Can primary care groups and trusts improve health?

Architectural and Management Strategies for The Design, Construction and Operation of Energy Efficient and Intelligent Primary Care Centers in Chile

Primary care centers are establishments with elevated social relevance and high operational energy consumption. In Chile, there more than 628 family healthcare centers (CESFAM) have been built in the last two decades and with plans for hundreds more in the next few years. We revised the architecture, construction management and energy performance of five CESFAM centers to determine possible instances of overall improvement. Staff was interviewed, and state documents reviewed, which allowed the conceptualization of the architectonic and energy structure of the centers, as well as the process of implementation. At the same time, energy simulations were done for each one of the centers, controlling for different climates, construction solutions and orientations. Our study revealed that strategies employed by the primary healthcare centers in Chile have aided a progressive implementation of establishments with elevated costs and materialization times, as well as neglect for climatic conditions. These energy evaluations show relevant and consistent impacts of the architectural form and material conditions, especially in southern zones, demonstrating the need to work with shared knowledge resources such as BIM. There is a clear necessity to define technological, morphological and construction strategies specific to each climate zone in order to achieve energetically efficient and intelligent healthcare establishments.

The organisation and delivery of health improvement in general practice and primary care: a scoping study

Background

This project examines the organisation and delivery of health improvement activities by and within general practice and the primary health-care team. The project was designed to examine who delivers these interventions, where they are located, what approaches are developed in practices, how individual practices and the primary health-care team organise such public health activities, and how these contribute to health improvement. Our focus was on health promotion and ill-health prevention activities.

Aims

The aim of this scoping exercise was to identify the current extent of knowledge about the health improvement activities in general practice and the wider primary health-care team. The key objectives were to provide an overview of the range and type of health improvement activities, identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further empirical research. Our specific research objectives were to map the range and type of health improvement activity undertaken by general practice staff and the primary health-care team based within general practice; to scope the literature on health improvement in general practice or undertaken by health-care staff based in general practice and identify gaps in the evidence base; to synthesise the literature and identify effective approaches to the delivery and organisation of health improvement interventions in a general practice setting; and to identify the priority areas for research as defined by those working in general practice.

Methods

We undertook a comprehensive search of the literature. We followed a staged selection process involving reviews of titles and abstracts. This resulted in the identification of 1140 papers for data extraction, with 658 of these papers selected for inclusion in the review, of which 347 were included in the evidence synthesis. We also undertook 45 individual and two group interviews with primary health-care staff.

Findings

Many of the research studies reviewed had some details about the type, process or location, or who provided the intervention. Generally, however, little attention is paid in the literature to examining the impact of the organisational context on the way services are delivered or how this affects the effectiveness of health improvement interventions in general practice. We found that the focus of attention is mainly on individual prevention approaches, with practices engaging in both primary and secondary prevention. The range of activities suggests that general practitioners do not take a population approach but focus on individual patients. However, it is clear that many general practitioners see health promotion as an integral part of practice, whether as individual approaches to primary or secondary health improvement or as a practice-based approach to improving the health of their patients. Our key conclusion is that there is currently insufficient good evidence to support many of the health improvement interventions undertaken in general practice and primary care more widely.

Future Research

Future research on health improvement in general practice and by the primary health-care team needs to move beyond clinical research to include delivery systems and be conducted in a primary care setting. More research needs to examine areas where there are chronic disease burdens – cancer, dementia and other disabilities of old age. Reviews should be commissioned that examine the whole prevention pathway for health problems that are managed within primary care drawing together research from general practice, pharmacy, community engagement, etc.

Funding

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

Health promotion in primary care: how should we intervene? A qualitative study involving both physicians and patients

Background

The effects of tobacco, physical exercise, diet, and alcohol consumption on morbidity and mortality underline the importance of health promotion and prevention (HPP) at the primary health care (PHC) level. Likewise, the deficiencies when putting such policies into practice and assessing their effectiveness are also widely recognised. The objectives of this research were: a) to gain an in-depth understanding of general practitioners' (GPs) and patients' perceptions about HPP in PHC, and b) to define the areas that could be improved in future interventions.

