Determinants of health and wellbeing in refractory epilepsy and surgery: The Patient Reported, ImpleMentation sciEnce (PRIME) model

Determining the role and responsibilities of the community epilepsy nurse in the management of epilepsy

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to enhance the understanding of the core elements and influencing factors on the community-based epilepsy nurse's role and responsibilities.

BACKGROUND

Internationally, epilepsy nurse specialists play a key role in providing person-centred care and management of epilepsy but there is a gap in understanding of their role in the community.

DESIGN

A national three-stage, mixed-method study was conducted.

METHODS

One-on-one, in-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted online with 12 community-based epilepsy nurses (Stage 1); retrospective analysis of data collected from the National Epilepsy Line, a nurse-led community helpline (Stage 2); and focus group conducted with four epilepsy nurses, to delve further into emerging findings (Stage 3). A thematic analysis was conducted in Stages 1 and 3, and a descriptive statistical analysis of Stage 2 data. Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative studies checklist was followed for reporting.

RESULTS

Three key themes emerged: (1) The epilepsy nurse career trajectory highlighted a lack of standardised qualifications, competencies, and career opportunities. (2) The key components of the epilepsy nurse role explored role diversity, responsibilities, and models of practice in the management of living with epilepsy, and experiences navigating complex fragmented systems and practices. (3) Shifting work practices detailed the adapting work practices, impacted by changing service demands, including COVID-19 pandemic experiences, role boundaries, funding, and resource availability.

CONCLUSION

Community epilepsy nurses play a pivotal role in providing holistic, person-centred epilepsy management They contribute to identifying and addressing service gaps through innovating and implementing change in service design and delivery.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Epilepsy nurses' person-centred approach to epilepsy management is influenced by the limited investment in epilepsy-specific integrated care initiatives, and their perceived value is impacted by the lack of national standardisation of their role and scope of practice.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Only epilepsy nurses' perspectives were sought.

Too much theory and not enough practice? The challenge of implementation science application in healthcare practice

BACKGROUND

Implementation science (IS) should contribute to maintaining high standards of care across healthcare systems and enhancing care practices. However, despite the evident need for greater and more rapid uptake and integration of evidence in practice, IS design and methodology fall short of the needs of effective translation.

AIM

In this paper we examine what it is about IS that makes it so appealing for effective uptake of interventions in routine practice, and yet so difficult to achieve. We propose a number of ways that implementation scientists could build mutual relationships with healthcare practitioners and other stakeholders including public members to ensure greater shared care practices, and highlight the value of IS training, collaborative educational events, and co-designed research.

DISCUSSION

More consideration should be given to IS applications in healthcare contexts. Implementation scientists can make a valuable contribution by mobilizing theory and improving practice. However, goals for an evidence-based system may be more appropriately achieved through greater outreach and collaboration, with methods that are flexible to support rapid implementation in complex adaptive systems. Collective learning and mutual trust can be cultivated by embedding researchers into healthcare services while offering greater opportunities for practitioners to learn about, and engage in, implementation research.

CONCLUSION

To bridge the worlds of healthcare practice and IS, researchers could be more consistent in the relationships they build with professionals and the public, communicating through a shared language and co-joining practical approaches to effective implementation. This will build capacity for improved collaboration and foster respectful, interdisciplinary relationships.

The role of implementation science in improving epilepsy surgery utilization

Randomized controlled studies demonstrated that patients with intractable epilepsy could benefit significantly more from epilepsy surgery than from continuing medical therapy. Unfortunately, robust efforts over the last few decades, including the formation and dissemination of guidelines and practice parameters, did not improve the utilization of epilepsy surgery. Epilepsy surgery remains one of the most underutilized evidence-based interventions in modern medicine. A new scientific study of methods has emerged to improve uptake of evidence-based practices, named implementation science (IS). Despite its tremendous rise in popularity in various domains, its usage to mitigate epilepsy surgery underutilization is very limited. In fact, the application of principles and methods of IS are somewhat restricted in the entire neuroscience field, where quality improvement (QI) efforts primarily drive the provision of high-quality health care. Although both QI efforts and IS have a similar goal of improving healthcare quality, they differ significantly in associated terminologies, concepts, and approaches. For implementing high-quality, evidence-based practices in routine clinical settings, we need a better understanding of IS methods and closer integration between QI and IS fields. Recognizing a dearth of awareness of IS in the neuroscience community, the first part of the review addresses the fundamentals of IS, focusing on multifaceted implementation strategies that neurologists can apply in their clinical practice. In the second part of the review, an entire illustrative case is presented to familiarize neurologists with the practical application of diverse implementation strategies to mitigate the underutilization of epilepsy surgery.

