A manifesto for improving cancer detection: four key considerations when implementing innovations across the interface of primary and secondary care.

Improving cancer outcomes through innovative cancer detection initiatives in primary care is an international policy priority. There are unique implementation challenges to the roll-out and scale-up of different innovations, requiring synchronisation between national policy levers and local implementation strategies. We draw on implementation science to highlight key considerations when seeking to sustainably embed cancer detection initiatives within health systems and clinical practice. Points of action include considering the implications of change on the current configuration of responsibility for detecting cancer; investing in understanding how to adapt systems to support innovations; developing strategies to address inequity when planning innovation implementation; and anticipating and making efforts to mitigate the unintended consequences of innovation. We draw on examples of contemporary cancer detection issues to illustrate how to apply these recommendations to practice.

Routine data in a primary care performance dashboard, Ethiopia.

Objective: To explore the feasibility of building a primary care performance dashboard using DHIS2 data from Ethiopia's largest urban (Addis Ababa), agrarian (Oromia) and pastoral (Somali) regions. Methods: We extracted 26 data elements reported by 12 062 health facilities to DHIS2 for the period 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023. Focusing on indicators of effectiveness, safety and user experience, we built 14 indicators of primary care performance covering reproductive, maternal and child health, human immunodeficiency virus, tuberculosis, noncommunicable disease care and antibiotic prescription. We assessed data completeness by calculating the proportion of facilities reporting each month, and examined the presence of extreme outliers and assessed external validity. Findings: At the regional level, average completeness across all data elements was highest in Addis Ababa (82.9%), followed by Oromia (66.2%) and Somali (52.6%). Private clinics across regions had low completeness, ranging from 38.6% in Somali to 58.7% in Addis Ababa. We found only a few outliers (334 of 816 578 observations) and noted that external validity was high for 11 of 14 indicators of primary care performance. However, the 12-month antiretroviral treatment retention rate and proportions of patients with controlled diabetes or hypertension exhibited poor external validity. Conclusion: The Ethiopian DHIS2 contains information for measuring primary care performance, using simple analytical methods, at national and regional levels and by facility type. Despite remaining data quality issues, the health management information system is an important data source for generating health system performance assessment measures on a national scale.

Assessing the WHO-UNICEF primary health-care measurement framework; Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Objective: To assess the availability of information on indicators of the World Health Organization and United Nations Children's Fund primary health-care measurement framework in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and to outline the opportunities for and challenges to using the framework in these countries. Methods: We reviewed global and national data repositories for quantitative indicators of the framework and conducted a desk review of country documents for qualitative indicators in February-April 2023. We assessed data sources and cross-sectional survey tools to suggest possible sources of information on framework indicators that were not currently reported in the countries. We also identified specific indicators outside the framework on which information is collected in the countries and which could be used to measure primary health-care performance. Findings: Data on 54% (32/59) of the quantitative indicators were partially or completely available for the countries, ranging from 41% (24/59) in Pakistan to 64% (38/59) in Nepal. Information on 41% (66/163) of the qualitative subindicators could be acquired through desk reviews of country-specific documents. Information on input indicators was more readily available than on process and output indicators. The feasibility of acquiring information on the unreported indicators was moderate to high through adaptation of data collection instruments. Conclusion: The primary health-care measurement framework provides a platform to readily assess and track the performance of primary health care. Countries should improve the completeness, quality and use of existing data for strengthening of primary health care.

Home visits versus fixed-site care by community health workers and child survival: a cluster-randomized trial, Mali.