Methods

Qualitative methodology focussed on the field of health services research. Information was generated on the basis of two GP-based and two patient-based discussion groups, all of which had previously participated in two interventions concerning healthy lifestyle promotion (tobacco and physical exercise). Transcripts and field notes were analysed on the basis of a sociological discourse-analysis model. The results were validated by triangulation between researchers.

Results

GPs and patients' discourses about HPP in PHC were different in priorities and contents. An overall explanatory framework was designed to gain a better understanding of the meaning of GP-patient interactions related to HPP, and to show the main trends that emerged from their discourses. GPs linked their perceptions of HPP to their working conditions and experience in health services. The dimensions in this case involved the orientation of interventions, the goal of actions, and the evaluation of results. For patients, habits were mainly related to ways of life particularly influenced by close contexts. Health conceptions, their role as individuals, and the orientation of their demands were the most important dimensions in patients' sphere.

Conclusions

HPP activities in PHC need to be understood and assessed in the context of their interaction with the conditioning trends in health services and patients' social micro-contexts. On the basis of the explanatory framework, three development lines are proposed: the incorporation of new methodological approaches according to the complexity of HPP in PHC; the openness of habit change policies beyond the medical services; and the effective commitments in the medium to long term by the health services themselves at the policy management level.

Networks and social capital: a relational approach to primary healthcare reform

Collaboration among health care providers and across systems is proposed as a strategy to improve health care delivery the world over. Over the past two decades, health care providers have been encouraged to work in partnership and build interdisciplinary teams. More recently, the notion of networks has entered this discourse but the lack of consensus and understanding about what is meant by adopting a network approach in health services limits its use. Also crucial to this discussion is the work of distinguishing the nature and extent of the impact of social relationships – generally referred to as social capital. In this paper, we review the rationale for collaboration in health care systems; provide an overview and synthesis of key concepts; dispel some common misconceptions of networks; and apply the theory to an example of primary healthcare network reform in Alberta (Canada). Our central thesis is that a relational approach to systems change, one based on a synthesis of network theory and social capital can provide the fodation for a multi-focal approach to primary healthcare reform. Action strategies are recommended to move from an awareness of 'networks' to fully translating knowledge from existing theory to guide planning and practice innovations. Decision-makers are encouraged to consider a multi-focal approach that effectively incorporates a network and social capital approach in planning and evaluating primary healthcare reform.

Local health systems in 21st century: who cares?-An exploratory study on health system governance in Amsterdam

BACKGROUND

There is a growing awareness that there should be a public health perspective to health system governance. Its intrinsic population health orientation provides the ultimate ground for determining the health needs and governing collaborative care arrangements within which these needs can be met. Notwithstanding differences across countries, population health concerns are not central to European health reforms. Governments currently withdraw leaving governance roles to care providers and/or financiers. Thereby, incentives that trigger the uptake of a public health perspective are often ignored.

METHODS

In this study we addressed this issue in the city of Amsterdam. Using a qualitative study design, we explored whether there is a public health perspective to the governance practices of the municipality and the major sickness fund in Amsterdam. And if so, what the scope of this perspective is. And if not, why not.

RESULTS

Findings indicate that the municipality has a public health perspective to local health system governance, but its scope is limited. The municipality facilitates rather than governs health care provision in Amsterdam. Furthermore, the sickness fund runs major financial risks when adapting a public health perspective. It covers an insured population that partly overlaps the Amsterdam population. Returns on investments in population health are therefore uncertain, as competitors would also profit from the sickness fund's investments.

CONCLUSION

The local health system in Amsterdam is not consistently aligned to the health needs of the Amsterdam population. The Amsterdam case is not unique and general consequences for local health system governance are discussed.

Establishing a welfare advice service in family practices: views of advice workers and primary care staff

BACKGROUND

The placement of welfare advice services in family practice to assist patients with health-related social and economic issues (e.g. disability benefits) has gathered momentum over the last decade in the UK. This expansion of primary care raises a number of issues for practices hosting these services.

OBJECTIVES

To gain the views of advice workers and primary care staff about the issues raised in hosting a welfare advice service across 30 practices in inner city Bradford.