Implementation Science to Improve Quality of Neurological Care

Neurological disorders are the leading cause of disability and the second leading cause of death globally. To challenge this enormous disease burden, scientists are pursuing innovative solutions to maintain and improve the quality of neurological care. Despite the availability of many effective evidence-based practices, many patients with neurological disorders cannot access these (or receive them inefficiently after a long delay) and may be exposed to unnecessary, expensive, and potentially harmful treatments. To promote the systematic uptake of evidence-based practices into the real world, a new scientific study of methods has been developed: implementation science. In implementation science research, transdisciplinary research teams systematically (using theory, model, and framework) assess local barriers to facilitate the adoption of evidence-based practices and examine potential solutions using implementation strategies (interventions that help adoption of intended practices) targeting multiple levels in the health care system, including patient, provider, clinic, facility, organization, or broader community and policy environment. The success of these strategies (implementation outcomes) is measured by the extent and quality of the implementation. Implementation studies can be either observational or interventional but are distinct from traditional efficacy or effectiveness studies. Traditional neuroscience research and clinical trials, conducted in controlled settings, focus on discovering new insights with little consideration of translating those insights into the everyday practice of a resource-constrained and dynamic health care system. Thus, neurologists should become familiar with implementation science to reduce the knowledge-practice gap, maximize health care value, and improve management of brain disorders affecting public health.

Underutilization of epilepsy surgery: Part I: A scoping review of barriers

One-third of persons with epilepsy have seizures despite appropriate medical therapy. Drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) is associated with neurocognitive and psychological decline, poor quality of life, increased risk of premature death, and greater economic burden. Epilepsy surgery is an effective and safe treatment for a subset of people with DRE but remains one of the most underutilized evidence-based treatments in modern medicine. The reasons for this quality gap are insufficiently understood. In this comprehensive review, we compile known significant barriers to epilepsy surgery, originating from both patient/family-related factors and physician/health system components. Important patient-related factors include individual and epilepsy characteristics which bias towards continued preferential use of poorly effective medications, as well as patient perspectives and misconceptions of surgical risks and benefits. Health system and physician-related barriers include demonstrable knowledge gaps among physicians, inadequate access to comprehensive epilepsy centers, complex presurgical evaluations, insufficient research, and socioeconomic bias when choosing appropriate surgical candidates.

Determining the role and responsibilities of the Australian epilepsy nurse in the management of epilepsy: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition affecting between 3% and 3.5% of the Australian population at some point in their lifetime. The effective management of chronic and complex conditions such as epilepsy requires person-centred and coordinated care across sectors, from primary to tertiary healthcare. Internationally, epilepsy nurse specialists are frequently identified as playing a vital role in improving the integration of epilepsy care and enhancing patient self-management. This workforce has not been the focus of research in Australia to date.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multistage mixed-method study examines the role and responsibilities of epilepsy nurses, particularly in primary and community care settings, across Australia, including through the provision of a nurse helpline service. A nationwide sample of 30 epilepsy nurses will be purposively recruited via advertisements distributed by epilepsy organisations and through word-of-mouth snowball sampling. Two stages (1 and 3) consist of a demographic questionnaire and semistructured interviews (individual or group) with epilepsy nurse participants, with the thematic data analysis from this work informing the areas for focus in stage 3. Stage 2 comprises of a retrospective descriptive analysis of phone call data from Epilepsy Action Australia's National Epilepsy Line service to identify types of users, their needs and reasons for using the service, and to characterise the range of activities undertaken by the nurse call takers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for this study was granted by Macquarie University (HREC: 52020668117612). Findings of the study will be published through peer-reviewed journal articles and summary reports to key stakeholders, and disseminated through public forums and academic conference presentations. Study findings will also be communicated to people living with epilepsy and families.

Identification and referral of patients with refractory epilepsy from the primary to the tertiary care interface in New South Wales, Australia

OBJECTIVES

This mixed-method feasibility study conducted in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, aimed to explore clinical practices around the identification of patients with refractory epilepsy and referral from primary care to Tertiary Epilepsy Centers. The perceptions of general practitioners, neurologists, and adults living with refractory epilepsy were considered.

METHODS

Fifty-two data collection events were achieved through 22 semi-structured interviews with six neurologists and 12 adults who currently have, or have had refractory epilepsy, and four family members, 10 clinical observations of patient consultations and 20 surveys with general practitioners. A thematic analysis was conducted on the qualitative data alongside assessment of observational fieldnotes and survey data.

FINDINGS

Two main themes emerged: 1) Patient healthcare pathways and care experiences highlighted the complex and deeply contextualized experiences of both patients and healthcare professionals, from first identification of people's seizures, in primary and community care settings, to referral to Tertiary Epilepsy Centers, shedding light on a fragmented, nonstandardized referral process, influenced by both individual and shared-care practices. 2) Factors impacting referrals and patient pathways indicated that onward referral to a Tertiary Epilepsy Center is affected by the knowledge, or the lack thereof, of healthcare professionals regarding treatment options. Barriers include limited person-centered care, shared decision-making, and refractory epilepsy education for healthcare professionals, which can delay patients' disease identification and can hinder speedy referral pathways and processes, in Australia for up to 17 years. In addition, person-centered communication around care pathways is affected by relationships between clinicians, patients, and family members.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified a noticeable lack of standardized care across epilepsy-related healthcare sectors, which recognizes a need for developing and implementing clearer epilepsy-related guidelines and Continuing Professional Development in the primary and community care settings. This, however, requires greater collaboration and commitment in the primary, community, and tertiary care sectors to address the ongoing misconceptions around professional roles and responsibilities to optimize shared-care practices. Ultimately, prioritizing person-centered care on both patients' and professionals' agendas, in order to improve satisfaction with care experiences of people living with complex epilepsy.