Search results

The Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) project identified the different models of primary care that exist for children, examined the particular attributes that might be different from those directed at adults and considered how these models might be appraised. The project took the multiple and interrelated dimensions of primary care and simplified them into a conceptual framework for appraisal. A general description of the models in existence in all 30 countries of the EU and EEA countries, focusing on lead practitioner, financial and regulatory and service provision classifications, was created. We then used the WHO ‘building blocks’ for high-performing health systems as a starting point for identifying a good system for children. The building blocks encompass safe and good quality services from an educated and empowered workforce, providing good data systems, access to all necessary medical products, prevention and treatments, and a service that is adequately financed and well led. An extensive search of the literature failed to identify a suitable appraisal framework for MOCHA, because none of the frameworks focused on child primary care in its own right. This led the research team to devise an alternative conceptualisation, at the heart of which is the core theme of child centricity and ecology, and the need to focus on delivery to the child through the life course. The MOCHA model also focuses on the primary care team and the societal and environmental context of the primary care system.

This paper provides initial findings from a pilot to introduce graduate mental health workers into primary care, child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) across three localities in the north west of England in the UK. The progress of the pilot was monitored by gathering information from students, managers, supervisors and mentors regularly throughout the 12 month period, during which the pilot cohort were being formally trained. The potential of the new role of primary care graduate mental health workers to address problems of volume and access to services, particularly how the role might contribute to developing nonspecialist primary care services, is considered.

There is more to primary care than solely medical and nursing services. Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) explored the role of the professions of pharmacy, dental health and social care as examples of affiliate contributors to primary care in providing health advice and treatment to children and young people. Pharmacies are much used, but their value as a resource for children seems to be insufficiently recognised in most European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) countries. Advice from a pharmacist is invaluable, particularly because many medicines for children are only available off-label, or not available in the correct dose, access to a pharmacist for simple queries around certain health issues is often easier and quicker than access to a primary care physician or nursing service. Preventive dentistry is available throughout the EU and EEA, but there are few targeted incentives to ensure all children receive the service, and accessibility to dental treatment is variable, particularly for disabled children or those with specific health needs. Social care services are an essential part of health care for many extremely vulnerable children, for example those with complex care needs. Mapping social care services and the interaction with health services is challenging due to their fragmented provision and the variability of access across the EU and EEA. A lack of coherent structure of the health and social care interface requires parents or other family members to navigate complex systems with little assistance. The needs of pharmacy, dentistry and social care are varied and interwoven with needs from each other and from the healthcare system. Yet, because this inter-connectivity is not sufficiently recognised in the EU and EEA countries, there is a need for improvement of coordination and with the need for these services to focus more fully on children and young people.

Due to the evolution of the health-care scenario and the growing role of the primary care setting, the distribution processes of health technologies will be more and more in demand in the near future. This paper aims to investigate this theme, analyzing the performance, strengths and weaknesses of the current distribution practices, with the ultimate overarching aim to improve the provision of the primary care services.

The research framework is twofold. First, a tool to monitor the economic/quantitative performance of the distribution models was designed; second, the tool was applied to measure the performance of distribution models of absorbent devices for incontinence adopted by Local Health Authorities (LHA) in Lombardy Region (Italy). Quantitative data were collected by LHAs (from 2012 to 2016) and compared through data-benchmarking. Qualitative data from interviews and focus groups complemented the outcomes.

Two main distribution models were investigated: distribution through pharmacies and home delivery. Results show that there is no winning/preferable model in terms of economic/quantitative performance and service quality level, but a counterbalanced combination of strengths and weaknesses exists. Moving from the highlighted weaknesses and building on the strengths, an alternate distribution model is proposed for testing.

The present study approaches the theme of primary care services with a holistic approach, filling a literature gap. It also provides practitioners with a tool of performance analysis and management and real data, applicable also in international contexts. The collected real-world data also gives insights on the area of the quality of care, with particular reference to the patients’ experience. As a lesson learned, policymakers and the National Healthcare Service should re-think their current distribution models/practices in the light of the highlighted criticisms and opportunities for improvement.