METHODS

Views were obtained through focus groups with six advice workers, and primary care staff in 14 practices. A questionnaire was also posted to all practice managers asking their opinions about the service.

RESULTS

The focus groups highlighted a number of advantages for patients, including improvements in health and quality of life through increased income and reduced stress from social and economic issues. For practice staff, the service provided a resource to refer patients for welfare advice, reducing the time spent dealing with welfare issues, thereby reducing workload. This was confirmed in the questionnaire to practice managers where 72% said the service had saved time for GPs and reception/office staff. The advice workers raised concerns about the perceived level of commitment to the service from some staff at some practices. Practice staff were particularly concerned about the need for feedback about referrals.

CONCLUSION

Providing welfare advice in family practice can act as a valuable resource for primary care staff helping to address their patients health-related social and economic needs.

Welfare advice in general practice: a resource for community nurses

Recent policy guidance has recommended that community nurses address public health issues, suggesting that they play a role in assessing and addressing poverty, and ensuring patients claim the welfare benefits to which they are entitled. This article reports an evaluation of a welfare advice service catering for 30 general practices in inner-city Bradford. Community nurses, along with other members of the primary care team, were able to refer patients for advice about welfare issues, including benefits, housing, debt etc. A retrospective study was conducted of all patients referred for advice during 24 months of the project. The advice workers saw 2484 patients, dealt with over 4000 welfare advice issues, and raised over pounds 2 million in welfare benefit claims for patients, primarily through disability-related benefits. The contribution of community nurses is examined in terms of referrals and outcomes for patients.

Providing welfare advice in general practice: referrals, issues and outcomes

General practices in the UK are increasingly hosting welfare advice services on their premises to address patients' social and economic needs. In this paper, the authors present the outcomes of a service providing welfare advice across 30 general practices in inner-city Bradford. A retrospective study of all patients referred for advice during the initial 24 months of the project was conducted. The following information was collected: patient demographics, source of referrals, advice issues raised and income generated through benefit claims. The advice workers saw 2484 patients dealing with over 4000 welfare advice issues. Demand for the service varied widely across practices, reflecting practice list size and engagement with the service by practice staff. The main source of referrals was general practitioners (28%), and disability-related welfare benefits constituted the largest category of advice issues. Sixty-nine per cent of patients seen for advice were of south Asian ethnic origin. The advice workers raised pound sterling 2,389,255 in welfare benefit claims for patients, primarily through disability-related benefits. Approximately one in four patients referred for advice benefited financially. It is concluded that the service is an excellent strategy by which primary care organisations address the social, economic and environmental influences on the health of their population.

The community-oriented primary care experience in the United kingdom

The UK National Health Service has long delivered public health programs through primary care. However, attempts to promote Sidney Kark's model of community-oriented primary care (COPC), based on general practice populations, have made only limited headway. Recent policy developments give COPC new resonance. Currently, primary care trusts are assuming responsibility for improving the health of the populations they serve, and personal medical service pilots are tailoring primary care to local needs under local contracts. COPC has yielded training packages and frameworks that can assist these new organizations in developing public health skills and understanding among a wide range of primary care professionals.

Primary care budget holding in the United Kingdom National Health Service: learning from a decade of health service reform

1. The United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) has experienced 10 years of primary care budget holding in a variety of forms. 2. Half of all general practitioners had joined the GP fundholding scheme by 1997, and many others had joined broader GP commissioning groups, but fundholders controlled only about 20% of the budget for hospital and community health services. 3. Research on fundholding and commissioning groups suggests that delegation of budgets produced some gains in the range and effectiveness of services, but also had significant management costs and inequities. 4. From 1999, all primary care professionals joined Primary Care Groups, which are now becoming Primary Care Trusts (PCTs). PCTs will control three-quarters of the healthcare budget and provide all primary and community services as well as commissioning hospital care. 5. Control of a unified healthcare budget presents opportunities to improve quality, increase integration of services, reduce inequities and improve health. However, PCTs are threatened by a growing gap between capacity and expectations, and by continuing tension between devolution of power and increasingly prescriptive management by central government.