ABSTRACT
Objective: To analyse doctors' opinions on clinical coordination between primary and secondary care in different healthcare networks and on the factors influencing it. Methods: A qualitative descriptive-interpretative study was conducted, based on semi-structured interviews. A two-stage theoretical sample was designed: 1) healthcare networks with different management models; 2) primary care and secondary care doctors in each network. Final sample size (n = 50) was reached by saturation. A thematic content analysis was conducted. Results: In all networks doctors perceived that primary and secondary care given to patients was coordinated in terms of information transfer, consistency and accessibility to SC following a referral. However, some problems emerged, related to difficulties in acceding non-urgent secondary care changes in prescriptions and the inadequacy of some referrals across care levels. Doctors identified the following factors: 1) organizational influencing factors: coordination is facilitated by mechanisms that facilitate information transfer, communication, rapid access and physical proximity that fosters positive attitudes towards collaboration; coordination is hindered by the insufficient time to use mechanisms, unshared incentives in prescription and, in two networks, the change in the organizational model; 2) professional factors: clinical skills and attitudes towards coordination. Conclusions: Although doctors perceive that primary and secondary care is coordinated, they also highlighted problems. Identified factors offer valuable insights on where to direct organizational efforts to improve coordination
Objetivo: Analizar la opinión de los médicos sobre la coordinación entre la atención primaria (AP) y la atención especializada (AE) en diferentes redes de servicios de salud, e identificar los factores relacionados. Método: Estudio cualitativo descriptivo-interpretativo basado en entrevistas semiestructuradas. Se diseñó una muestra teórica en dos etapas: 1) redes de servicios de salud con diferentes modelos de gestión; 2) en cada red, médicos de AP y AE. El tamaño muestral se alcanzó por saturación (n = 50). Se realizó un análisis temático de contenido. Resultados: En las tres redes, los médicos expresaron que la atención está coordinada en términos de intercambio de información, consistencia y accesibilidad de AE tras derivación urgente. Sin embargo, emergieron problemas relacionados con el acceso no urgente y cambios en prescripciones, y en dos redes la inadecuación clínica de las derivaciones entre ambos niveles. Se identificaron los siguientes factores relacionados: 1) organizativos: facilitan la coordinación, la existencia de mecanismos de transferencia de información, de comunicación y de acceso rápido, y la proximidad física que promueve actitudes positivas a la colaboración; la obstaculizan el tiempo insuficiente para el uso de mecanismos, incentivos no compartidos en la prescripción y, en dos redes, un cambio del modelo organizativo; 2) relacionados con los profesionales: habilidades clínicas y actitudes frente a la coordinación. Conclusiones: Aunque los médicos perciben que la atención entre niveles está coordinada, también señalan problemas. Los factores identificados muestran hacia dónde dirigir los esfuerzos organizativos para su mejora
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Intersectoral Collaboration , Primary Health Care/trends , Secondary Care/trends , Comprehensive Health Care/organization & administration , Qualitative Research , Interviews as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Interprofessional Relations , Efficiency, Organizational/trends , Physicians/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyse doctors' opinions on clinical coordination between primary and secondary care in different healthcare networks and on the factors influencing it. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive-interpretative study was conducted, based on semi-structured interviews. A two-stage theoretical sample was designed: 1) healthcare networks with different management models; 2) primary care and secondary care doctors in each network. Final sample size (n = 50) was reached by saturation. A thematic content analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In all networks doctors perceived that primary and secondary care given to patients was coordinated in terms of information transfer, consistency and accessibility to SC following a referral. However, some problems emerged, related to difficulties in acceding non-urgent secondary care changes in prescriptions and the inadequacy of some referrals across care levels. Doctors identified the following factors: 1) organizational influencing factors: coordination is facilitated by mechanisms that facilitate information transfer, communication, rapid access and physical proximity that fosters positive attitudes towards collaboration; coordination is hindered by the insufficient time to use mechanisms, unshared incentives in prescription and, in two networks, the change in the organizational model; 2) professional factors: clinical skills and attitudes towards coordination. CONCLUSIONS: Although doctors perceive that primary and secondary care is coordinated, they also highlighted problems. Identified factors offer valuable insights on where to direct organizational efforts to improve coordination.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Physicians , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Secondary Care/organization & administration , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Organization and Administration , Qualitative Research , SpainABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coordination across levels of care is becoming increasingly important due to rapid advances in technology, high specialisation and changes in the organization of healthcare services; to date, however, the development of indicators to evaluate coordination has been limited. The aim of this study is to develop and test a set of indicators to comprehensively evaluate clinical coordination across levels of care. METHODS: A systematic review of literature was conducted to identify indicators of clinical coordination across levels of care. These indicators were analysed to identify attributes of coordination and classified accordingly. They were then discussed within an expert team and adapted or newly developed, and their relevance, scientific soundness and feasibility were examined. The indicators were tested in three healthcare areas of the Catalan health system. RESULTS: 52 indicators were identified addressing 11 attributes of clinical coordination across levels of care. The final set consisted of 21 output indicators. Clinical information transfer is evaluated based on information flow (4) and the adequacy of shared information (3). Clinical management coordination indicators evaluate care coherence through diagnostic testing (2) and medication (1), provision of care at the most appropriate level (2), completion of diagnostic process (1), follow-up after hospital discharge (4) and accessibility across levels of care (4). The application of indicators showed differences in the degree of clinical coordination depending on the attribute and area. CONCLUSION: A set of rigorous and scientifically sound measures of clinical coordination across levels of care were developed based on a literature review and discussion with experts. This set of indicators comprehensively address the different attributes of clinical coordination in main transitions across levels of care. It could be employed to identify areas in which health services can be improved, as well as to measure the effect of efforts to improve clinical coordination in healthcare organizations.
Subject(s)
Continuity of Patient Care , Information Management/organization & administration , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Quality Control , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although hypercholesterolemia is considered a cardiovascular risk factor, in isolation it is not necessarily sufficient cause for a cardiovascular event. To improve event prediction, cardiovascular risk calculators have been developed; the REGICOR calculator has been validated for use in our population. The objective of this project is to develop an intervention with general practitioners (GPs) and evaluate its impact on prescription adequacy of cholesterol-lowering drugs in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and in controlling the costs associated with this disease. METHODS: This nonblinded, cluster-randomized clinical trial analyzes data from primary care electronic medical records (ECAP) and other databases. Inclusion criteria are patients aged 35 to 74 years with no known cardiovascular disease and a new prescription for cholesterol-lowering drugs during the 2-year study period. Dependent variables include the following: RETIRA, defined as new cholesterol-lowering drugs initiated during the year preceding the intervention, considered inadequate, and withdrawn during the study period; EVITA, defined as new cholesterol-lowering drugs initiated during the study period and considered inadequate; COST, defined as the total cost of inadequate new treatments prescribed; and REGISTER, defined as the recording of cardiovascular risk factors. Independent variables include the GP's quality-of-care indicators and randomly assigned study group (intervention vs control), patient demographics, and clinical variables. Aggregated descriptive analysis will be done at the GP level and multilevel analysis will be performed to estimate the intervention effect, adjusted for individual and GP variables. DISCUSSION: The study objective is to generate evidence about the effectiveness of implementing feedback information programs directed to GPs in the context of Primary Care. The goal is to improve the prescription adequacy of lipid-lowering therapies for primary prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01997671. November 28, 2013.