Objective: To test the effect of proactive home visits by trained community health workers (CHWs) on child survival. Methods: We conducted a two arm, parallel, unmasked cluster-randomized trial in 137 village-clusters in rural Mali. From February 2017 to January 2020, 31 761 children enrolled at the trial start or at birth. Village-clusters received either primary care services by CHWs providing regular home visits (intervention) or by CHWs providing care at a fixed site (control). In both arms, user fees were removed and primary health centres received staffing and infrastructure improvements before trial start. Using lifetime birth histories from women aged 15-49 years surveyed annually, we estimated incidence rate ratios (IRR) for intention-to-treat and per-protocol effects on under-five mortality using Poisson regression models. Findings: Over three years, we observed 52 970 person-years (27 332 in intervention arm; 25 638 in control arm). During the trial, 909 children in the intervention arm and 827 children in the control arm died. The under-five mortality rate declined from 142.8 (95% CI: 133.3-152.9) to 56.7 (95% CI: 48.5-66.4) deaths per 1000 live births in the intervention arm; and from 154.3 (95% CI: 144.3-164.9) to 54.9 (95% CI: 45.2-64.5) deaths per 1000 live births in the control arm. Intention-to-treat (IRR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.88-1.19) and per-protocol estimates (IRR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.87-1.18) showed no difference between study arms. Conclusion: Though proactive home visits did not reduce under-five mortality, system-strengthening measures may have contributed to the decline in under-five mortality in both arms.

Bringing Generalists to Global Health: a Missed Opportunity and Call to Action.

The credo of the generalist physician has always been the promotion of health for all, in every aspect: not just multiple vulnerable organ systems, but multiple social, cultural, and political factors that contribute to poor health and exacerbate health inequity. In recent years, the field of global health has also adopted this same mission: working across both national and clinical specialty borders to improve health for all and end health disparities worldwide. Yet within the Society for General Internal Medicine, and among American generalists, engagement in global health, both within and outside the USA, remains uncommon. We see this gap as an opportunity, because in fact generalists in America already have the skills and experience that global health badly needs. SGIM could promote generalists to global health's vanguard, with three core steps. First, we generalists must continue to integrate health for the vulnerable into our domestic work, generating care models applicable in low-resource settings around the globe. Conversely, we must also engage with and implement international ideas and solutions for universal access to primary care for vulnerable patients in the USA. And lastly, we must build platforms to connect ourselves with colleagues worldwide to exchange these learnings.

A Pragmatic Approach to Identifying and Profiling Primary Care Clinicians and Primary Care Practices in the USA.

BACKGROUND: There are no consistent data on US primary care clinicians and primary care practices owing to the lack of standard methods to identify them, hampering efforts in primary care improvement. METHODS: We develop a pragmatic framework that identifies primary care clinicians and practices in the context of the US healthcare system, and applied the framework to the IQVIA OneKey Healthcare Professional database to identify and profile primary care clinicians and practices in the USA. RESULTS: Our framework prescribes sequential steps to identify primary care clinicians by cross-examining clinician specialties and organizational affiliations, and then identify primary care practices based on organization types and presence of primary care clinicians. Applying this framework to the 2021 IQVIA data, we identified 365,751 physicians with a primary specialty in primary care, and after excluding those who further specialized (24%), served as hospitalists (5%), or worked in non-primary care settings (41%), we determined that 179,369 (49%) of them were actually practicing primary care. We identified 287,506 nurse practitioners and 134,083 physician assistants and determined that 88,574 (31%) and 29,781 (22%), respectively, were delivering primary care. We identified 94,489 primary care practices, and found that 45% of them were with one primary care physician, 15% had two physicians, 12% employed nurse practitioners or physician assistants only, and 19% employed both primary care physicians and specialists. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach offers a pragmatic and consistent alternative to the diverse methods currently used to identify and profile primary care workforce and organizations in the USA.

