Search

This study examined the efficacy of a health education technology program on self-management adherence behavior and quality of life among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). A randomized experimental study design was employed. A total of 110 subjects was recruited. The experimental group received a novel technology education program plus routine shared care. The control group received routine shared care alone. Quality of life and adherence to self-management behavior questionnaires were used to measure outcomes. A linear mixed-effects model was used to analyze changes in quality of life after controlling for pre-test effects. The odds ratio was calculated for differences in adherence behavior between the two groups. The between-group mean difference in quality of life scores and adherence to physical activity comparing pre-test at 3 months follow-up showed significant progress at 3 months post-test compared with the control group. However, the increase in mean quality of life scores and adherence behavior at 6 months did not demonstrate a sustained between-group difference. The results showed adherence to physical activity and improved quality of life in patients with T2D at 3 months post intervention. Therefore, the program can be used as an intensive model for diabetes shared care. • At 3 months technology based self-management education improved quality of life. • Independence with physical activity compliance persisted at 3 months. • Technology education on diabetes shared care yields clinically promising outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly implanted in patients with advanced heart failure. Currently, LVAD care is predominantly concentrated at specialized tertiary care hospitals. However, the increasing workload and logistical burden for implanting centres pose significant challenges to accessing care for individual patients in remote areas. An emerging approach to LVAD patient management is the use of a shared care model (SCM), which facilitates collaboration between implanting centres and local non-implanting hospitals. This scoping review explores and synthesizes the current scientific evidence on the use of SCMs in LVAD care management. Eligible studies were identified in EMBASE, PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar. Findings were synthesized in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Of the 950 records screened, five articles met the inclusion criteria. Four review articles focused on the proposed benefits and challenges of using SCMs. Main benefits included improved patient satisfaction and continuity of care. Important challenges were initial education of non-implanting centre staff and maintaining competency. One prospective study showed that absence of LVAD-specific care was associated with impaired survival and higher rates of pump thrombosis and LVAD-related infections. The use of SCMs is a promising approach in the long-term management of LVAD patients. However, sufficient evidence about the impact of SCMs on patients and the healthcare system is not currently available. Standardized protocols based on prospective studies are needed to develop safe and effective shared care for LVAD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaboration between the implantation centers, management centers, and regional core hospitals is a key factor in securing long-term implantable ventricular assist device (VAD) management. In Kyushu, a management system for patients with implantable VADs has been established at the prefectural and regional levels. Presently, six implantable VAD implantation centers and seven management centers exists in the eight prefectures of Kyushu and Okinawa, with at least one specialized VAD centers in each prefecture. This collaborative management system allows patients with VADs to receive seamless treatment based on the same management concept wherever they live. In fact, approximately half of the present outpatients treated at our center reside outside the prefecture and are managed in collaboration with management centers and regional core hospitals. Among our patients, there were no significant differences in survival or rehospitalization-free rates between patients with VADs in and out of the prefecture, suggesting that the place of residence did not affect the outcome. With the increase in the number of patients with VADs and the diversification of patients, patient management has become more complex. Mutual collaboration between the implantation centers, management centers, and regional core hospitals, is essential to improve the quality of VAD management. This review was created based on a translation of the Japanese review written in the Japanese Journal of Artificial Organs in 2023 (Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 85–88), with some modifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Methods Results Conclusions Our objective was to assess the numbers of eligible people living with HIV attending one HIV clinic and receiving statins, the factors increasing the likelihood of statin prescription, the knowledge and involvement of primary care in cardiovascular risk prevention in people living with HIV, and the barriers to and drivers of shared care between general practitioners (GPs) and an HIV centre.This was a retrospective case note review identifying cardiovascular risk, medications, and communication between the HIV clinic and GPs via an electronic survey of GPs identifying their knowledge about statin indications in people living with HIV.In total, 62% of GPs were unaware of the indication for statins in people living with HIV aged >40 years. A total of 33% of patients received statins, rising to 61% of patients with independent indications for statins. 