Introducing care pathway commissioning to primary dental care: the concept

Specialists' management of permanent dentition traumatic dental injuries in 7-16-year-olds: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND/AIM

Specialist paediatric dentists are integral to dental trauma care pathways. General dentists rely on specialist input, more so in complex cases. Little is known about specialists' role in these pathways or the perceived barriers they face. The aim is to explore specialists' role in managing traumatic dental injuries in the permanent dentition in children.

MATERIAL/METHODS

Face-to-face (remote video) online semi-structured interviews were undertaken. All UK specialists were invited by email. Purposeful sampling aimed to investigate representation from the devolved nations, presence/absence of working within a managed-clinical network and level of care provision. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Data saturation was reached after nine interviews. Three main themes established were: inconsistent access to care; the need to formalise traumatic dental injuries care pathways; educationally upskilling general dentists. Geographical variation in provision of specialist and out-of-hours/emergency department care meant patients risked not receiving care by the most appropriate individual. Formalizing care pathways by clearly defining the role of each stakeholder (specialist, dentist, medical professionals and parents) and developing a method to assess complexity was perceived to be essential to improving treatment outcomes. Upskilling general dentists in trauma management appeared essential. A potential lack of engagement was raised, with a suggestion that trauma management education should become core continuing-professional development.

CONCLUSIONS

Specialist input should be available in the management of traumatic dental injuries. Current access to specialist care is inequitable across the UK. Formalizing care pathways and upskilling general dentists could ease inconsistencies.

The potential harm of not following clinical practice guideline recommendations

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations for clinicians on the basis of best evidence. CPGs are often not followed because of numerous barriers, including lack of awareness, inability to understand recommendations, and problems with implementation.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A case report is presented in which treatment of a patient's incipient caries lesions may not have followed a CPG available to practitioners, recommending conservative nonrestorative medical interventions. The resulting treatment led to pain and the need for endodontic therapy and full-coverage restoration.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

This case represents possible mismanagement leading to undue pain and additional costs that could have been avoided by being aware of, and following, the recommendations from CPGs.

Presenting patients with information on their oral health risk: the PREFER three-arm RCT and ethnography

Background

A new NHS dental practice contract is being tested using a traffic light (TL) system that categorises patients as being at red (high), amber (medium) or green (low) risk of poor oral health. This is intended to increase the emphasis on preventative dentistry, including giving advice on ways patients can improve their oral health. Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLF™) cameras (Inspektor Research Systems BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) also potentially offer a vivid portrayal of information on patients’ oral health.

Methods

Systematic review – objective: to investigate how patients value and respond to different forms of information on health risks. Methods: electronic searches of nine databases, hand-searching of eight specialist journals and backwards and forwards citation-chasing followed by duplicate title, abstract- and paper-screening and data-extraction. Inclusion criteria limited studies to personalised information on risk given to patients as part of their health care. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) – setting: NHS dental practice. Objective: to investigate patients’ preferences for and response to different forms of information about risk given at check-ups. Design: a pragmatic, multicentred, three-arm, parallel-group, patient RCT. Participants: adults with a high/medium risk of poor oral health attending NHS dental practices. Interventions: (1) information given verbally supported by a card showing the patient’s TL risk category; (2) information given verbally supported by a QLF photograph of the patient’s mouth. The control was verbal information only (usual care). Main outcome measures: primary outcome – median valuation for the three forms of information measured by willingness to pay (WTP). Secondary outcomes included toothbrushing frequency and duration, dietary sugar intake, smoking status, self-rated oral health, a basic periodontal examination, Plaque Percentage Index and the number of tooth surfaces affected by caries (as measured by QLF). Qualitative study – an ethnography involving observations of 368 dental appointments and interviews with patients and dental teams.

Results

Systematic review – the review identified 12 papers (nine of which were RCTs). Eight studies involved the use of computerised risk assessments in primary care. Intervention effects were generally modest, even with respect to modifying risk perceptions rather than altering behaviour or clinical outcomes. RCT – the trial found that 51% of patients identified verbal information as their most preferred form, 35% identified QLF as most preferred and 14% identified TL information as most preferred. The median WTP for TL was about half that for verbal information alone. Although at 6 and 12 months patients reported taking less sugar in drinks, and at 12 months patients reported longer toothbrushing, there was no difference by information group. Qualitative study – there was very little explicit risk talk. Lifestyle discussions were often cursory to avoid causing shame or embarrassment to patients.

Limitations

Only 45% of patients were retained in the trial at 6 months and 31% were retained at 12 months. The trial was conducted in four dental practices, and five dental practices were involved in the qualitative work.