Primary Care Telemedicine and Care Continuity: Implications for Timeliness and Short-term Follow-up Healthcare.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of telemedicine by a patient's own primary care provider (PCP) versus another available PCP is understudied. OBJECTIVE: Examine the association between primary care visit modality with timeliness and follow-up in-person healthcare, including variation by visits with the patient's own PCP versus another PCP. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cohort study including primary care visits in a large, integrated delivery system in 2022. MEASURES: Outcomes included timeliness (visit completed within 7 days of scheduling) and in-person follow-up (PCP visits, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations) within 7 days of the index PCP visit. Logistic regression measured the association between visit modality (in-person, video, and audio-only telemedicine) with the patient's own PCP or another PCP and outcomes, adjusting for characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Among 4,817,317 primary care visits, 59% were in-person, 27% audio-only, and 14% video telemedicine. Most (71.3%) were with the patient's own PCP. Telemedicine visits were timelier, with modality having a larger association for visits with patient's own PCP versus another PCP (P < 0.001). For visits with patient's own PCPs, return office visit rates were 1.2% for in-person, 5.3% for video, and 6.1% for audio-only. For another PCP, rates were 2.2% for in-person, 7.3% for video, and 8.1% for audio. Follow-up ED visits ranged from 1.4% (in-person) to 1.6% (audio-only) with own PCP, compared to 1.9% (in-person) to 2.3% (audio-only) with another PCP. Differences in return office and ED visits between in-person and telemedicine were larger for visits with another PCP compared to their own PCP (P < 0.001). Follow-up hospitalizations were rare, ranging from 0.19% (in-person with own PCP) to 0.32% (video with another PCP). CONCLUSION: Differences in return office and ED visits between in-person and telemedicine were larger when patients saw a less familiar PCP compared to their own PCP, reinforcing the importance of care continuity.

Advancing Primary Care Access: Exploring the Impact of the Virtual Waiting Room on the Quadruple Aim.

BACKGROUND: Community health centers grapple with high no-show rates, posing challenges to patient access and primary care provider (PCP) utilization. AIM: To address these challenges, we implemented a virtual waiting room (VWR) program in April 2023 to enhance patient access and boost PCP utilization. SETTING: Academic community health center in a small urban city in Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Community health patients (n = 8706) and PCP (n = 14). PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The VWR program, initiated in April 2023, involved nurse triage of same-day visit requests for telehealth appropriateness, then placing patients in a standby pool to fill in as a telehealth visit for no-shows or last-minute cancellations in PCP schedules. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Post-implementation, clinic utilization rates between July and September improved from 75.2% in 2022 to 81.2% in 2023 (p < 0.01). PCP feedback was universally positive. Patients experienced a mean wait time of 1.9 h, offering a timely and convenient alternative to urgent care or the ER. DISCUSSION: The VWR is aligned with the quadruple aim of improving patient experience, population health, cost-effectiveness, and PCP satisfaction through improving same-day access and improving PCP schedule utilization. This innovative and reproducible approach in outpatient offices utilizing telehealth holds the potential for enhancing timely access across various medical disciplines.

Challenges and Facilitators in Implementing Remote Patient Monitoring Programs in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in greater use of remote patient monitoring (RPM). However, the use of RPM has been modest compared to other forms of telehealth. OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe barriers to the implementation of RPM among primary care physicians (PCPs) that may be constraining its growth. DESIGN: We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with PCPs across the USA who adopted RPM. Interview questions focused on implementation facilitators and barriers and RPM's impact on quality. We conducted thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews using both inductive and deductive approaches. The analysis was informed by the NASSS (non-adoption and abandonment and challenges to scale-up, spread, and sustainability) framework. PARTICIPANTS: PCPs who practiced at least 10 h per week in an outpatient setting, served adults, and monitored blood pressure and/or blood glucose levels with automatic transmission of data with at least 3 patients. KEY RESULTS: While PCPs generally agreed that RPM improved quality of care for their patients, many identified barriers to adoption and maintenance of RPM programs. Challenges included difficulties handling the influx of data and establishing a manageable workflow, along with digital and health literacy barriers. In addition to these barriers, many PCPs did not believe RPM was profitable. CONCLUSIONS: To encourage ongoing growth of RPM, it will be necessary to address implementation barriers through changes in payment policy, training and education in digital and health literacy, improvements in staff roles and workflows, and new strategies to ensure equitable access.

Impact of Evidence-Based Quality Improvement on Tailoring VA's Patient-Centered Medical Home Model to Women Veterans' Needs.