92% of all statin prescriptions were provided by the GP. Statins were recommended in 25% of clinic letters but were not prescribed in 72% of these cases. There was discordance between antiretrovirals prescribed by the HIV clinic and those documented on the GP record in 60% of cases and in 40% of non‐antiretroviral medications.Our results indicate that GPs can engage people living with HIV in cardiovascular risk reduction measures but may not consider HIV a cardiovascular risk. Written communication alone is insufficient to improve safe patient care. Shared HIV care needs bidirectional shared medical records. Ongoing work needs to ensure that HIV is recognized as an independent cardiovascular risk factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community Eye Clinics (CEC) increase accessibility of specialist ophthalmic services in the community, reducing demand for tertiary eye services. This paper aims to evaluate the impact of CEC on first-visit referrals from Hougang Polyclinic (HOU) to Tan Tock Seng Hospital Ophthalmology Specialist Outpatient Clinic (SOC). A retrospective analysis was performed on first-visit referrals from Hougang Polyclinic (HOU) to Tan Tock Seng Hospital Ophthalmology Specialist Outpatient Clinic (SOC) over a similar 3-months period before and after the introduction of CEC in August 2018 (1 January to 31 March in 2018 and 2019, respectively). Data pertaining to patients' presenting complaints, referral reasons, final diagnoses, follow-up plans, and need for ophthalmic intervention were obtained. We included 978 patients in our study. There was a 27.5% reduction in the number of first-visit referrals seen at SOC after the establishment of CEC. Patients were more likely to be referred on to sub-specialty eye clinics (10.8% vs. 12.9%, p= p =.304) and receive more ophthalmic interventions (15% vs. 16.3%, p =.066) than prior to CEC. The CEC provides greater accessibility to eye care within the community. Optometrists are upskilled to manage patients with stable eye conditions, whilst eye specialists can provide timely care to the SOC for patients with more severe eye conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding patterns of children’s living arrangements (physical custody) in separated families and the factors related to joint physical custody are crucial as custody patterns have significant implications for the well-being of children and parents. In this study we use the 2021 European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions Survey (EU-SILC) to provide new evidence of children’s post-separation living arrangements in Europe. Our sample (n = 7,461) is restricted to children of separated or divorced parents residing in their mother’s household and having another parent residing outside of the household. We analyze both the individual-level socioeconomic, family-and child-related characteristics, and country-level variables to explain variation in children’s joint physical custody arrangements. We find that joint physical custody is higher among boys and children in the age groups 6–10 and 11–15. We also find that children with more socioeconomically advantaged mothers (higher education, employed, higher income, homeowners) are more likely to have joint physical custody. Importantly, controlling for individual-level characteristics, both the legal and the gender equality context shape the prevalence of joint physical custody, suggesting that country-level policies and norms may be important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2000, Iceland has had an equal parental leave quota for both parents regardless of their marital status or a child's legal residency. Lone mothers' much-reported disadvantages and poverty risks have been found to be effectively alleviated by generous parental leave policies by promoting their employment. This study asks if the Icelandic parental leave policy works in favour of lone-parent families by increasing shared care among parents living apart and facilitating lone mothers' financial resources. The study applies data from four cross-sectional population surveys measuring how parents of firstborn children in 1997, 2003, 2009 and 2014 organise parental leave, work and care, for three years after childbirth. The results show that equal care participation of parents living apart has gradually increased since the enactment of equal parental leave rights. Furthermore, analysis of data collected among parents of children born in 2009 and 2014 shows that when parents have an equal division of care, the mother is likelier to find it easier to make ends meet in the child's fourth year. These findings emphasise the importance of policies that promote care participation of fathers living apart from the mother. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a highly prevalent neurodevelopmental disorder. UK guidance states that primary care has a vital role in effective ADHD management, including referral, medication prescribing and monitoring, and providing broader mental health and wellbeing support. However, many GPs feel unsupported to provide health care for young people with ADHD. Inadequate health care is associated with rising costs for patients and society. Aim: To investigate the experiences of young people with ADHD accessing primary care in England, from the perspectives of people with lived experience of ADHD and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Design and setting: A qualitative study. Interviews were conducted with HCPs (GPs, practice managers, and a wellbeing worker) and people with lived experience of ADHD (young people aged 16–25 years and their supporters) located in integrated care systems across England. Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants at five purposively selected general practices (varying by deprivation, ethnicity, and setting). Questions focused on experiences of accessing/providing health care for ADHD. Reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken within a critical realist framework to understand how provision works in practice and to explore potential improvements. Results: In total, 20 interviews were completed with 11 HCPs and nine people with lived experience. Three themes were generated: a system under stress, incompatibility between ADHD and the healthcare system, and strategies for change in ADHD primary care provision. Conclusion: Standardisation of ADHD management in primary care, providing better information and support for HCPs, and advising on reasonable adjustments for people with lived experience could help improve access to effective treatments for young people living with ADHD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Despite the serious risks of diabetes with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, this preventable comorbidity is rarely a priority for HCV elimination. We aim to examine how a shared care model could eliminate HCV in patients with diabetes (PwD) in primary care. METHODS: There were 27 community-based Diabetes Health Promotion Institutes in each township/city of Changhua, Taiwan. PwD from these institutes from January 2018 to December 2020 were enrolled. HCV screening and treatment were integrated into diabetes structured care through collaboration between diabetes care and HCV care teams. Outcome measures included HCV care continuum indicators. Township/city variation in HCV infection prevalence and care cascades were also examined. RESULTS: Of the 10,684 eligible PwD, 9,984 (93.4%) underwent HCV screening, revealing a 6.18% (n 5 617) anti-HCV seroprevalence.Among the 597 eligible seropositive individuals, 507 (84.9%) completed the RNA test, obtaining 71.8% positives. Treatment was initiated by 327 (89.8%) of 364 viremic patients, and 315 (86.5%) completed it, resulting in a final cure rate of 79.4% (n 5 289). Overall, with the introduction of antivirals in this cohort, the prevalence of viremic HCV infection dropped from 4.44%to 1.34%, yielding a 69.70% (95% credible interval 63.64%--77.03%) absolute reduction. DISCUSSION: Although HCV prevalence varied, the care cascades achieved consistent results across townships/ cities. We have further successfully implemented the model in county-wide hospital-based diabetes clinics, eventually treating 89.6% of the total PwD. A collaborative effort between diabetes care and HCV elimination enhanced the testing and treatment in PwD through an innovative shared care model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Home-based hospice care for the elderly is an important medical service model aimed at providing comprehensive medical and social support for the elderly. However, due to the special needs and difficulties in nursing of the elderly, a single medical service model often fails to meet their needs. Therefore, establishing a collaborative medical and social worker intervention model for elderly home care and shared care has become an important research direction. This article aims to investigate the sharing model of medical and social workers participating in home-based hospice care under the background of population aging, explore a home-based hospice care model suitable for China's elderly care system, standardize and guide the participation of medical and social workers in home-based shared care, leverage the intervention role of social workers, and meet the needs of patients at home. (老年人居家安宁疗护是一种重要的医疗服务模式, 由于老年人的特殊性和照护难度, 单一的医疗服务模式往往难以满足老年人的需求。因此, 建立医务社工联动介入老年居家安宁疗护共照护理模式成为了一个重要的研究方向。本研究探讨老龄化趋势下医务社工联动参与居家安宁疗护的共照模式, 旨在探索适合我国养老体系下的居家安宁疗护模式, 规范化指引医务社工参与居家共照工作, 发挥社工介入作用, 为老年人提供全面的医疗和社会支持。)

Background: Primary- and specialist-level palliative care services are needed. They should work collaboratively and synergistically. Although several service models have been described, these remain open to different interpretations and deployment. Aim: This article describes a conceptual framework, the Consultation-Shared Care-Takeover (C-S-T) Framework, its evolution and its applications. Design: An iterative process informed the development of the Framework. This included a symposium, literature searches, results from three studies, and real-life applications. Results: The C-S-T Framework represents a spectrum anchored by the Consultation model at one end, the Takeover model at the other end, and the Shared Care model in the center. Indicators, divided into five domains, help differentiate one model from the other. The domains are (1) Scope (What aspects of care are addressed by the palliative care clinician?); (2) Prescriber (Who prescribes the treatments?); (3) Communication (What communication occurs between the palliative care clinician and the patient's attending clinician?); (4) Follow-up (Who provides the follow-up visits and what is their frequency?); and (5) Most responsible practitioner (MRP) (Who is identified as MRP?). Each model demonstrates strengths, limitations, uses, and roles. Conclusions: The C-S-T Framework can be used to better describe, understand, assess, and monitor models being used by specialist palliative care teams in their interactions with primary care providers and other specialist services. Large studies are needed to test the application of the Framework on a broader scale in health care systems.

