In view of the difficulties in recruitment and the potential biases introduced by selective loss of patients and the delay in obtaining a valid second opinion in the study group, no valid conclusions can be drawn regarding the clinical performance of this model of SF telemedicine. With regard to digital photography in suspected skin cancer, it is unlikely that this approach can dramatically reduce the need for conventional clinical consultations, whilst still maintaining clinical safety. Additional research on the assessment of diagnostic and management agreement between clinicians would be valuable in this and other fields of research.
As part of a randomized controlled trial involving 208 dermatology patients, a quantitative and qualitative study was undertaken to explore patients' satisfaction with a specialist dermatological opinion and further management obtained through either a traditional outpatient consultation (control group) or an asynchronous teleconsultation (telemedicine group). There was a response rate of 71% to the quantitative patient satisfaction survey (148 replies from 208 distributed questionnaires). The responders comprised 80 of the 111 telemedicine patients (72%) and 68 of the 97 control patients (70%). Overall levels of patient satisfaction were high in both groups, and there was no significant difference between them. Ninety per cent of patients in the control group were satisfied with their overall care, compared with 81% in the telemedicine group, and 87% of patients in the control group were satisfied with their overall management, compared with 84% in the telemedicine group. Follow-up qualitative interviews with 30 of the participants also suggested that patients were generally positive about their care and management, regardless of group, age or gender. Receiving a diagnosis, treatment and cure, receiving adequate information and explanations, the need to be taken seriously, the need for individualized personal care, and the importance of a short waiting time for an appointment and treatment were all aspects of care and management most likely to result in patient satisfaction, regardless of modality.
Introduction Decisions about allocation of public funds to pay for care or treatment are reliant on a composite assessment process usually involving contributions from a number of professions (New Zealand Government, 2016; Australian Government, 2018; Department of Health and Social Care, 2018a). Communication is facilitated by appropriate tools and other mechanisms to coordinate multiple contributions to the process (Taylor, 2012). In England, one such example is decision-making relating to the provision of NHS Continuing Healthcare, a package of ongoing care that is arranged and funded solely by the health service for individuals outside a hospital setting who have complex ongoing healthcare needs. Guidance sets out a process for the NHS to work in partnership with its local authority partners to assess health needs and determine eligibility for NHS Continuing Healthcare (Department of Health and Social Care, 2018a). This provides the context for the study reported in this paper. Information sharing between professionals within the assessment process to improve outcomes for patients and service users is a longstanding policy objective (Department for Communities and Local Government,
This study found that agitation symptoms have a substantial impact on informal care costs in the community care setting. Future research is needed to evaluate which strategies may be efficient by improving the cost-effectiveness ratio and reducing the burden associated with informal care in the management of agitation in PwD.
BackgroundThe rising number of older people with mental health problems makes the effective use of mental health resources imperative. Little is known about the clinical effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness of different service models.AimsThe programme aimed to (1) refine and apply an existing planning tool [‘balance of care’ (BoC)] to this client group; (2) identify whether, how and at what cost the mix of institutional and community services could be improved; (3) enable decision-makers to apply the BoC framework independently; (4) identify variation in the structure, organisation and processes of community mental health teams for older people (CMHTsOP); (5) examine whether or not different community mental health teams (CMHTs) models are associated with different costs/outcomes; (6) identify variation in mental health outreach services for older care home residents; (7) scope the evidence on the association between different outreach models and resident outcomes; and (8) disseminate the research findings to multiple stakeholder groups.MethodsThe programme employed a mixed-methods approach including three systematic literature reviews; a BoC study, which used a systematic framework for choosing between alternative patterns of support by identifying people whose needs could be met in more than one setting and comparing their costs/outcomes; a national survey of CMHTs’ organisation, structure and processes; a multiple case study of CMHTs exhibiting different levels of integration encompassing staff interviews, an observational study of user outcomes and a staff survey; national surveys of CMHTs’ outreach activities and care homes. A planned randomised trial of depression management in care homes was removed at the review stage by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) prior to funding award.ResultsBoC: Past studies exhibited several methodological limitations, and just two related to older people with mental health problems. The current study suggested that if enhanced community services were available, a substantial proportion of care home and inpatient admissions could be diverted, although only the latter would release significant monies. CMHTsOP: 60% of teams were considered multidisciplinary. Most were colocated, had a single point of access (SPA) and standardised assessment documentation. Evidence of the impact of particular CMHT features was limited. Although staff spoke positively about integration, no evidence was found that more integrated teams produced better user outcomes. Working in high-integration teams was associated with poor job outcomes, but other factors negated the statistical significance of this. Care home outreach: Typical services in the literature undertook some combination of screening (less common), assessment, medication review, behaviour management and training, and evidence suggested intervention can benefit depressed residents. Care home staff were perceived to lack necessary skills, but relatively few CMHTs provided formal training.LimitationsLimitations include a necessary reliance on observational rather than experimental methods, which were not feasible given the nature of the services explored.ConclusionsBoC: Shifting care towards the community would require the growth of support services; clarification of extra care housing’s (ECH) role; timely responses to people at risk of psychiatric admission; and improved hospital discharge planning. However, the promotion of care at home will not necessarily reduce public expenditure. CMHTsOP: Although practitioners favoured integration, its goals need clarification. Occupational therapists (OTs) and social workers faced difficulties identifying optimal roles, and support workers’ career structures needed delineating. Care home outreach: Further CMHT input to build care home staff skills and screen for depression may be beneficial. Priority areas for further study include the costs and benefits for older people of age inclusive mental health services and the relative cost-effectiveness of different models of mental health outreach for older care home residents.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.