Reducing inequality in avoidable emergency admissions: Case studies of local health care systems in England using a realist approach.

OBJECTIVE: People in disadvantaged areas are more likely to have an avoidable emergency hospital admission. Socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency hospital admissions is monitored in England. Our aim was to inform local health care purchasing and planning by identifying recent health care system changes (or other factors), as reported by local health system leaders, that might explain narrowing or widening trends. METHODS: Case studies were undertaken in one pilot and at five geographically distinct local health care systems (Clinical Commissioning Groups, CCGs), identified as having consistently increasing or decreasing inequality. Local settings were explored through discussions with CCG officials and stakeholders to identify potential local determinants. Data were analysed using a realist evaluation approach to generate context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. RESULTS: Of the five geographically distinct CCGs, two had narrowing inequality, two widening, and one narrowing inequality, which widened during the project. None of the CCGs had designed a large-scale package of service changes with the explicit aim of reducing socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency admissions, and local decision makers were unfamiliar with their own trends. Potential primary and community care determinants included: workforce, case finding and exclusion, proactive care co-ordination for patients with complex needs, and access and quality. Potential commissioning determinants included: data use and incentives, and targeting of services. Other potential determinants included changes in care home services, national A&E targets, and wider issues - such as public services financial constraints, residential gentrification, and health care expectations. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any bespoke initiatives that explained the inequality trends. The trends were more likely due to an interplay of multiple health care and wider system factors. Local decision makers need greater awareness, understanding and support to interpret, use and act upon inequality indicators. They are unlikely to find simple, cheap interventions to reduce inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions. Rather, long-term multifaceted interventions are required that embed inequality considerations into mainstream decision making.

Responding to sustained poor outcomes in the management of non-communicable diseases (NCDs): an "incident control" approach is needed to improve and protect population health.

In 2017 Public Health England were asked to assist with investigating why 1-year cancer survival rates appeared lower than expected in a local area. We identified 50 premature deaths that surveillance data suggested we would not expect. These deaths highlighted a gap in recognising and responding to this kind of systematic non communicable disease (NCD) outcome variation. We hypothesise that the lack of a universally agreed systematic response to variations is not only counter-intuitive, but wholly unacceptable where non-communicable diseases (NCDs) rather than infectious diseases have become the leading causes of illness and death worldwide. In the United Kingdom (UK) alone over 89% of mortality in 2014 was attributable to NCDs. We argue that a new approach is urgently needed to turn the curve on NCD outcome variation to protect and improve the public's health. We set out a definition of an NCD "incident" and propose a phased approach that could be used to respond to local variation in NCD outcomes.Establishing parity of response for local variations in NCD outcomes and CD control is critically important. Although evidence shows that prevention and early intervention will make the biggest difference to NCD incidence, collective local whole health economy response, exploiting the wealth of surveillance data in real time, needs to be at the heart of responding to variations in NCD outcomes at a population level. We argue that local and national public health agencies should mandate a standardised 'incident' response to significant changes in outcomes from NCD to mitigate and reduce the loss of quality life.

Intraocular pressure outcome in primary 5FU phacotrabeculectomies compared with 5FU trabeculectomies.

PURPOSE: Combined surgery for glaucoma and cataract may not achieve as low intraocular pressure (IOP) as compared with trabeculectomy alone. The aim of this study was to assess the IOP control of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) phacotrabeculectomies compared with 5-fluorouracil trabeculectomies. METHODS: A retrospective, nonrandomized study of consecutive primary 5FU phacotrabeculectomies and primary 5FU trabeculectomies. The main outcome measures were preoperative and postoperative IOP, number of medications, visual acuity, and complications. RESULTS: Forty-five 5FU phacotrabeculectomies and 47 5FU trabeculectomies were performed with a mean follow-up of 43.1 and 36.6 months, respectively. The absolute success rate as defined as an IOP equal to or less than 16 mm Hg on no glaucoma drops was 62.2% for the phacotrabeculectomy group and 63.8% for the trabeculectomy group. These success rates were not statistically significantly different (log-rank test P = 0.81 for absolute success and P = 0.29 for relative success). The magnitude of the treatment effect was found to be significantly greater in the T group compared with the PT group (a 44.6% reduction in IOP in the T group compared with a 31.2% reduction in the PT group). The phacotrabectomy group underwent significantly more postoperative 5FU injections compared with the trabeculectomy group (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: 5FU phacotrabeculectomy seems to be a safe and effective treatment option in terms of IOP control. Patients with both coexistent glaucoma and cataract could be considered for combined surgery.

The role of telemedicine in the assessment of strabismus.

Thirty patients with strabismus were seen face to face by an ophthalmologist and an orthoptist. The patients were then presented by the same orthoptist to a second ophthalmologist via a telemedicine link. Twenty-six patients were seen using a bandwidth of 384 kbit/s and four using 128 kbit/s. There was agreement between the two ophthalmologists about diagnosis and management in 24 cases, partial agreement in one and no agreement in five (17%). Manifest strabismus was safely diagnosed and managed using telemedicine at 128 kbit/s, although 384 kbit/s was preferred because it obviated the need for repeated examination. Latent strabismus and micro-movements were difficult to diagnose using telemedicine even at 384 kbit/s. Young patients who are unable to sit still would not be suitable for strabismus assessment via telemedicine.