Harmful use of illicit drugs and/or alcohol is linked to life-limiting illness and complex health and social care needs, but people who use substances and have complex needs do not receive timely palliative care and fail to achieve quality standards for a good death. They and their families often require support from multiple health and social care services which are shown to be poorly integrated and fail to deliver interdisciplinary care. This study aimed to identify the existing barriers and facilitators within and between services in providing this population with a good death. Using a mixed methods approach of survey, focus groups and semi-structured interviews, we explored the perspectives of practitioner and management staff across a range of health and social disciplines and organisations in one combined authority in a large city in the north west of England. Our findings indicate that practitioners want to provide better care for this client group, but face structural, organisational and professional boundary barriers to delivering integrated and shared care. Differences in philosophy of care, piecemeal commissioning and funding of services, and regulatory frameworks for different services, lead to poor and inequitable access to health and social care services. Ways forward for improving care are suggested as bespoke hostel-based accommodation for palliative care for this client group, and specialist link workers who can transcend professional and organisational boundaries to support co-ordination of services and support. We conclude that it is no longer adequate to call for more training, better communication and improved joint working. Complex care at the end of life requires creative and cohesive systemic responses that enable multi-disciplinary practitioners to provide the care they wish to give and enables individuals using substances to get the respect and quality service they deserve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the complex issues surrounding trans youths' shared care perceived by parents in primary care settings in the UK. The analyses in this article draws on qualitative data derived from an online survey of 153 parents with trans children. Through the conceptual framework of healthcare assemblages, findings suggest that quality shared care for trans youth is based upon transient service relationships inherent in their healthcare—primary care, gender identity services, endocrinologists, and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAHMS)—and, as such, this complexity must be understood better by GPs in order for quality shared care to be administered. We explored various blockages to quality shared care within primary care surgeries that produced limit situations, such as lack of knowledge, training, or experience with trans healthcare. One other key factor was that there were strong external forces that were limiting trans youths' quality shared care in the form of abject depictions from beyond the consultation, which all produced negative effects. Despite these blockages, we also demonstrate how and where quality shared care is received. For instance, we show that continuity of care or treatment after an initial diagnosis or assessment contributes to quality shared care as too does personalized care to those youths receiving it. Overall, this research provides insights into the complex perceptions of parents about what quality shared care is and ought to be for trans youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasingly, children live in both parents' homes equally after parental separation, but little is known about whether social security policy supports these shared‐residence families. We propose that a determination of support for shared residence in various policies can be based on two criteria: whether both parents can receive benefits and whether the total amount received is greater than what would have been received if children lived with only one parent. We categorise support for shared residence in child benefits, housing assistance, social assistance, and guaranteed child support in 13 countries (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States), using a 2017 questionnaire, policy documents, and previous research. Norway is the only country supporting shared residence in all four policy domains; three countries do not support shared residence in any. Policies on shared residence across domains are inconsistent. This research highlights the need to clarify policy for these families and to consider whether parents who manage shared parental responsibilities post‐separation should be assisted in new ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Patients in rural communities may have limited access to wound care; however, this may be mitigated by using a shared care approach. This study assessed the impact of a remote assessment and monitoring tool in combination with adjunctive continuous topical oxygen therapy (cTOT) in patients with diabetes and hard-to-heal wounds. Method: Patients with hard-to-heal wounds (defined as no visible improvement in the previous four weeks) were enrolled to this 12-week pilot study to validate a shared care approach using an Advanced Digital Wound Care Platform-telehealth (ADWCPt) system (eKare Inc., US) coupled with cTOT. Patient and wound assessments were reviewed by the clinician either remotely, via telehealth calls, or at the clinic, and the number of face-to-face clinic visits was recorded. Patient health status scores were captured before and after the study, along with feedback on usability of the remote platform and cTOT device. Results: The wounds in all eight patients studied reduced in size over 12 weeks (mean percentage area reduction 92.0%), and two wounds were completely re-epithelialised. Another wound almost healed (99.2% wound area reduction). Clinical interactions consisted of self-assessments (n=80, 50.0%), video assessments with the clinician (n=27, 16.9%), and face-to-face interactions in clinic (n=53, 33.1%). Operational efficiencies encompassed a 54.0% increase in the number of clinical interactions, whereas clinical time was reduced by 25.8%. Health status scores improved across all eight patients and feedback on the shared approach and cTOT device was favourable. Conclusion: A shared care model with ADWCPt coupled with an innovative cTOT device saved time and resources, improving patient access and engagement, along with a marked improvement in the wound healing trajectory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow‐up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two‐way information sharing and clear follow‐up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted pre‐ and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed. Results Thirty‐two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow‐up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer‐specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low‐risk, stable patients around 2–3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow‐up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported. Conclusion Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow‐up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration. Patient or Public Contribution Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed.