Severe mental illness affects a significant number of people and, if left untreated, leads to poor quality of life and disability. Many of the aspirations proposed for new models of care assert that better preventative services, closer integration between professionals, and increased access to cognitive behavioural therapy in primary care will bring substantial benefits and improved outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to explore the benefits of integrating mental health services into primary care, and improving collaboration between secondary services and primary care. There is a transition underway in healthcare whereby a focus on illness is being supplemented with, or refocused towards achieving better patient well-being. New approaches to service provision are being proposed that: focuses on more holistic outcomes; integrates services around the user; and employs innovative system techniques to incentivise professional and organisational collaboration. Such a transition must be inclusive of those with mental health needs managed in primary care and for those people with serious mental illness in secondary care.

This paper discusses the issues of professional collaboration and the need to provide mental healthcare in a continuous and coordinated manner and; how this may improve timely access to treatment, early diagnosis and intervention. Importantly, it is essential to consider the limitations and reality of recent integration initiatives, and to consider where the true benefit of better integrating mental health into a more collaborative system may lie.

Identifying and addressing issues of parity is likely to call for a new approach to service provision that: focuses on outcomes; co-designs services integrated around the user; and employs innovative contracting techniques to incentivise provider integration.

There is a transition underway in healthcare whereby a focus on illness is being supplemented with or refocused towards working towards wellness. Such a transition requires primary care mental health services to be provided in a continuous and coordinated manner in order to meet the health needs of people with serious mental illness.

It discusses the issues of professional collaboration and how this may improve timely access to treatment, early diagnosis and intervention. It is essential to consider the limitations and reality of recent integration initiatives, and to consider where the true benefit may lie.

Primary care cancer lead clinicians (PCCLs) act strategically in primary care trusts (PCTs) in England to improve communication and understanding of cancer across primary and secondary care and provide a link between Cancer Networks and primary care. The aim is to evaluate the first three years of the initiative.

A postal questionnaire was sent to all PCT chief executives in all PCTs in England and some were passed on to other PCT managers for completion. The response rate was 61 per cent. PCT directors of public health were the largest group of respondents (29 per cent). Most (74 per cent) PCCLs were GPs and 22 per cent were nurses.

PCCLs were most likely to focus on palliative care and preventive services. Key achievements were identified as raising awareness of cancer, developing relationships and promoting primary care. The personal skills of the PCCLs were important as was support of colleagues at all levels. Lack of time was a major barrier to achievement, as was a lack of understanding of the role from others. Links with the Cancer Networks were being developed. About 85 per cent of managers wanted the role to continue.

The paper illustrates that PCCLs are at the forefront of improving cancer services in primary care. They are particularly important in view of the priority of reducing premature deaths and promotion of healthy lifestyles.

The role of the primary mental health worker (PMHW) is relatively new within child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Different organisational structures have emerged and it is important to study the advantages and disadvantages associated with different PMHW practice models. The current study uses a large, representative sample of PMHWs and operationalises practice models according to the PMHWs' self‐reported location and team alignment thus identifying three models (namely CAMHS outreach, primary care based, and dedicated PMHW team). Comparisons between the models are made in relation to organisation and management, inter‐agency links, and job satisfaction with the aim of exploring the strengths and weaknesses of each model. The results suggest that each model meets the aims of the role and there is greater similarity than dissimilarity between models. However, it also indicates that attention should be paid to improving the working environments and training and development opportunities for all PMHWs irrespective of model, but with particular consideration given to improving the support available to PMHWs working in primary care based models.

The paper seeks to show that the new General Medical Services (GMS) contract will provide opportunities for NHS staff to enhance their roles, so it is important that adequate training assessment and quality control systems are set in place. This paper assesses the implications for NHS staff in primary care.

In this paper a review of policy documents was undertaken.

The paper finds that enhanced services set out in the new GMS contract may be provided by primary care organisations and healthcare professionals other than those located in general practitioner (GP) practices. As nurses and other healthcare professionals take on tasks previously conducted by GPs, so GPs will take on more consultant tasks previously confined to secondary care. Personal Medical Services (PMS) and GMS are converging in their contractual obligations and the opportunities offered to staff. As well as General Practitioners with Special Interests (GPwSIs), Practitioners with Special Interests (PwSIs) are important developments, which could promote recruitment and retention in the nursing and allied health professional workforce. Nurses and other healthcare professionals will be the main source of staffing for services shifted from secondary care.

The paper shows that it will be important to identify whether these professionals can substitute for GPs, the boundaries to that substitution, and whether recruitment and retention are enhanced. Training for GPwSIs and PwSIs will be introduced or expanded but also needs accreditation and validation.

The paper provides an overview of the implications of the new GMS contract for nurses and other NHS professionals.