Woodman Jenny, Lewis Hannah, Cheung Ronny, Gilbert Ruth, Wijlaars Linda Pmm
Children's Policy Research Unit, Population, Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Department of General Paediatrics, Evelina Children's Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Arch Dis Child. 2016 Sep;101(9):792-7. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2015-308558. Epub 2015 Oct 20.
To share innovative practice with enough detail to be useful for paediatricians involved in planning services.
A review of practice, adopting a realist approach.
We collected detailed information about five initiatives which were presented at two meetings in July and October 2014 and telephone interviews between July and November 2014 with key informants, updating information again in February 2015.
The five case studies involved three clinical commissioning groups (CCGs): Islington CCG and Southwark and Lambeth CCG in London and Taunton CCG in the Southwest. All five initiatives involved acute paediatric units. We heard about four distinct types of services designed to bring paediatric expertise into primary care and/or improve joint working between paediatricians and primary care professionals: telephone multidisciplinary team, hospital at home, general practitioner (GP) outreach clinics, and advice and guidance. We defined four common ways that initiatives might work: promoting shared responsibility; upskilling GPs; establishing relationships between paediatricians and primary healthcare professionals; and by taking specialist care to the patient.
We derived common aims and mechanisms and generated programme (mid-level) theory for each integrated care initiative about how they might work. These descriptions of what is being done can inform debate about which interventions should be prioritised for wider implementation. There is an urgent need for evaluation of these interventions and more indepth research into how mechanisms and their effectiveness could be assessed.
详细分享创新实践经验,以便为参与规划服务的儿科医生提供参考。
采用现实主义方法进行实践回顾。
我们收集了五项举措的详细信息,这些举措在2014年7月和10月的两次会议上进行了介绍,并在2014年7月至11月期间对关键信息提供者进行了电话访谈,2015年2月再次更新信息。
五个案例研究涉及三个临床委托小组(CCG):伦敦的伊斯灵顿CCG、南华克和兰贝斯CCG以及西南部的汤顿CCG。所有五项举措都涉及儿科急症病房。我们了解到四种不同类型的服务,旨在将儿科专业知识引入基层医疗和/或改善儿科医生与基层医疗专业人员之间的合作:电话多学科团队、居家医院、全科医生(GP)外展诊所以及咨询与指导。我们确定了举措可能发挥作用的四种常见方式:促进共同责任;提升全科医生技能;建立儿科医生与基层医疗专业人员之间的关系;以及为患者提供专科护理。
我们得出了共同目标和机制,并为每个综合护理举措生成了关于其可能如何发挥作用的项目(中级)理论。这些对正在开展工作的描述可为关于哪些干预措施应优先推广以供更广泛实施的辩论提供参考。迫切需要对这些干预措施进行评估,并对如何评估机制及其有效性进行更深入的研究。