BACKGROUND: Women Veterans' numerical minority, high rates of military sexual trauma, and gender-specific healthcare needs have complicated implementation of comprehensive primary care (PC) under VA's patient-centered medical home model, Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT). OBJECTIVE: We deployed an evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) approach to tailor PACT to meet women Veterans' needs and studied its effects on women's health (WH) care readiness, team-based care, and burnout. DESIGN: We evaluated EBQI effectiveness in a cluster randomized trial with unbalanced random allocation of 12 VAMCs (8 EBQI vs. 4 control). Clinicians/staff completed web-based surveys at baseline (2014) and 24 months (2016). We adjusted for individual-level covariates (e.g., years at VA) and weighted for non-response in difference-in-difference analyses for readiness and team-based care overall and by teamlet type (mixed-gender PC-PACTs vs. women-only WH-PACTs), as well as post-only burnout comparisons. PARTICIPANTS: We surveyed all clinicians/staff in general PC and WH clinics. INTERVENTION: EBQI involved structured engagement of multilevel, multidisciplinary stakeholders at network, VAMC, and clinic levels toward network-specific QI roadmaps. The research team provided QI training, formative feedback, and external practice facilitation, and support for cross-site collaboration calls to VAMC-level QI teams, which developed roadmap-linked projects adapted to local contexts. MAIN MEASURES: WH care readiness (confidence providing WH care, self-efficacy implementing PACT for women, barriers to providing care for women, gender sensitivity); team-based care (change-readiness, communication, decision-making, PACT-related QI, functioning); burnout. KEY RESULTS: Overall, EBQI had mixed effects which varied substantively by type of PACT. In PC-PACTs, EBQI increased self-efficacy implementing PACT for women and gender sensitivity, even as it lowered confidence. In contrast, in WH-PACTs, EBQI improved change-readiness, team-based communication, and functioning, and was associated with lower burnout. CONCLUSIONS: EBQI effectiveness varied, with WH-PACTs experiencing broader benefits and PC-PACTs improving basic WH care readiness. Lower confidence delivering WH care by PC-PACT members warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The data in this paper represent results from a cluster randomized controlled trial registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02039856).

Integrating Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder into Rural, Primary Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) including buprenorphine are effective, but underutilized. Rural patients experience pronounced disparities in access. To reach rural patients, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has sought to expand buprenorphine prescribing beyond specialty settings and into primary care. OBJECTIVE: Although challenges remain, some rural VA health care systems have begun offering opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment with buprenorphine in primary care. We conducted interviews with clinicians, leaders, and staff within these systems to understand how this outcome had been achieved. DESIGN: Using administrative data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), we identified rural VA health care systems that had improved their rate of primary care-based buprenorphine prescribing over the period 2015-2020. We conducted qualitative interviews (n = 30) with staff involved in implementing or prescribing buprenorphine in these systems to understand the processes that had facilitated implementation. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians, staff, and leaders embedded within rural VA health care systems located in the Northwest, West, Midwest (2), South, and Northeast. APPROACH: Qualitative interviews were analyzed using a mixed inductive/deductive approach. KEY RESULTS: Interviews revealed the processes through which buprenorphine was integrated into primary care, as well as processes insufficient to enact change. Implementation was often initially catalyzed through a targeted hire. Champions then engaged clinicians and leaders one-on-one to "pitch" the case, describe concordance between buprenorphine prescribing and existing goals, and delineate the supportive role that they could provide. Sites were prepared for implementation by developing new clinical teams and redesigning clinical processes. Each of these processes was made possible with the active, instrumental support of leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that rural systems seeking to improve buprenorphine accessibility in primary care may need to alter primary care structures to accommodate buprenorphine prescribing, whether through new hires, team development, or clinical redesign.