Conclusions

Patients prefer personal, detailed verbal advice on oral health at their check-up. A new NHS dental practice contract using TL categorisation might make this less likely.

Future work

Research on how to deliver, within time constraints, effective advice to patients on preventing poor oral health. More research on ‘risk work’ in wider clinical settings is also needed.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71242343.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Presenting information on dental risk: PREFER study protocol for a randomised controlled trial involving patients receiving a dental check-up

Introduction

A new dental contract being tested in England places patients into traffic light categories according to risk (Red = High risk). This reflects health policy which emphasises patients' shared responsibility for their health, and a growing expectation that clinicians discuss health risk in consultations. Alongside this, there are technological developments such as scans and photographs which have generated new, vivid imagery which may be used to communicate risk information to patients. However, there is little evidence as to whether the form in which risk information is given is important.

Methods

The PREFER study is a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm, patient-level randomised controlled trial, based in four NHS dental practices, from which 400 high/medium risk patients will be recruited. The study compares three ways of communicating risk information at dental check-ups: 1) verbal only (usual care); 2) a Traffic Light graphic with verbal explanation; 3) a Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLF) photograph showing, for example, patches of red fluorescence where dental plaque has been present for two days or more (with a verbal explanation). The study assesses patient preferences using the economic preference-based valuation methodology Willingness-to-Pay (WTP). Any changes in oral self-care (for example in tooth-brushing), will be measured by self-report, and clinical outcome data collected by clinicians and extracted from QLF photographs. Predictors and moderators of any behaviour change will be explored using demographic characteristics and psychological variables from the Extended Parallel Process Model. A cost-benefit framework will explore the financial implications for NHS dentistry of the three risk presentation methods.

Can conditional health policies be justified? A policy analysis of the new NHS dental contract reforms

Conditional policies, which emphasise personal responsibility, are becoming increasingly common in healthcare. Although used widely internationally, they are relatively new within the UK health system where there have been concerns about whether they can be justified. New NHS dental contracts include the introduction of a conditional component that restricts certain patients from accessing a full range of treatment until they have complied with preventative action. A policy analysis of published documents on the NHS dental contract reforms from 2009 to 2016 was conducted to consider how conditionality is justified and whether its execution is likely to cause distributional effects. Contractualist, paternalistic and mutualist arguments that reflect notions of responsibility and obligation are used as justification within policy. Underlying these arguments is an emphasis on preserving the finite resources of a strained NHS. We argue that the proposed conditional component may differentially affect disadvantaged patients, who do not necessarily have access to the resources needed to meet the behavioural requirements. As such, the conditional component of the NHS dental contract reform has the potential to exacerbate oral health inequalities. Conditional health policies may challenge core NHS principles and, as is the case with any conditional policy, should be carefully considered to ensure they do not exacerbate health inequities.

The INCENTIVE study: a mixed-methods evaluation of an innovation in commissioning and delivery of primary dental care compared with traditional dental contracting

Background

Over the past decade, commissioning of primary care dentistry has seen contract currency evolving from payment for units of dental activity (UDAs) towards blended contracts that include key performance indicators such as access, quality and improved health outcome.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate a blended/incentive-driven model of dental service provision. To (1) explore stakeholder perspectives of the new service delivery model; (2) assess the effectiveness of the new service delivery model in reducing the risk of and amount of dental disease and enhancing oral health-related quality of life (OHQoL) in patients; and (3) assess cost-effectiveness of the new service delivery model.

Methods

Using a mixed-methods approach, the study included three dental practices working under the blended/incentive-driven (incentive) contract and three working under the UDAs (traditional) contract. All were based in West Yorkshire. The qualitative study reports on the meaning of key aspects of the model for three stakeholder groups [lay people (patients and individuals without a dentist), commissioners and the primary care dental teams], with framework analysis of focus group and semistructured interview data. A non-randomised study compared clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatment under the two contracts. The primary outcome was gingivitis, measured using bleeding on probing. Secondary outcomes included OHQoL and cost-effectiveness.

Results

Participants in the qualitative study associated the incentive contract with more access, greater use of skill mix and improved health outcomes. In the quantitative analyses, of 550 participants recruited, 291 attended baseline and follow-up. Given missing data and following quality assurance, 188 were included in the bleeding on probing analysis, 187 in the caries assessment and 210 in the economic analysis. The results were mixed. The primary outcome favoured the incentive practices, whereas the assessment of caries favoured the traditional practices. Incentive practices attracted a higher cost for the service commissioner, but were financially attractive for the dental provider at the practice level. Differences in generic health-related quality of life were negligible. Positive changes over time in OHQoL in both groups were statistically significant.

