Black Georgia B, Khalid Ahmad F, Lyratzopoulos Georgios, Duffy Stephen W, Nicholson Brian D, Fulop Naomi J
Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research Health System Impact Fellow, Centre for Implementation Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Canada.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2025 Jan;30(1):21-30. doi: 10.1177/13558196241288068. Epub 2024 Dec 13.
This study aimed to explore the policy implementation of non-specific symptom pathways within the English National Health Service.
A multi-site ethnographic project was conducted in four hospitals that contained non-specific symptom pathways between November 2021 and February 2023. The research involved observation (44 h), interviews ( = 54), patient shadowing, and document review.
The study examined how the policy concept of 'holistic' care was understood and put into practice within four non-specific symptom pathways. Several challenges associated with providing holistic care were identified. One key challenge was the conflict between delivering holistic care and meeting timed targets, such as the Faster Diagnosis Standard, due to limited availability of imaging and diagnostic tools. The interpretation of a holistic approach varied among participants, with some acknowledging that the current model did not recognise holistic care beyond cancer exclusion. The findings also revealed a lack of clarity and differing opinions on the boundaries of holistic care, resulting in wide variation in NSS pathway implementation across health care providers. Additionally, holistic investigation of non-specific symptoms in younger patients were seen to pose difficulties due to younger patients' history of health anxiety or depression, as well as concerns over radiological risk exposure.
The study highlights the complexity of implementing non-specific symptom pathways in light of standardised timed cancer targets and local cancer policies. There is a need for appropriately funded organisational models of care that prioritise holistic care in a timely manner over solely meeting cancer targets. Decision-makers should also consider the role of non-specific symptom pathways within the broader context of chronic disease management, with a particular emphasis on expanding diagnostic capacity.
本研究旨在探讨英国国民医疗服务体系中非特异性症状诊疗路径的政策实施情况。
2021年11月至2023年2月期间,在四家设有非特异性症状诊疗路径的医院开展了一项多地点人种志项目。研究包括观察(44小时)、访谈(n = 54)、患者跟踪以及文件审查。
该研究考察了“整体”护理这一政策概念在四条非特异性症状诊疗路径中是如何被理解和付诸实践的。确定了与提供整体护理相关的若干挑战。一个关键挑战是,由于影像和诊断工具的可用性有限,在提供整体护理与实现诸如快速诊断标准等定时目标之间存在冲突。参与者对整体方法的解释各不相同,一些人承认当前模式在排除癌症之外并不认可整体护理。研究结果还显示,对于整体护理的界限缺乏明确性且存在不同意见,导致不同医疗服务提供者在非特异性症状诊疗路径的实施上存在很大差异。此外,由于年轻患者有健康焦虑或抑郁病史,以及对辐射风险暴露的担忧,对年轻患者的非特异性症状进行全面调查存在困难。
该研究凸显了在标准化定时癌症目标和地方癌症政策背景下实施非特异性症状诊疗路径的复杂性。需要有适当资金支持的护理组织模式,这些模式应及时将整体护理置于优先地位,而不是仅仅满足癌症目标。决策者还应在慢性病管理的更广泛背景下考虑非特异性症状诊疗路径的作用,尤其要强调扩大诊断能力。