Lessons Learned: Evaluation of Fracture Liaison Service Quality Improvement Efforts in a Large Academic Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) care model, a care coordination program for patients experiencing a fragility fracture, is proven to improve management of patients with an osteoporotic fracture, but treatment initiation gaps persist. OBJECTIVE: We describe the evolution of a centralized FLS within a university-based healthcare system, including impact of adding clinical pharmacist consultation, and describe circumstances surrounding continued care gaps. DESIGN: Cohort analysis of osteoporosis medication initiation before FLS, after initial implementation, and after addition of pharmacist consultation. PATIENTS: Individuals aged 65 and older experiencing any fragility fracture between 7/1/16 and 3/31/22. INTERVENTION: A centralized team outreached eligible patients, ordered dual x-ray absorptiometry and laboratory tests as needed, and scheduled an osteoporosis-focused primary care appointment. Three years after FLS implementation, clinical pharmacist consultative review was added prior to the primary care visit. MAIN MEASURES: Initiation of osteoporosis pharmacologic therapy, completion of DXA, primary care follow-up rate, and description of circumstances where therapy was not initiated. KEY RESULTS: Of 1204 new fractures between 7/1/16 and 3/31/22, 315 patients were enrolled in one of two FLS phases, and 89 eligible historical controls were identified. Medication initiation rates went from 22/89 (25%) pre-FLS to 201/428 (47%) after-FLS phase 1 [POST1] (p<0.001) and to 106/187 (57%) after FLS phase 2 (POST2), when clinical pharmacist consultation was added (p=0.03 versus POST1). DXA was completed in 56/89 (67%) of pre-FLS patients, 364/428 (85%) POST1 patients (p<0.001 versus pre), and 163/187 (87%) POST2 (p< 0.001 versus PRE, p=0.59 versus POST1). Of 375 patients who did not initiate osteoporosis medication, more in the combined post-FLS cohorts attended a follow-up primary care appointment (233/308, 76% attended, versus pre-FLS 41/67, 61%, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: An FLS including centralized outreach and care coordination significantly improved patient follow-up, DXA, and medication initiation. Addition of de-centralized pharmacist consultation further improved medication initiation rates.

COVID-19 Disruptions to Social Care Delivery: A Qualitative Study in Two Large, Safety-Net Primary Care Clinics.

BACKGROUND: Social care integration refers to the incorporation of activities into health systems that assist patients with health-related social needs (HRSNs) that negatively impact the health outcomes of their patients, such as food insecurity or homelessness. Social care integration initiatives are becoming more common. The COVID-19 pandemic strained health systems while simultaneously increasing levels of unmet social needs. OBJECTIVE: To describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on established social care delivery in a primary care setting. DESIGN: We used qualitative semi-structured interviews of stakeholders to assess barriers and facilitators to social care delivery in the primary care setting during the COVID-19 health emergency. Data was analyzed using a hybrid inductive/deductive thematic analysis approach with both the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Screen-Navigate-Connect-Address-Evaluate model of social care integration. SETTING: Two safety-net, hospital-based primary care clinics with established screening for food insecurity, homelessness, and legal needs. PARTICIPANTS: Six physicians, six nurses, six members of the social work team (clinical social workers and medical case workers), six community health workers, and six patients (total N = 30) completed interviews. RESULTS: Four major themes were identified. (1) A strained workforce experienced challenges confronting increased levels of HRSNs. (2) Vulnerable populations experienced a disproportionate negative impact in coping with effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on HRSNs. (3) COVID-19 protections compounded social isolation but did not extinguish the sense of community. (4) Fluctuations in the social service landscape led to variable experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted established social care delivery in a primary care setting. Many of the lessons learned about challenges to social care delivery when health systems are strained are important considerations that can inform efforts to expand social care delivery.

Implementing an advanced team-based care model in a federally qualified health center (FQHC): Assessing implementation facilitators and challenges.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to assess implementation facilitators and challenges for advanced team-based care (aTBC) in a federally qualified health center (FQHC). In aTBC, care team coordinators room patients, perform vitals and agenda setting during patient intake, and remain present alongside providers during patient visits. METHODS: The authors conducted a qualitative post-hoc analysis of the aTBC implementation using data from several sources. They used content analysis to code items as facilitators or challenges and thematic analysis to group those into larger themes. Finally, they applied a priori codes from the revised consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) to organize the facilitators and barriers into subdomains. RESULTS: The existing evidence-base around aTBC, the FQHC's ability to pilot and adapt it, and strong implementation leads were key facilitating factors. Challenges included an external shock (i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic), aTBC complexity, and uncertainty about whether success required implementation of the full model versus easier-to-integrate smaller components. CONCLUSIONS: FQHCs that wish to implement aTBC models need strong champions and internal structures for piloting, adapting, and disseminating interventions. FQHC leaders must think strategically about how to build support and demonstrate success to improve an FQHC's chances of expanding and sustaining aTBC.