Limitations

The results of the quantitative analysis should be treated with caution given small sample numbers, reservations about the validity of pooling, differential dropout results and data quality issues.

Conclusions

A large proportion of people in this study who had access to a dentist did not follow up on oral care. These individuals are more likely to be younger males and have poorer oral health. Although access to dental services was increased, this did not appear to facilitate continued use of services.

Future work

Further research is required to understand how best to promote and encourage appropriate dental service attendance, especially among those with a high level of need, to avoid increasing health inequalities, and to assess the financial impact of the contract. For dental practitioners, there are challenges around perceptions about preventative dentistry and use of the risk assessments and care pathways. Changes in skill mix pose further challenges.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Conscious sedation: is this provision equitable? Analysis of sedation services provided within primary dental care in England, 2012-2014

Aim:

Patients receiving primary dental care may occasionally require conscious sedation as an adjunct to care. It is one of a range of options to support anxious patients or those undergoing difficult procedures. The aim of this study was to examine patterns of conscious sedation within primary dental care in relation to patient demography, deprivation status, geography (local authority, region) and type of care (Band) within England to examine equity in distribution of service provision.

Materials and Methods:

Descriptive analysis of cross-sectional primary dental care data, obtained from national claims held by the National Health Service (NHS) Business Services Authority, on patients who had received one or more courses of care involving sedation.

Results:

Just under 137,000 episodes of care involving sedation are provided for over 120,000 patients per year, the majority of which are for adults. Four out of ten (41%) patients were children, with 6–12-year-olds forming the largest group; 6% were aged under six years. Eleven per cent of patients had more than one course of care involving sedation, with adults aged 25–34 years having the highest rate: 1.17 (s.d.: 0.887) in 2012/2013 and 1.16 (s.d.: 0.724) in 2013/2014. There was a clear social gradient, whereby the most deprived quintile had the highest volume of patients that had received sedation at least once in primary dental care in both years (31.5%). Whilst there was a clear social gradient amongst children and young adults who received sedation, the gradient flattened among middle-aged and was flat amongst older adults. The majority of courses of care involving sedation were associated with Band 2 claims for care (88.6% in 2012/2013; 88.8 in 2013/2014). Whilst one or more patients in all higher tier local authorities received care involving sedation, there were marked geographic inequalities.

Discussion:

Patients receive sedation in support of NHS primary dental care across the life course and social spectrum. Whilst the pattern of uptake of care parallels the social gradient in younger age groups overall, there are clear geographical inequalities in provision. As sedation is only one of a series of adjuncts to care which may be provided across different sectors of the health system, a wider systems analysis should be undertaken as the findings raise important issues about equitable access to appropriate care. Furthermore, there should be a greater emphasis on prevention to reduce the need for care. The implications for child oral health, access and quality are discussed.

Developing care pathways--lessons from the Steele Review implementation in England

OBJECTIVE

This paper sets out to discuss the concept of care pathways, review their definition, features and implementation and using an example from the NHS dental system in England guide the development of an elder care pathway.

BACKGROUND

Care pathways have developed from quality management approaches in industry and focus on a number of steps which are intended to lead to expected outcomes. The existing definition and descriptors of care pathways serve well, but miss the complex process underlying the development of pathways, their structure, implementation and evaluation.

FINDINGS

The literature identifies key features of clinical pathways and from the developing field of implementation science, the factors likely to support pathway implementation. Pathways must be generic enough to enable them to be applicable broadly, but specific enough for them to be locally relevant and population specific. The development of care pathways in the National Health Service (NHS) Dental Service in England is described and when compared with the implementation science literature exhibits features identified as positive factors for implementation. As a result a contribution to the pathway definition literature is offered.

CONCLUSIONS

Learning from the literature and the practical experience described from England, the process for developing dental care pathways for dependent elders should begin with the creation of a high level pathway, which is cognisant of the clinical and implementation science evidence base.

Clinical leadership and prevention in practice: is a needs led preventive approach to the delivery of care to improve quality, outcomes and value in primary dental care practice a realistic concept?

Background

There is a need to improve access to, and the quality of, service delivery in NHS primary dental care. Building public health thinking and leadership capacity in clinicians from primary care teams was seen as an underpinning component to achieving this goal. Clinical teams contributed to service redesign concepts and were contractually supported to embrace a preventive approach.

