Reforming primary care: innovation or destruction?

Development of a Person-Centred Integrated Care Approach for Chronic Disease Management in Dutch Primary Care: A Mixed-Method Study

To reduce the burden of chronic diseases on society and individuals, European countries implemented chronic Disease Management Programs (DMPs) that focus on the management of a single chronic disease. However, due to the fact that the scientific evidence that DMPs reduce the burden of chronic diseases is not convincing, patients with multimorbidity may receive overlapping or conflicting treatment advice, and a single disease approach may be conflicting with the core competencies of primary care. In addition, in the Netherlands, care is shifting from DMPs to person-centred integrated care (PC-IC) approaches. This paper describes a mixed-method development of a PC-IC approach for the management of patients with one or more chronic diseases in Dutch primary care, executed from March 2019 to July 2020. In Phase 1, we conducted a scoping review and document analysis to identify key elements to construct a conceptual model for delivering PC-IC care. In Phase 2, national experts on Diabetes Mellitus type 2, cardiovascular diseases, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and local healthcare providers (HCP) commented on the conceptual model using online qualitative surveys. In Phase 3, patients with chronic conditions commented on the conceptual model in individual interviews, and in Phase 4 the conceptual model was presented to the local primary care cooperatives and finalized after processing their comments. Based on the scientific literature, current practice guidelines, and input from a variety of stakeholders, we developed a holistic, person-centred, integrated approach for the management of patients with (multiple) chronic diseases in primary care. Future evaluation of the PC-IC approach will show if this approach leads to more favourable outcomes and should replace the current single-disease approach in the management of chronic conditions and multimorbidity in Dutch primary care.

Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance access to specialist care: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Electronic consultation (eConsult)-provider-to-provider electronic asynchronous exchanges of patient health information at a distance-is emerging as a potential tool to improve the interface between primary care providers and specialists. Despite growing evidence that eConsult has clinical benefits, it is not widely adopted. We investigated factors influencing the adoption and implementation of eConsult services.

METHODS

We applied established methods to guide the review, and the recently published Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews to report our findings. We searched five electronic databases and the grey literature for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened titles and full texts to identify studies that reported barriers to and/or facilitators of eConsult (asynchronous (store-and-forward) use of telemedicine to exchange patient health information between two providers (primary and secondary) at a distance using secure infrastructure). We extracted data on study characteristics and key barriers and facilitators were analysed thematically and classified using the Quadruple Aim framework taxonomy. No date or language restrictions were applied.

RESULTS

Among the 2579 publications retrieved, 130 studies met eligibility for the review. We identified and summarised key barriers to and facilitators of eConsult adoption and implementation across four domains: provider, patient, healthcare system and cost. Key barriers were increased workload for providers, privacy concerns and insufficient reimbursement for providers. Main facilitators were remote residence location, timely responses from specialists, utilisation of referral coordinators, addressing medicolegal concerns and incentives for providers to use eConsult.

CONCLUSION

There are multiple barriers to and facilitators of eConsult adoption across the domains of Quadruple Aim framework. Our findings will inform the development of practice tools to support the wider adoption and scalability of eConsult implementation.

Tending to innovate in Swedish primary health care: a qualitative study

Background

Policymakers in many countries are involved in system reforms that aim to strengthen the primary care sector. Sweden is no exception. Evidence suggests that targeted financial micro-incentives can stimulate change in certain areas of care, but they do not result in more radical change, such as innovation. The study was performed in relation to the introduction of a national health care reform, and conducted in Jönköping County Council, as the region’s handling of health care reforms has attracted significant national and international interest. This study employed success case method to explore what enables primary care innovations.

Methods

Five Primary Health Care Centres (PHCCs) were purposively selected to ensure inclusion of a variety of aspects, such as size, location, ownership and regional success criteria. 48 in-depth interviews with managers and staff at the recruited PHCCs were analysed using content analyses. The COREQ checklist for qualitative studies was used to assure quality standards.

Results

This study identified three types of innovations, which break with previous ways of organizing work at these PHCCs: (1) service innovation; (2) process innovation; and (3) organizational innovation. A learning-oriented culture and climate, comprising entrepreneurial leadership, cross-boundary collaboration, visible and understandable performance measurements and ability to adapt to external pressure were shown to be advantageous for innovativeness.