Introduction: Epilepsy is the most common neurological condition globally. Integrating health and social care is fundamental in epilepsy management, but the scope of progress in this area is unclear. This scoping review aimed to capture the range and type of integrated care components and models in epilepsy management. Methods: Four databases were searched for articles published since 2010 that reported on integrated care in epilepsy. Data were extracted and synthesised into components of integrated care that had been implemented or recommended only. Models of integrated care were identified, and their components tabulated. Results: Fifteen common and interrelated components of integrated care emerged that were aligned with four broad areas: healthcare staff and pathways (e.g., epilepsy nurses); tasks and services (e.g., care coordination); education and engagement (e.g., shared decision making); and technology for diagnosis and communication (e.g., telehealth). Twelve models of integrated care were identified; seven were implemented and five were recommended. Discussion: There is a growing evidence-base supporting integrated, person-centred epilepsy care, but implementation is challenged by entrenched silos, underdeveloped pathways for care, and deficits in epilepsy education. Conclusion: Integrating epilepsy care relies on changes to workforce development and policy frameworks to support whole-of-system vision for improving care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow‐up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two‐way information sharing and clear follow‐up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted pre‐ and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed. Results: Thirty‐two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow‐up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer‐specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low‐risk, stable patients around 2–3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow‐up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported. Conclusion: Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow‐up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Survival of childhood cancer is increasing, resulting in a growing population of childhood cancer survivors who enter the health care system. There is widespread agreement on the need for effective transition programs for age-appropriate care for these individuals. However, the transition from pediatric to adult care can be a particularly confusing and overwhelming experience for the survivors of childhood cancer or children requiring long term treatment. The concept of transition implies more than just transfer of a cancer patient /more often a survivor to adult care; the preparation of which must begin well before the event of transfer. The transfer of a pediatric case to adult team could have many implications like a feeling of insecurity culminating in psychosocial issues. There is another concept in management of cancers: 'Shared care' which is essentially integration and coordination of care to develop an effective and collaborative relationship between primary and cancer care physicians. The care of patients from diagnosis to treatment is complex and requires the expertise of a wide range of care providers who are new to patients/survivors. This review article elaborates on both transition of care and shared care as applicable to India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer has become the 2nd most common cancer in men worldwide. An ageing population and treatment improvements are increasing the number of men living with and beyond cancer. In 2013, there was both scant evidence to guide as to when, where or how men with prostate cancer should be followed up and neither, it appears, pointing to agreed pathways. Generally, follow up regimes are based on tradition and expert medical opinion rather than research or patient need. For men to have their follow up with their GP, several factors need to be in place such as a single system, an improved exchange of experiences, as well as information and knowledge sharing. A recent presentation of a randomized control trial has shown that there are no differences between secondary and primary care follow up. Understanding that the current model of follow up was not working and was unsustainable, a review of urological services was undertaken in 2011 in a large National Health Service (NHS) district general hospital in the north of England. The review evaluated current services, noting that some follow up pathways did not necessarily need to be undertaken within a secondary are setting. The process of relocating patients for primary care review, involved creating a shared care process for prostate cancer. A workstream consisting of consultant urologists, nurse specialists, GPs, service managers and clinical commissioners was convened. Protocols containing specific responsibilities for secondary and primary care were devised. The review and workstream, included a shared vision for improving and sustaining services. Whilst safely moving follow up from secondary to primary care, benefits were realized such as care closer to the home. In conclusion a radical approach to follow up was needed and undertaken. Shared care has yielded success for the patient, primary and secondary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background People with serious mental illness die about 20 years earlier than the general population from preventable diseases. Shared-care arrangements between general practitioners and mental health services can improve consumers’ access to preventive care, but implementing shared care is challenging. This scoping review sought to describe current evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the participation and engagement of primary care (specifically general practitioners) in shared-care arrangements with community mental health services for preventive health care of this population. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, APA PsychINFO and EBM Reviews from 2010 to 2022. Data was extracted against a Microsoft Excel template developed for the review. Data was synthesised through tabulation and narrative methods. Results We identified 295 records. After eligibility screening and full-text review, seven studies were included. Facilitators of engagement included a good fit with organisation and practice and opportunities to increase collaboration, specific roles to promote communication and coordination and help patients to navigate appointments, multidisciplinary teams and teamwork, and access to shared medical/health records. Barriers included a lack of willingness and motivation on the part of providers and low levels of confidence with tasks, lack of physical structures to produce capacity, poor alignment of funding/incentives, inability to share patient information and challenges engaging people with severe mental illness in the service and with their care. Conclusion Our results were consistent with other research on shared care and suggests that the broader literature is likely to be applicable to the context of general practitioner/mental health services shared care. Specific challenges relating to this cohort present difficulties for recruitment and retention in shared care programs. Sharing “goals and knowledge, mutual respect” and engaging in “frequent, timely, accurate, problem-solving communication”, supported by structures such as shared information systems are likely to engage primary care in shared care arrangements more than the traditional focus on incentives, education, and guidelines.

