Working Together to Connect Care: a metropolitan tertiary emergency department and community care program

Repeated intentional foreign body ingestion, what can be done?

Repeated intentional foreign body ingestion (RIFBI) in patients with Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD) is a common clinical presentation to the emergency department. The relationship between repeated foreign body ingestion and a co-existent personality disorder diagnosis is complex, making it challenging to manage. Our institution implemented a novel interdisciplinary model of care for RIFBI as a way of improving health outcomes in this cohort of patients. Our observations following the model of care are presented herein. We encourage other health networks to adopt this model of care for managing RIBFI in EUPD.

Case management programs for people with complex needs: Towards better engagement of community pharmacies and community-based organisations

Introduction

The objectives of this study were 1) to describe how case management programs engaged community pharmacies and community-based organisations in a perspective of integrated care for people with complex needs, and 2) to identify enablers, barriers and potential strategies for this engagement.

Methods

Using a descriptive qualitative design, individual interviews and focus groups with patients, healthcare providers and managers were analysed according to a mixed thematic analysis based on a deductive (Rainbow Model of Integrated Care) and an inductive approach.

Results and discussion

Participants highlighted the individualized service plan as a significant tool to foster a shared person-focused vision of care, information exchanges and concerted efforts. Openness to collaboration was also considered as an enabler for community stakeholders’ engagement. The lack of recognition of community-based organisations by certain providers and the time required to participate in individualized service plans were outlined as barriers to professional integration. Limited opportunities for community stakeholders to be involved in decision-making within case management programs were reported as another constraint to their engagement. Cultural differences between organisations regarding the focus of the intervention (psychosocial vs healthcare needs) and differences in bureaucratic structures and funding mechanisms may negatively affect community stakeholders’ engagement. Formal consultation mechanisms and improvement of communication channels between healthcare providers and community stakeholders were suggested as ways to overcome these barriers.

Conclusion

Efforts to improve care integration in case management programs should be directed toward the recognition of community stakeholders as co-producers of care and co-builders of social policies across the entire care continuum for people with complex needs.

Factors supporting the implementation of integrated care between physical and mental health services: an integrative review

In Australia and internationally there is a strong policy commitment to the redesign of health services toward integrated physical and mental health care. When executed well, integrated care has been demonstrated to improve the access to, clinical outcomes from, and quality of care while reducing overtreatment and duplication. Despite the demonstrated effectiveness and promise of integrated care, exactly how integrated care is best achieved remains less clear. The aim of this review study was to identify factors that support the implementation of integrated care between physical and mental health services. An integrative review was conducted following the framework developed by Whittemore and Knafl, with quantitative and qualitative evidence systematically considered. To identify studies, Medline, PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL were searched for the period from 2003 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies and review articles were examined. Nineteen studies were included. Synthesis of study findings identified seven key factors supporting the implementation of integrated care between physical and mental health services: (a) adequate resourcing, (b) shared values, (c) effective communication, (d) information technology (IT) infrastructure, (e) flexible administrative organizations, (f) role clarity and accountability, and (g) staff engagement and training. There was little theoretical development in included studies, with little insight into the contextual factors or underlying mechanism required to support the implementation of integrated care initiatives. This review identified a set of inter-related barriers and facilitators which, if addressed, can improve the implementation and sustainability of truly integrated care.

Adult frequent presentation to emergency departments and adverse childhood experiences: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Extensive literature reports the influence of childhood adversity on adult health, however few studies have explored these life antecedents in people who frequently present to the emergency department. This review synthesizes literature exploring childhood adversity influences on emergency department presentations, if and how it is identified, and interventions addressing the health care needs of this group.

METHODS

Eight electronic databases were searched. Arksey and O'Malley's framework guided this review, and a quality appraisal was undertaken. Searches included all published studies until August 2020.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included in this review. They revealed that childhood adversity is common among adults who frequently attend the emergency department. It impacts physical and psychological health into adulthood and there is no standardized approach described to documenting childhood adversity, nor any consistent intervention reported by emergency departments to address its sequelae in adulthood.

CONCLUSIONS

Several studies call for screening, intervention, and education to identify and address impacts of childhood adversity for patients who frequently present to the emergency department. However, reliable high-level studies exploring these topics specific to the emergency department are uncommon. Consequently, definitive interventions to address the healthcare needs of this group is lacking and warrants further research.

Interventions to manage use of the emergency and urgent care system by people from vulnerable groups: a mapping review

Background

The NHS currently faces increasing demands on accident and emergency departments. Concern has been expressed regarding whether the needs of vulnerable groups are being handled appropriately or whether alternative methods of service delivery may provide more appropriate emergency and urgent care services for particular groups.

Objective

Our objective was to identify what interventions exist to manage use of the emergency and urgent care system by people from a prespecified list of vulnerable groups. We aimed to describe the characteristics of these interventions and examine service delivery outcomes (for patients and the health service) resulting from these interventions.

Review methods

We conducted an initial mapping review to assess the quantity and nature of the published research evidence relating to seven vulnerable groups (socioeconomically deprived people and families, migrants, ethnic minority groups, the long-term unemployed/inactive, people with unstable housing situations, people living in rural/isolated areas and people with substance abuse disorders). Databases, including MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and other sources were searched between 2008 and 2018. Quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews and primary studies of any design were eligible for inclusion. In addition, we searched for UK interventions and initiatives by examining press reports, commissioning plans and casebooks of ‘good practice’. We carried out a detailed intervention analysis, using an adapted version of the TIDieR (Template for Intervention Description and Replication) framework for describing interventions, and an analysis of current NHS practice initiatives.

Results

We identified nine different types of interventions: care navigators [three studies – moderate GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations)], care planning (three studies – high), case finding (five studies – moderate), case management (four studies – high), front of accident and emergency general practice/front-door streaming model (one study – low), migrant support programme (one study – low), outreach services and teams (two studies – moderate), rapid access doctor/paramedic/urgent visiting services (one study – low) and urgent care clinics (one systematic review – moderate). Few interventions had been targeted at vulnerable populations; instead, they represented general population interventions or were targeted at frequent attenders (who may or may not be from vulnerable groups). Interventions supported by robust evidence (care navigators, care planning, case finding, case management, outreach services and teams, and urgent care clinics) demonstrated an effect on the general population, rather than specific population effects. Many programmes mixed intervention components (e.g. case finding, case management and care navigators), making it difficult to isolate the effect of any single component. Promising UK initiatives (front of accident and emergency general practice/front-door streaming model, migrant support programmes and rapid access doctor/paramedic/urgent visiting services) lacked rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should therefore focus on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these initiatives.

Conclusions

The review identified a limited number of intervention types that may be useful in addressing the needs of specific vulnerable populations, with little evidence specifically relating to these groups. The evidence highlights that vulnerable populations encompass different subgroups with potentially differing needs, and also that interventions seem particularly context sensitive. This indicates a need for a greater understanding of potential drivers for varying groups in specific localities.

Limitations

Resources did not allow exhaustive identification of all UK initiatives; the examples cited are indicative.

Future work

Research is required to examine how specific vulnerable populations differentially benefit from specific types of alternative service provision. Further exploration, using primary mixed-methods data and potentially realist evaluation, is required to explore what works for whom under what circumstances. Rigorous evaluation of UK initiatives is required, including a specific need for economic evaluations and for studies that incorporate effects on the wider emergency and urgent care system.

Funding

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