CASEPLUS-SimPat: An Intersectoral Web-Based Case Management System for Multimorbid Dementia Patients.
ABSTRACT: One main challenge of health care systems in future will be the care and treatment of dementia patients. To their advanced age, dementia patients do not only have limitations in cognition, perception, and articulation, but also suffer from several other diseases (multimorbidity). These patients have sophisticated needs for assistance, care, and treatment relying on different health care sectors. Well-known communication and coordination deficits between sectors are intensified in the case of dementia, to the above described limitations. Coordination processes concerning the transition of patients from hospitals to inpatient or outpatient aftercare pose particularly difficult. To show a possible future direction for improving intersectoral care of dementia patients, we developed the web-based case management system CASEPLUS-SimPat as part of the project SimPat "Securing Integrated Care for Multi-morbid Patients with Dementia using an IT-based Service Concept". CASEPLUS-SimPat allows health care professionals, hospital employees and general practitioners, to jointly access patient data and exchange information about the treatment of patients. The case management system was implemented in a three-tier architecture with a role-based authorization concept. A portal for relatives complements the system. By providing precise information and e-learning services, caring relatives are integrated into the care process. In a pilot test, CASEPLUS-SimPat shows a good usability. Adapting aspects, such as keywords used to structure entries will make it easier to find required information, and thus will increase usability. Next steps comprise integration of further health care professionals and care facilities as well as real-life testing in terms of feasibility and effectiveness.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death globally causing 31% of all deaths worldwide. The Danish health care system is characterized by fragmented delivery of services and rehabilitation activities. The Teledialog Telerehabilitation Program for cardiac patients was developed and tested to rectify fragmentation and improve the quality of care. The Teledialog program was based on the assumption that a common communication platform shared by health care professionals, patients, and relatives could reduce or eliminate the fragmentation in the rehabilitation process and improve cooperation between the health professionals. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess the interorganizational cooperation between health care professionals across sectors (hospitals, municipal health care centers) in a cardiac telerehabilitation program. METHODS:Theories of networks between organizations, the sociology of professions, and the "community of practice" approach were used in a case study of a cardiac telerehabilitation program. A triangulation of data collection techniques were used including documents, participant observation (n=76 hours), and qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals (n=37). Data were analyzed using NVivo 11.0. RESULTS:The case study of cooperation in an interorganizational context of cardiac telerehabilitation program is characterized by the following key themes and patterns: (1) integrated workflows via a shared digital rehabilitation plan that help integrate workflow between health care professions and organizations, (2) joint clinical practice showed as a community of practice in telerehabilitation developed across professions and organizations, and (3) unifying the organizations as cooperation has advanced via a joint telerehabilitation program across municipalities and hospitals. CONCLUSIONS:The Teledialog Telerehabilitation Program was a new innovative cardiac program tested on a large scale across hospitals, health care centers, and municipalities. Assessments showed that the Teledialog program and its associated technologies helped improve interorganizational cooperation and reduce fragmentation. The program helped integrate the organizations and led to the creation of a community of practice. Further research is needed to explore long-term effects of implementation of telerehabilitation technologies and programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01752192; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01752192 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yR3tdEpb).
