Coordinate My Care from the perspective of the London Ambulance Service

Jones, Georgina; Whitmore, David

doi:10.1080/17571472.2013.11493400

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fourteen of 26 articles comprised ‘expert opinion’ (editorials, commentaries and discussion papers) 5 15–27. Of the remaining 12 articles, nine were quantitative studies,6 7 28–34 two were qualitative35 36 and one was a mixed-method study though predominantly qualitative 37.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fourteen articles were classified as expert opinion. Two were editorials,16 20 nine were commentaries,15 17–19 21 23 25–27 two were discussion and analytical papers,5 24 and one was a narrative review on advance care planning 22. Five articles provided an overview of EPaCCS in the UK context, including implementation challenges and references to data from audits, internal reports and some published articles 5 17 18 21 24.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six articles were a commentary to another published study 15 19 23 25–27. In four commentary articles and one editorial, authors expressed a favourable opinion regarding the potential of EPaCCS to improve end-of-life care outcomes 17 18 20 23 26. Three commentaries raised concerns about the lack of strong evidence for EPaCCS and the difficulties and potential bias of the current available research 15 25 27.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS): a systematic review

Léniz

Weil

Higginson

et al. 2019

BMJ Support Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo systematically search, evaluate and report the state of the science of electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS).MethodsWe searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature for articles evaluating or discussing electronic systems to facilitate sharing of information about advance care plans. Two independent review authors screened full‐text articles for inclusion, assessed quality and extracted data.ResultsIn total, 30 articles and reports were included. Of the 26 articles, 14 were ‘expert opinion’ articles (editorials, discussion papers or commentaries), 9 were observational studies (cross-sectional, retrospective cohort studies or service evaluations), 2 were qualitative studies and 1 a mixed-methods study. No study had an experimental design. Quantitative studies described the proportion of people with EPaCCS dying in their preferred place, and associations between EPaCCS use and hospital utilisation. Qualitative, mixed-methods studies and reports described the burden of inputting data and difficulties with IT systems as main challenges of implementing EPaCCS.ConclusionsMuch of the current scientific literature on EPaCCS comprises expert opinion, and there is an absence of experimental studies evaluating the impact of EPaCCS on end-of-life outcomes. Given the current drive for national roll-out of EPaCCS by 2020, it is essential that rigorous evaluation of EPaCCS is prioritised.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS): a systematic review

Léniz

Weil

Higginson

et al. 2019

BMJ Support Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Crash course in EPaCCS (Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems): 8 years of successes and failures in patient data sharing to learn from

Petrova

Riley

Abel

et al. 2016

BMJ Support Palliat Care

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundElectronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems (EPaCCS) are England's pre-eminent initiative in enabling advance care planning and improved communication and coordination at the end of life. EPaCCS have been under development for 8 years after being proposed, as Locality Registers, in the 2008 End of Life Care Strategy for England. EPaCCS are electronic registers or tools and processes for sharing data which aim to enable access to information about dying patients. Striking outcomes have been reported around EPaCCS, such as 77.8% of ‘Coordinate My Care’ patients dying in their preferred place. EPaCCS have, however, been extremely challenging to develop and implement, with many projects remaining continuously ‘under development’ or folding. They also continue to be suboptimally integrated with other data sharing initiatives. Rigorous research is non-existent.Discussion pointsWe discuss the current EPaCCS landscape and way forward. We summarise key facts concerning the availability, uptake, outcomes and costs of EPaCCS. We outline 5 key challenges (scope of projects, unrealistic expectations set by existing guidance, the discrepancy between IT realities in healthcare and our broader lives, information governance and ‘death register’ associations) and 6 key drivers (robust concept, striking outcomes, national support and strong clinical leadership, clinician commitment, education and funding).ConclusionsThe priorities for advancing EPaCCS we propose include linking to other work streams and reframing the concept, potentially making it less ‘end of life’, overview of current EPaCCS and lessons learnt, continuing work on information standards, rethinking of national funding and new levels of individual and community involvement.

show abstract

Coordinate My Care from the perspective of the London Ambulance Service

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS): a systematic review

Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS): a systematic review

Crash course in EPaCCS (Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems): 8 years of successes and failures in patient data sharing to learn from

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About