases, and closer working between ambulance responses and urgent primary care, as a perceived or actual distance between these two service sectors may be influencing patient decision making on urgent care.

Patients' perceptions of depression and coronary heart disease: a qualitative UPBEAT-UK study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of depression in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) is high but little is known about patients' own perceptions and experiences of this. This study aimed to explore (i) primary care (PC) patients' perceptions of links between their physical condition and mental health, (ii) their experiences of living with depression and CHD and (iii) their own self-help strategies and attitudes to current PC interventions for depression. METHOD: Qualitative study using consecutive sampling, in-depth interviews and thematic analysis using a process of constant comparison. 30 participants from the UPBEAT-UK cohort study, with CHD and symptoms of depression. All participants were registered on the General Practitioner (GP) primary care, coronary register. RESULTS: A personal and social story of loss underpinned participants' accounts of their lives, both before and after their experience of having CHD. This theme included two interrelated domains: interpersonal loss and loss centred upon health/control issues. Strong links were made between CHD and depression by men who felt emasculated by CHD. Weaker links were made by participants who had experienced distressing life events such as divorce and bereavement or were living with additional chronic health conditions (i.e. multimorbidity). Participants also felt 'depressed' by the 'medicalisation' of their lives, loneliness and the experience of ageing and ill health. Just under half the sample had consulted their GP about their low mood and participants were somewhat ambivalent about accessing primary care interventions for depression believing the GP would not be able to help them with complex health and social issues. Talking therapies and interventions providing the opportunity for social interaction, support and exercise, such as Cardiac Rehabilitation, were thought to be helpful whereas anti-depressants were not favoured. CONCLUSIONS: The experiences and needs of patients with CHD and depression are diverse and include psycho-social issues involving interpersonal and health/control losses. In view of the varying social and health needs of patients with CHD and depression the adoption of a holistic, case management approach to care is recommended together with personalised support providing the opportunity for patients to develop and achieve life and health goals, where appropriate.