Comparing patient and professional views of expected treatment outcomes for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Delphi study identifies possibilities for change in service delivery in England, UK

Evaluating health service outcomes of public involvement in health service design in high-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Internationally, it is expected that health services will involve the public in health service design. Evaluation of public involvement has typically focused on the process and experiences for participants. Less is known about outcomes for health services. The aim of this systematic review was to a) identify and synthesise what is known about health service outcomes of public involvement and b) document how outcomes were evaluated.

METHODS

Searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL for studies that reported health service outcomes from public involvement in health service design. The review was limited to high-income countries and studies in English. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in health research. Content analysis was used to determine the outcomes of public involvement in health service design and how outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 93 articles were included. The majority were published in the last 5 years, were qualitative, and were located in the United Kingdom. A range of health service outcomes (discrete products, improvements to health services and system/policy level changes) were reported at various levels (service level, across services, and across organisations). However, evaluations of outcomes were reported in less than half of studies. In studies where outcomes were evaluated, a range of methods were used; most frequent were mixed methods. The quality of study design and reporting was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

When reporting public involvement in health service design authors outline a range of outcomes for health services, but it is challenging to determine the extent of outcomes due to inadequate descriptions of study design and poor reporting. There is an urgent need for evaluations, including longitudinal study designs and cost-benefit analyses, to fully understand outcomes from public involvement in health service design.

Research and Healthcare Priorities of Individuals Living with COPD

This study describes the research and healthcare priorities of individuals living with COPD. On an online survey, individuals living with COPD assigned a percentage of funding to 22 research priorities and a percentage of time spent communicating with a healthcare provider to 24 healthcare priorities, indicating which topics were most important. For each research and healthcare priority, we examined the selection frequency of the priority and used chi-square analyses to examine differences in priority selection by quartiles of airflow obstruction (percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1-sec (FEV₁%predicted)) and breathlessness burden and exacerbation risk. Based on participants' responses (N = 148, 47% women; Mean ± Standard Deviation age = 68 ± 9 yrs) relief of breathlessness was the most often selected research (76% of respondents) and healthcare priority (61% of respondents). It was selected most often, regardless of disease severity or breathlessness burden and exacerbation risk. We found differences for disease severity and breathlessness burden and exacerbation risk in some research priorities (e.g., to improve the maximal amount of exercise of adults living with COPD in and out of the home (χ²₍₃₎ = 9.97, Cramer's V =.28) and healthcare priorities (e.g., increase your ability to exercise (χ²₍₃₎ = 9.72, Cramer's V =.27)). This study provides empirical evidence that relief of breathlessness is a top research and healthcare priority for individuals living with COPD. Future healthcare and research activities should align with the priorities of individuals with COPD to improve their care by minimizing disease/symptom burden and optimizing health-related quality of life.

Comprehensive Diagnostic Assessment of Health Status of Patients with Asthma or COPD: A Delphi Panel Study among Dutch Experts

A comprehensive diagnostic assessment is needed to improve understanding of the health status of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma. Therefore, this study investigated which components and subsequent instruments should be part of a holistic assessment in secondary care. We also explored which data need to be exchanged for an adequate transfer of patients between primary and secondary care, and vice versa. A cross-sectional Web-based survey was conducted among Dutch healthcare professionals using a Delphi-like procedure; these included professionals working in primary or secondary care, medical advisors of health insurance companies and patients' representatives. The national guidelines were used as a starting point, resulting in a questionnaire addressing 55 components related to a comprehensive diagnostic assessment, covering the domains physiological impairments, symptoms, functional limitations and quality of life. Of the 151 experts and stakeholders invited, 92 (60.9%) completed the first round and 79 (52.3%) the second round; most respondents were pulmonologists. There was a high level of agreement between respondents from primary versus secondary care regarding which components should be measured during a comprehensive assessment of patients with asthma or COPD in secondary care and the instruments to measure these components. Regarding the exchange of information, upon referral, pulmonologists required little information from the general practitioners, whereas general practitioners required more extensive information after referral. An overview is provided of what should be part of a holistic assessment of health status in asthma and COPD. This information can be used as input for integrated care pathways.

Improving COPD Care in a Medically Underserved Primary Care Clinic: A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives

We conducted a focus group study in an urban hospital-based primary care teaching clinic serving an indigent and Hispanic (predominantly Puerto Rican) population in New England in order to learn how patients with Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (COPD) perceive their disease, how they experience their medical care, and the barriers they face managing their disease and following medical recommendations. The research team included medical doctors, nurses, a medical anthropologist, a clinical pharmacist, a hospital interpreter, and a systems analyst. Four focus groups were conducted in Spanish and English in April and May 2014. The demographic characteristics of the 25 focus group participants closely reflected the demographics of the total COPD clinic patients. The participants were predominantly female (72%) and Hispanic (72%) and had a median age of 63. The major themes expressed in the focus groups included: problems living with COPD; coping with complexities of comorbid illnesses; challenges of quitting smoking and maintaining cessation; dealing with second-hand smoke; beliefs and myths about quitting smoking; difficulty paying for and obtaining medications; positive experiences obtaining and managing medications; difficulties in using sleep machines at home; expressions of disappointment with the departure of their doctors; and overall satisfaction with the clinic health care providers. The study led to the creation of an action plan that addresses the concerns expressed by the focus study participants. The action plan is spearheaded by a designated bilingual and bicultural nurse and is now in operation.

Lessons from community mental health to drive implementation in health care systems for people with long-term conditions

This paper aims to identify which lessons learned from the evidence and the experiences accruing from the transformation in mental health services in recent decades may have relevance for the future development of healthcare for people with long-term physical conditions. First, nine principles are discussed which we first identified to guide mental health service organisation, and all of which can be potentially applied to long term care as well (autonomy, continuity, effectiveness, accessibility, comprehensiveness, equity, accountability, co-ordination, and efficiency). Second, we have outlined innovative operational aspects of service user participation, many of which were first initiated and consolidated in the mental health field, and some of which are now also being implemented in long term care (including case management, and crisis plans). We conclude that long term conditions, whether mental or physical, deserve a long-term commitment from the relevant health services, and indeed where continuity and co-ordination are properly funded implemented, this can ensure that the symptomatic course is more stable, quality of life is enhanced, and the clinical outcomes are more favourable. Innovations such as self-management for long-term conditions (intended to promote autonomy and empowerment) need to be subjected to the same level of rigorous scientific scrutiny as any other treatment or service interventions.