Conclusions

This qualitative study highlights critical features in practice that support primary care innovation. Managers need to consistently transform and integrate a policy “push” with professionals’ understanding and values to better support primary care innovation. Ultimately, the key to innovation is the professionals’ engagement in the work, that is, their willingness, capability and opportunity to innovate.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3874-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adherence to chronic kidney disease guidelines in primary care patients is associated with comorbidity

BACKGROUND

GPs insufficiently follow guidelines regarding consultation and referral for chronic kidney disease (CKD).

OBJECTIVE

To identify patient characteristics and quality of care (QoC) in CKD patients with whom consultation and referral recommendations were not followed.

METHOD

A 14 month prospective observational cohort study of primary care patients with CKD stage 3-5. 47 practices participated, serving 207469 people. 2547 CKD patients fulfilled consultation criteria, 225 fulfilled referral criteria. We compared characteristics of patients managed by GPs with patients receiving nephrologist co-management. We assessed QoC as adherence to monitoring criteria, CKD recognition and achievement of blood pressure (BP) targets.

RESULTS

Patients treated in primary care despite a consultation recommendation (94%) had higher eGFR values (OR 1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.09), were less often monitored for renal function (OR 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.74) and potassium (OR 0.56; 95% CI: 0.35-0.92) and CKD was less frequently recognised (OR 0.46; 95% CI: 0.31-0.68) than in patients with nephrologist co-management. Patients treated in primary care despite referral recommendation (70%) were older (OR 1.03; 95% CI:1.01-1.06) and had less cardiovascular disease (OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.19-0.73). Overall, in patients solely managed by GPs, CKD recognition was 50%, monitoring disease progression in 36% and metabolic parameters in 3%, BP targets were achieved in 51%. Monitoring of renal function and BP was positively associated with diabetes (OR 3.10; 95% CI: 2.47-3.88 and OR 7.78; 95% CI: 3.21-18.87) and hypertension (OR 3.19; 95% CI: 2.67-3.82 and OR 3.35; 95% CI: 1.45-7.77).

CONCLUSION

Patients remaining in primary care despite nephrologists' co-management recommendations were inadequately monitored, and BP targets were insufficiently met. CKD patients without cardiovascular comorbidity or diabetes require extra attention to guarantee adequate monitoring of renal function and BP.

Quality of chronic kidney disease management in primary care: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Early detection and appropriate management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care are essential to reduce morbidity and mortality.

AIM

To assess the quality of care (QoC) of CKD in primary healthcare in relation to patient and practice characteristics in order to tailor improvement strategies.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective study using data between 2008 and 2011 from 47 general practices (207 469 patients of whom 162 562 were adults).

METHOD

CKD management of patients under the care of their general practitioner (GP) was qualified using indicators derived from the Dutch interdisciplinary CKD guideline for primary care and nephrology and included (1) monitoring of renal function, albuminuria, blood pressure, and glucose, (2) monitoring of metabolic parameters, and alongside the guideline: (3) recognition of CKD. The outcome indicator was (4) achieving blood pressure targets. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was applied to identify associated patient and practice characteristics.

RESULTS

Kidney function or albuminuria data were available for 59 728 adult patients; 9288 patients had CKD, of whom 8794 were under GP care. Monitoring of disease progression was complete in 42% of CKD patients, monitoring of metabolic parameters in 2%, and blood pressure target was reached in 43.1%. GPs documented CKD in 31.4% of CKD patients. High QoC was strongly associated with diabetes, and to a lesser extent with hypertension and male sex.

CONCLUSION

Room for improvement was found in all aspects of CKD management. As QoC was higher in patients who received structured diabetes care, future CKD care may profit from more structured primary care management, e.g. according to the chronic care model.

KEY POINTS

Quality of care for chronic kidney disease patients in primary care can be improved. In comparison with guideline advice, adequate monitoring of disease progression was observed in 42%, of metabolic parameters in 2%, correct recognition of impaired renal function in 31%, and reaching blood pressure targets in 43% of chronic kidney disease patients. Quality of care was higher in patients with diabetes. Chronic kidney disease management may be improved by developing strategies similar to diabetes care.

Taking responsibility for the early assessment and treatment of patients with musculoskeletal pain: a review and critical analysis

Musculoskeletal pain is common across all populations and costly in terms of impact on the individual and, more generally, on society. In most health-care systems, the first person to see the patient with a musculoskeletal problem such as back pain is the general practitioner, and access to other professionals such as physiotherapists, chiropractors, or osteopaths is still either largely controlled by a traditional medical model of referral or left to self-referral by the patient. In this paper, we examine the arguments for the general practitioner-led model and consider the arguments, and underpinning evidence, for reconsidering who should take responsibility for the early assessment and treatment of patients with musculoskeletal problems.