Project description:PURPOSE:Despite a call for earlier diagnosis of dementia, the diagnostic yield of case finding and its impact on the mental health of patients and relatives are unclear. This study assessed the effect of a two-component intervention of case finding and subsequent care on these outcomes. METHODS:In a cluster RCT we assessed whether education of family physicians (FPs; trial stage 1) resulted in more mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia diagnoses among older persons in whom FPs suspected cognitive decline and whether case finding by a practice nurse and the FP (trial stage 2) added to this number of diagnoses. In addition, we assessed mental health effects of case finding and subsequent care (trial stage 2). FPs of 15 primary care practices (PCPs = clusters) judged the cognitive status of all persons ? 65 years. The primary outcome, new MCI and dementia diagnoses by FPs after 12 months as indicated on a list, was assessed among all persons in whom FPs suspected cognitive impairment but without a formal diagnosis of dementia. The secondary outcome, mental health of patients and their relatives, was assessed among persons consenting to participate in trial stage 2. Trial stage 1 consisted of either intervention component 1: training FPs to diagnose MCI and dementia, or control: no training. Trial stage 2 consisted of either intervention component 2: case finding of MCI and dementia and care by a trained nurse and the FP, or control: care as usual. RESULTS:Seven PCPs were randomized to the intervention; eight to the control condition. MCI or dementia was diagnosed in 42.3% (138/326) of persons in the intervention, and in 30.5% (98/321) in the control group (estimated difference GEE: 10.8%, OR: 1.51, 95%-CI 0.60-3.76). Among patients and relatives who consented to stage 2 of the trial (n = 145; 25%), there were no differences in mental health between the intervention and control group. CONCLUSIONS:We found a non-significant increase in the number of new MCI diagnoses. As we cannot exclude a clinically relevant effect, a larger study is warranted to replicate ours. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Nederlands Trial Register NTR3389.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Focus on frailty status has become increasingly important when determining care plans within and across health care sectors. A standardized frailty measure applicable for both primary and secondary health care sectors is needed to provide a common reference point. The aim of this study was to translate the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) into Danish (CFS-DK) and test inter-rater reliability for key health care professionals in the primary and secondary sectors using the CFS-DK. METHODS:The Clinical Frailty Scale was translated into Danish using the ISPOR principles for translation and cultural adaptation that included forward and back translation, review by the original developer, and cognitive debriefing. For the validation exercise, 40 participants were asked to rate 15 clinical case vignettes using the CFS-DK. The raters were distributed across several health care professions: primary care physicians (n?=?10), community nurses (n?=?10), hospital doctors from internal medicine (n?=?10) and intensive care (n?=?10). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and sensitivity analysis was performed using multilevel random effects linear regression. RESULTS:The Clinical Frailty Scale was translated and culturally adapted into Danish and is presented in this paper in its final form. Inter-rater reliability in the four professional groups ranged from ICC 0.81 to 0.90. Sensitivity analysis showed no significant impact of professional group or length of clinical experience. The health care professionals considered the CFS-DK to be relevant for their own area of work and for cross-sectoral collaboration. CONCLUSION:The Clinical Frailty Scale was translated and culturally adapted into Danish. The inter-rater reliability was high in all four groups of health care professionals involved in cross-sectoral collaborations. However, the use of case vignettes may reduce the generalizability of the reliability findings to real-life settings. The CFS has the potential to serve as a common reference tool when treating and rehabilitating older patients.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Integrated care (IC) can promote health and social care efficiency through prioritization of preventive patient-centered models and defragmentation of care and collaboration across health tiers, and mobile health (mHealth) can be the cornerstone allowing for the adoption of IC.<h4>Objective</h4>This study aims to assess the acceptability, usability, and satisfaction of an mHealth-enabled IC model for complex chronic patients in both patients and health professionals.<h4>Methods</h4>As part of the CONNECARE Horizon 2020 project, a prospective, pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel, hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted from July 2018 to August 2019 in a rural region of Catalonia, Spain. Home-dwelling patients 55 years and older with chronic conditions and a history of hospitalizations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure (use case [UC] 1), or a scheduled major elective hip or knee arthroplasty (UC2) were recruited. During the 3 months, patients experienced an mHealth-enabled IC model, including a self-management app for patients, a set of integrated sensors, and a web-based platform connecting professionals from different settings or usual care. The Person-Centered Coordinated Care Experience Questionnaire (P3CEQ) and the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire (NCQ) assessed person-centeredness and continuity of care. Acceptability was assessed for IC arm patients and staff with the Net Promoter Score (NPS) and the System Usability Scale (SUS).<h4>Results</h4>The analyses included 77 IC patients, 58 controls who completed the follow-up, and 30 health care professionals. The mean age was 78 (SD 9) years in both study arms. Perception of patient-centeredness was similarly high in both arms (usual care: mean P3CEQ score 16.1, SD 3.3; IC: mean P3CEQ score 16.3, SD 2.4). IC patients reported better continuity of care than controls (usual care: mean NCQ score 3.7, SD 0.9; IC: mean NCQ score 4.0, SD 1; P=.04). The scores for patient acceptability (UC1: NPS +67%; UC2: NPS +45%) and usability (UC1: mean SUS score 79, SD 14; UC2: mean SUS score 68, SD 24) were outstanding. Professionals' acceptability was low (UC1: NPS -25%; UC2: NPS -35%), whereas usability was average (UC1: mean SUS score 63, SD 20; UC2: mean SUS score 62, SD 19). The actual use of technology was high; 77% (58/75) of patients reported physical activity for at least 60 days, and the ratio of times reported over times prescribed for other sensors ranged from 37% for oxygen saturation to 67% for weight.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The mHealth-enabled IC model showed outstanding results from the patients' perspective in 2 different UCs but lacked maturity and integration with legacy systems to be fully accepted by professionals. This paper provides useful lessons learned through the development and assessment process and may be of use to organizations willing to develop or implement mHealth-enabled IC for older adults.