Primary Care Practice Characteristics Associated With Medical Assistant Staffing Ratios.

This study characterized adult primary care medical assistant (MA) staffing. National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n = 1,252) data were analyzed to examine primary care practice characteristics associated with MA per primary care clinician (PCC) staffing ratios. In 2021, few practices (11.4%) had ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs. Compared with system-owned practices, independent (odds ratio [OR] = 1.76, P <0.05) and medical group-owned (OR = 2.09, P <0.05) practices were more likely to have ratios of 2 or more MAs per PCCs, as were practices with organizational cultures oriented to innovation (P <0.05). Most primary care practices do not have adequate MA staffing.

Practice Transformation in the Transforming Clinical Practice Initiative and Emergency Department Use.

To provide insight on how ambulatory care practices can reduce emergency department (ED) visits, we studied changes in Medicare ED visits for primary and specialty care practices in the Transforming Clinical Practice Initiative. We compared practices that transformed more vs less during the 6-year period ending in 2021 (3,773 practices). Using data from a practice transformation assessment tool completed at multiple intervals, we found improvement in the transformation score was associated with reduced ED visits by 6% and 4% for primary and specialty care practices, respectively, 3 to 4 years after first assessment. Transformation in 5 of 8 domains contributed to reduced ED visits.

Clinician perspectives on delivering primary and specialty palliative care in community oncology practices.

PURPOSE: Clinical guidelines recommend early palliative care for patients with advanced lung cancer. In rural and underserved community oncology practices with limited resources, both primary palliative care from an oncologist and specialty palliative care are needed to address patients' palliative care needs. The aim of this study is to describe community oncology clinicians' primary palliative care practices and perspectives on integrating specialty palliative care into routine advanced lung cancer treatment in rural and underserved communities. METHODS: Participants were clinicians recruited from 15 predominantly rural community oncology practices in Kentucky. Participants completed a one-time survey regarding their primary palliative care practices and knowledge, barriers, and facilitators to integrating specialty palliative care into advanced-stage lung cancer treatment. RESULTS: Forty-seven clinicians (30% oncologists) participated. The majority (72.3%) of clinicians worked in a rural county. Over 70% reported routinely asking patients about symptom and physical function concerns, whereas less than half reported routinely asking about key prognostic concerns. Roughly 30% held at least one palliative care misconception (e.g., palliative care is for only those who are stopping cancer treatment). Clinician-reported barriers to specialty palliative care referrals included fear a referral would send the wrong message to patients (77%) and concern about burdening patients with appointments (53%). Notably, the most common clinician-reported facilitator was a patient asking for a referral (93.6%). CONCLUSION: Educational programs and outreach efforts are needed to inform community oncology clinicians about palliative care, empower patients to request referrals, and facilitate patients' palliative care needs assessment, documentation, and standardized referral templates.

Exploring the lack of continuity of care in older cancer patients under China's 'integrated health system' reform.

BACKGROUND: Continuity of care is essential to older patients' health outcomes, especially for those with complex needs. It is a key function of primary healthcare. Despite China's policy efforts to promote continuity of care and an integrated healthcare system, primary healthcare centres (PHCs) are generally very underused. OBJECTIVES: To explore the experience and perception of continuity of care in older cancer patients, and to examine how PHCs play a role in the continuity of care within the healthcare system in China. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in Nantong city, Jiangsu province, China. A combination of deductive and inductive analysis was conducted thematically. RESULTS: Interviews with 29 patients highlighted three key themes: no guidance for patients in connecting with different levels of doctors, unmet patients' needs under specialist-led follow-up care, and poor coordination and communication across healthcare levels. This study clearly illustrated patients' lack of personal awareness and experience of care continuity, a key issue despite China's drive for an integrated healthcare system. CONCLUSION: The need for continuity of care at each stage of cancer care is largely unmeasured in the current healthcare system for older patients. PHCs offer benefits which include convenience, less burdened doctors with more time, and lower out-of-pocket payment compared to tertiary hospitals, especially for patients with long-term healthcare needs. However, addressing barriers such as the absence of integrated medical records and unclear roles of PHCs are needed to improve the crucial role of PHCs in continuity of care.

