The impact of collaborative organisational models and general practice size on patient safety and quality of care in the English National Health Service: A systematic review.

Collaborative primary care has become an increasingly popular strategy to manage existing pressures on general practice. In England, the recent changes taking place in the primary care sector have included the formation of collaborative organisational models and a steady increase in practice size. The aim of this review was to summarise the available evidence on the impact of collaborative models and general practice size on patient safety and quality of care in England. We searched for quantitative and qualitative studies on the topic published between January 2010 and July 2023. The quality of articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. We screened 6533 abstracts, with full-text screening performed on 76 records. A total of 29 articles were included in the review. 19 met the inclusion criteria following full-text screening, with seven identified through reverse citation searching and three through expert consultation. All studies were found to be of moderate or high quality. A predominantly positive impact on service delivery measures and patient-level outcomes was identified. Meanwhile, the evidence on the effect on pay-for-performance outcomes and hospital admissions is mixed, with continuity of care and access identified as a concern. While this review is limited to evidence from England, the findings provide insights for all health systems undergoing a transition towards collaborative primary care.

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats Analysis of the Use of Digital Health Technologies in Primary Health Care in the Sub-Saharan African Region: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies (DHTs) have become increasingly commonplace as a means of delivering primary care. While DHTs have been postulated to reduce inequalities, increase access, and strengthen health systems, how the implementation of DHTs has been realized in the sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) health care environment remains inadequately explored. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to capture the multidisciplinary experiences of primary care professionals using DHTs to explore the strengths and weaknesses, as well as opportunities and threats, regarding the implementation and use of DHTs in SSA primary care settings. METHODS: A combination of qualitative approaches was adopted (ie, focus groups and semistructured interviews). Participants were recruited through the African Forum for Primary Care and researchers' contact networks using convenience sampling and included if having experience with digital technologies in primary health care in SSA. Focus and interviews were conducted, respectively, in November 2021 and January-March 2022. Topic guides were used to cover relevant topics in the interviews, using the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats framework. Transcripts were compiled verbatim and systematically reviewed by 2 independent reviewers using framework analysis to identify emerging themes. The COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist was used to ensure the study met the recommended standards of qualitative data reporting. RESULTS: A total of 33 participants participated in the study (n=13 and n=23 in the interviews and in focus groups, respectively; n=3 participants participated in both). The strengths of using DHTs ranged from improving access to care, supporting the continuity of care, and increasing care satisfaction and trust to greater collaboration, enabling safer decision-making, and hastening progress toward universal health coverage. Weaknesses included poor digital literacy, health inequalities, lack of human resources, inadequate training, lack of basic infrastructure and equipment, and poor coordination when implementing DHTs. DHTs were perceived as an opportunity to improve patient digital literacy, increase equity, promote more patient-centric design in upcoming DHTs, streamline expenditure, and provide a means to learn international best practices. Threats identified include the lack of buy-in from both patients and providers, insufficient human resources and local capacity, inadequate governmental support, overly restrictive regulations, and a lack of focus on cybersecurity and data protection. CONCLUSIONS: The research highlights the complex challenges of implementing DHTs in the SSA context as a fast-moving health delivery modality, as well as the need for multistakeholder involvement. Future research should explore the nuances of these findings across different technologies and settings in the SSA region and implications on health and health care equity, capitalizing on mixed-methods research, including the use of real-world quantitative data to understand patient health needs. The promise of digital health will only be realized when informed by studies that incorporate patient perspective at every stage of the research cycle.

Patient-level costs of staged unilateral versus immediate bilateral symmetrization mammoplasty in breast-conserving surgery.

BACKGROUND: Following therapeutic mammoplasty (TM), the contralateral breast may require a later balancing procedure to optimize shape and symmetry. The alternative is to offer patients simultaneous TM with immediate contralateral symmetrization via a dual-surgeon approach, with the goal of reducing costs and minimizing the number of subsequent hospital appointments in an era of COVID-19 surges. The aim of this cost-consequence analysis is to characterize the cost-benefit of immediate bilateral symmetrization dual-operator mammoplasty versus staged unilateral single operator for breast cancer surgery. METHOD: A prospective single-centre observational study was conducted at an academic teaching centre for breast cancer surgery in the UK. Pseudonymized data for clinicopathological variables and procedural care information, including the type of initial breast-conserving surgery and subsequent reoperation(s), were extracted from the electronic patient record. Financial data were retrieved using the Patient-Level Information and Costing Systems. RESULTS: Between April 2014 and March 2020, 232 women received either immediate bilateral (n = 44), staged unilateral (n = 57) for breast cancer, or unilateral mammoplasty alone (n = 131). The median (interquartile range (i.q.r.)) additional cost of unilateral mammoplasty with staged versus immediate bilateral mammoplasty was €5500 (€4330 to €6570) per patient (P < 0.001), which represents a total supplementary financial burden of €313 462 to the study institution. There was no significant difference between groups in age, Charlson comorbidity index, operating minutes, time to adjuvant radiotherapy in months, or duration of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Synchronous dual-surgeon immediate bilateral TM can deliver safe immediate symmetrization and is financially beneficial, without delay to receipt of adjuvant therapy, or additional postoperative morbidity.

Impact of war on health related quality of life in Croatia: population study.

AIM: To present health-related quality of life in post-war Croatia, focusing on the population as a whole rather than on the specific group of people. METHOD: The study was conducted in six Croatian counties in the 1997-1999 period. Three of those counties had been directly affected by the 1991-1995 war. The sample consisted of 1,297 randomly selected respondents aged 18 years and older. The questionnaire was anonymous, consisting of questions on sociodemographic characteristics of respondents and Medical Outcome Study 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). SF-36 comprised the following nine subscales: physical functioning (PF), role-physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role-emotional (RE), mental health (MH), and health transition (HT). RESULTS: Mean subscale scores for the areas directly affected by war were PF 64.21; RP 52.70; BP 59.35; GH 49.02; VT 49.52; SF 68.29; RE 63.02; MH 57.95; HT 41.28; and for the areas not affected by war were PF 65.35; RP 62.01; BP 61.79; GH 50.45; VT 49.40; SF 71.41; RE 74.11; MH 60.33; HT 45.14. The two areas differed significantly in RP (p<0.001), SF (p=0.035), RE (p<0.001), MH (p=0.038), and HT (p=0.003). Respondents living in the areas directly affected by war achieved lower total health-related quality of life scores. Younger respondents, respondents with secondary education, and those with lower income were the groups mostly affected by war. CONCLUSION: War affects self-perceived health, physical ability, and emotional and mental health of the entire population affected by war, especially younger age groups, those with lower education, and lower income.