Project description:The aging of the population has led to the increase of chronic diseases, especially dementia and cardiovascular diseases, and it has become necessary for their relatives to dedicate more time in caregiving.The objective in the first phase of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a Primary Health Care procedure to increase the physical activity of people with dementia and their relative caregivers. Also the effect on the cognitive state and cardiovascular risk will be assessed.Clinical, multicentric and randomized trial. A simple random sampling to select 134 patients diagnosed with dementia will be carried out. After contacting their relatives, his/her participation in the trial will be requested. A basal assessment will be made and the participants will be asigned to control or intervention group (1:1).The main measure will be the assessment of physical activity (podometer and 7-PAR) in patients and caregivers. In patients with dementia: ADAS-cog, functional degree and cardiovascular risk. In caregivers: cardiovascular risk, general health and quality of life.For 3 months, participants will receive instructions to do physical activity with an adapted program. This program will be designed and applied by Primary Health Care professionals in patients with dementia and their caregivers. The control group will receive regular care.An intention-to-treat analysis will be carried out by comparing the observed differences between basal, 6 and 12 months measures. Change in the mean of daily steps assessed with the podometer and 7-PAR will be the main result.If the main hypothesis is confirmed, it could be useful to improve the cognitive state of patients with dementia, as well as the cardiovascular risk of all of them. The results can be good to improve technical features of the devices that register the physical activity in the patients with dementia, and it could facilitate its commercialization.Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT02044887.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Addressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors' shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility. AIM:This study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded. RESULTS:Of 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently reported with some evidence suggesting co-financing contributed to improved outcomes. CONCLUSION:Co-financing remains in an exploratory phase, with diverse models having been implemented across sectors and settings. By incentivising intersectoral action on structural inequities and barriers to health interventions, such a novel financing mechanism could contribute to more effective engagement of non-health sectors; to efficiency gains in the financing of universal health coverage; and to simultaneously achieving health and other well-being related sustainable development goals.
Project description:In China, the ageing population and the prevalence of dementia are projected to escalate significantly by 2050 resulting in a substantial increase in health and economic burden on caregivers, healthcare facilities, healthcare providers and communities. There is no published national dementia policy or strategy in China. This case report describes significant barriers contributing to diagnostic problems and inadequate care of dementia through the case of an older female in rural China, whose condition deteriorated due to neuropsychiatric and functional symptoms of undiagnosed dementia. Intersectoral collaboration between care organisations facilitated delivery of a non-pharmacological intervention programme which was associated with improvements in the patient's functional and neuropsychiatric symptoms. The case demonstrates that recruitment and training of a wider range of health and care professionals and caregivers in a systematic approach to non-pharmacological interventions could help overcome barriers to the specialised care needs of people with dementia where resources are lacking.