Multilevel perspectives on the implementation of the collaborative care model for depression and anxiety in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based mental health treatment in primary care. A greater understanding of the determinants of successful CoCM implementation, particularly the characteristics of multi-level implementers, is needed. METHODS: This study was a process evaluation of the Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) study (NCT04321876) in which CoCM was implemented in 11 primary care practices. CBHP implementation included screening for depression and anxiety, referral to CBHP, and treatment with behavioral care managers (BCMs). Interviews were conducted 4- and 15-months post-implementation with BCMs, practice managers, and practice champions (primary care clinicians). We used framework-guided rapid qualitative analysis with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Version 2.0, focused on the Individuals domain, to analyze response data. These data represented the roles of Mid-Level Leaders (practice managers), Implementation Team Members (clinicians, support staff), Innovation Deliverers (BCMs), and Innovation Recipients (primary care/CBHP patients) and their characteristics (i.e., Need, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation). RESULTS: Mid-level leaders (practice managers) were enthusiastic about CBHP (Motivation), appreciated integrating mental health services into primary care (Need), and had time to assist clinicians (Opportunity). Although CBHP lessened the burden for implementation team members (clinicians, staff; Need), some were hesitant to reallocate patient care (Motivation). Innovation deliverers (BCMs) were eager to deliver CBHP (Motivation) and confident in assisting patients (Capability); their opportunity to deliver CBHP could be limited by clinician referrals (Opportunity). Although CBHP alleviated barriers for innovation recipients (patients; Need), it was difficult to secure services for those with severe conditions (Capability) and certain insurance types (Opportunity). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, respondents favored sustaining CoCM and highlighted the positive impacts on the practice, health care team, and patients. Participants emphasized the benefits of integrating mental health services into primary care and how CBHP lessened the burden on clinicians while providing patients with comprehensive care. Barriers to CBHP implementation included ensuring appropriate patient referrals, providing treatment for patients with higher-level needs, and incentivizing clinician engagement. Future CoCM implementation should include strategies focused on education and training, encouraging clinician buy-in, and preparing referral paths for patients with more severe conditions or diverse needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04321876). Registered: March 25,2020. Retrospectively registered.

Integration of primary care and palliative care services to improve equality and equity at the end-of-life: Findings from realist stakeholder workshops.

BACKGROUND: Inequalities in access to palliative and end of life care are longstanding. Integration of primary and palliative care has the potential to improve equity in the community. Evidence to inform integration is scarce as research that considers integration of primary care and palliative care services is rare. AIM: To address the questions: 'how can inequalities in access to community palliative and end of life care be improved through the integration of primary and palliative care, and what are the benefits?' DESIGN: A theory-driven realist inquiry with two stakeholder workshops to explore how, when and why inequalities can be improved through integration. Realist analysis leading to explanatory context(c)-mechanism(m)-outcome(o) configurations(c) (CMOCs). FINDINGS: A total of 27 participants attended online workshops (July and September 2022): patient and public members (n = 6), commissioners (n = 2), primary care (n = 5) and specialist palliative care professionals (n = 14). Most were White British (n = 22), other ethnicities were Asian (n = 3), Black African (n = 1) and British mixed race (n = 1). Power imbalances and racism hinder people from ethnic minority backgrounds accessing current services. Shared commitment to addressing these across palliative care and primary care is required in integrated partnerships. Partnership functioning depends on trusted relationships and effective communication, enabled by co-location and record sharing. Positive patient experiences provide affirmation for the multi-disciplinary team, grow confidence and drive improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Integration to address inequalities needs recognition of current barriers. Integration grounded in trust, faith and confidence can lead to a cycle of positive patient, carer and professional experience. Prioritising inequalities as whole system concern is required for future service delivery and research.