Methods

Improvement in quality and preventive focus of dental practice care delivery was explored through determining the impact of several projects, to share how evidence, skill mix and clinical leadership could be utilised in design, implementation and measurement of care outcomes in general dental practice in order to champion and advocate change, during a period of substantial change within the NHS system.

The projects were:

1. A needs-led, evidence informed preventive care pathway approach to primary dental care delivery with a focus on quality and outcomes.

2. Building clinical leadership to influence and advocate for improved quality of care; and spread of learning through local professional networks. This comprised two separate projects: improved access for very young children called “Baby Teeth DO Matter” and the production of a clinically led, evidence-based guidance for periodontyal treatment in primary care called “Healthy Gums DO Matter”.

Results

What worked and what hindered progress, is described. The projects developed understanding of how working with ‘local majorities’ of clinicians influenced, adoption and spread of learning, and the impact in prompting wider policy and contract reform in England.

Conclusions

The projects identified issues that required change to meet population need. Clinicians were allowed to innovate in an evironment working together with commissioners, patients and public health colleagues. Communication and the development of clinical leadership led to the development of an infrastructure to define care pathways and decision points in the patient's journey.

The INCENTIVE protocol: an evaluation of the organisation and delivery of NHS dental healthcare to patients-innovation in the commissioning of primary dental care service delivery and organisation in the UK

INTRODUCTION

In England, in 2006, new dental contracts devolved commissioning of dental services locally to Primary Care Trusts to meet the needs of their local population. The new national General Dental Services contracts (nGDS) were based on payment for Units of Dental Activity (UDAs) awarded in three treatment bands based on complexity of care. Recently, contract currency in UK dentistry is evolving from UDAs based on volume and case complexity towards 'blended contracts' that include incentives linked with key performance indicators such as quality and improved health outcome. Overall, evidence of the effectiveness of incentive-driven contracting of health providers is still emerging. The INCENTIVE Study aims to evaluate a blended contract model (incentive-driven) compared to traditional nGDS contracts on dental service delivery in practices in West Yorkshire, England.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The INCENTIVE model uses a mixed methods approach to comprehensively evaluate a new incentive-driven model of NHS dental service delivery. The study includes 6 dental surgeries located across three newly commissioned dental practices (blended contract) and three existing traditional practices (nGDS contracts). The newly commissioned practices have been matched to traditional practices by deprivation index, age profile, ethnicity, size of practice and taking on new patients. The study consists of three interlinked work packages: a qualitative study to explore stakeholder perspectives of the new service delivery model; an effectiveness study to assess the INCENTIVE model in reducing the risk of and amount of dental disease and enhance oral health-related quality of life in patients; and an economic study to assess cost-effectiveness of the INCENTIVE model in relation to clinical status and oral health-related quality of life.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by NRES Committee London, Bromley. The results of this study will be disseminated at national and international conferences and in international journals.

NHS pilots in primary care--an insight into the future?

This article looks at the background to the current changes in primary care dentistry being piloted in England. It looks at the structure of the different elements being piloted, such as the oral health assessment, interim care appointments and care pathways. It also examines advanced care pathways and how complex care will be provided when clinically feasible and beneficial to the patient. The authors have worked in a type 1 pilot practice since September 2010.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The NHS contract currently being piloted in England delivers care through care pathways and clinical risk assessments with prevention as an important building block for the delivery of services. There are new measures planned for measuring quality outcomes in primary care. This has implications for how services are delivered, who delivers them and how dentists will be remunerated in the future.

Introducing care pathway commissioning to primary dental care: measuring performance

Care pathways have been used in a variety of ways: firstly to support quality improvement through standardising clinical processes, but also for secondary purposes, by purchasers of healthcare, to monitor activity and health outcomes and to commission services. This paper focuses on reporting a secondary use of care pathways: to commission and monitor performance of primary dental care services. Findings of a project involving three dental practices implementing a system based on rating patients according to their risk of disease and need for care are outlined. Data from surgery-based clinical databases and interviews from commissioners and providers are reported. The use of both process and outcome key performance indicators in this context is discussed, as well as issues which arise such as attributability of outcome measures and strategic approaches to improving quality of care.

QIPP: cutting budgets or working smarter?

The Department of Health's response to the national budget deficit is to ensure that the provision of NHS services is guided by four fundamental 'QIPP' principles: Quality, Innovation, Prevention, and Productivity. This agenda will govern all aspects of the National Health Service's (NHS') health care provision for the foreseeable future. NHS dental services will, like all other NHS services, need to make a contribution to the QIPP agenda. The purpose of this paper is to outline the implications for NHS dentistry.