Project description:care home residents have high healthcare needs not fully met by prevailing healthcare models. This study explored how healthcare configuration influences resource use.a realist evaluation using qualitative and quantitative data from case studies of three UK health and social care economies selected for differing patterns of healthcare delivery to care homes. Four homes per area (12 in total) were recruited. A total of 239 residents were followed for 12 months to record resource-use. Overall, 181 participants completed 116 interviews and 13 focus groups including residents, relatives, care home staff, community nurses, allied health professionals and General Practitioners.context-mechanism-outcome configurations were identified explaining what supported effective working between healthcare services and care home staff: (i) investment in care home-specific work that legitimises and values work with care homes; (ii) relational working which over time builds trust between practitioners; (iii) care which 'wraps around' care homes; and (iv) access to specialist care for older people with dementia. Resource use was similar between sites despite differing approaches to healthcare. There was greater utilisation of GP resource where this was specifically commissioned but no difference in costs between sites.activities generating opportunities and an interest in healthcare and care home staff working together are integral to optimal healthcare provision in care homes. Outcomes are likely to be better where: focus and activities legitimise ongoing contact between healthcare staff and care homes at an institutional level; link with a wider system of healthcare; and provide access to dementia-specific expertise.
Project description:BACKGROUND:While interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral collaboration promotes the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes for persons with low back pain, challenges remain for this process. Few studies have explored challenges to cross-sectoral care as experienced by all the involved professionals across sectors during a course of treatment. The aim of this study was to explore challenges to cross-sectoral care as experienced by professionals involved in the course of treatment for patients with low back pain. METHOD:This semi-structured, qualitative interview study included 28 health care professionals and 8 social workers who interacted with patients with low back pain. A systematic text condensation method was used to analyse data. Nvivo was used to structure and thematise the interview data. RESULTS:Professionals expressed challenges in relation to a lack of collaboration, knowledge sharing and acknowledgement of one other and they appeared to differ in their approach to patients with pain or patients with limited function. Additional challenges included time constraints, availability and subjective approaches to managing guidelines for low back pain. A lack of a common information technology (IT) registration system and limited knowledge of the work of other professions disrupted knowledge sharing among sectors. DISCUSSION:The different approach to patients with pain or patients with limited function challenged mutual understanding and collaboration among professionals. The lack of mutual understanding and knowledge of each other's work appeared to create an environment of disrespect and distrust among professionals that generated feelings of a lack of acknowledgement from other health care professionals. CONCLUSION:To provide cross-sectoral care, we must ensure that professionals work together towards transparent and informed transitions from one sector to the next. This study contributes to the existing literature by presenting challenges to cross-sectoral care that are experienced by the diverse groups of professionals involved in a course of treatment for patients with low back pain.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:In 2012-2013, the English National Health Service mandated hospitals to conduct systematic case-finding of people with dementia among older people with unplanned admissions. The method was not defined. The aim of this study was to understand current approaches to dementia case-finding in acute hospitals in England and explore the views of healthcare professionals on perceived benefits and challenges. DESIGN:Qualitative study involving interviews, focus groups and thematic content analysis. SETTING:Primary care and secondary care across six counties in the East of England. PARTICIPANTS:Hospital staff involved in dementia case-finding and primary care staff in the catchment areas of those hospitals. RESULTS:We recruited 23 hospital staff and 36 primary care staff, including 30 general practitioners (GPs). Analysis resulted in three themes: (1) lack of consistent approaches in case-finding processes, (2) barriers between primary care and secondary care which impact on case-finding outcomes and (3) perceptions of rationale, aims and impacts of case-finding. The study shows that there were variations in how well hospitals recorded and reported outcomes to GPs. Barriers between primary care and secondary care, including GPs' lack of access to hospital investigations and lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities, impacted case-finding outcomes. Staff in secondary care were more positive about the initiative than primary care staff, and there were conflicting priorities for primary care and secondary care regarding case-finding. CONCLUSIONS:The study suggests a more evidence-based approach was needed to justify approaches to dementia case-finding. Information communicated to primary care from hospitals needs to be comprehensive, appropriate and consistent before GPs can effectively plan further investigation, treatment or care. Follow-up in primary care further requires access to options for postdiagnostic support. There is a need to evaluate the outcomes for patients and the economic impact on health and care services across settings.