Abstract Background Improved management of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has resulted in improved life expectancy for people living with HIV and an ageing population with a significant comorbidity burden. Shared care models, involving the co-ordinated liaison between general practitioners and specialist physicians, have been advocated for in Australia to provide comprehensive care. People living with HIV in rural areas have reduced access to general practice and therefore shared care. This study explores the perspectives of people living with HIV on the barriers and enablers to accessing shared care in an Australian rural setting. Methods In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults living with HIV who either resided in or accessed care in a rural area of Australia. Interviews were conducted via video conferencing, phone or face-to-face. Transcripts were imported into NVivo, coded and analysed in alignment with a conceptual framework of healthcare access defined by Levesque and colleagues. Results Thirteen interviews were conducted in total. Participants’ narratives demonstrated the substantial influence of accessibility to general practice on their ability to engage in effective shared care. Challenges included the perception that general practitioners would not provide additive value to participants’ care, which restricted the ability to both seek and engage in the shared care model. Healthcare beliefs, expectations and experiences with stigma led participants to prioritise the perceived interpersonal qualities of specialist care above a shared care system. Access to shared care was facilitated by continuity of care in general practice but logistical factors such as affordability, transport and availability impacted the ability to access regular high-quality healthcare. Conclusions Navigating patient priorities and anticipated stigma in general practice within the resource limitations of rural healthcare were barriers to effective shared care. General practitioners’ ability to build rapport and long-term relationships with participants was instrumental in the perception of valuable care. Strategies are required to secure continuity of care with interpersonally skilled general practitioners to ensure provision of quality primary care for people living with HIV, which can be supported by specialist physicians in a shared care model.

The persistent elevation of the prevalence of chronic non-communicable diseases and sudden pandemic of COVID-19 infections have once again attracted the attention of the whole society to prevention activities closely associated with epidemic prevention. Although the correlation between prevention and treatment of health is a long-term topic, innovation and mechanism of treatment-prevention integration proposed by Chinese health administration after the peak of COVID-19 epidemic has attracted attention and reflections of the medical and academic fields. Medical treatment and prevention are inseparable. The questions such as how to achieve the coordination and balance between treatment and prevention, what is the solution of treatment-prevention integration, are worth further study and exploration. Beginning with clarifying the concept of treatment and prevention, this paper analyzes the reasons for the separation of treatment and prevention, explores the approaches for effective connection and cooperative interaction between the two, thus providing further research directions for general practice researchers, calling on colleagues in general practice to contribute their wisdom and promote the contribution of treatment-prevention integration to healthy China.

Summary: Background: SCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months. Methods: The study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I–III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of −10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p. Findings: 150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference −4.0 (95% CI: −9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients. Interpretation: SC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors. Funding: Victorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.

Objective: The present study examined young people's reflections on their experiences of parental and child–parent relationships when raised in shared care with low inter-parental conflict, post-separation. Background: Shared care arrangements are becoming increasingly common. However, little research has been done about children and young people's perspectives and experiences of it. Method: In-depth interviews of one to three hours were conducted with 12 young people who were living or had lived in shared care arrangements in New Zealand. Transcribed interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The themes identified from participants' accounts pointed to the importance of each parent being committed to cultivating an emotionally positive relationship with their child in the context of an amicable, cooperative parenting alliance; and the requirement of parents and step-parents' sensitivity and care when a parent re-partnered. Participants struggled emotionally when these were not achieved. It was evident that participants were sensitive about parental tension and apportioning time fairly. Conclusion: More attention needs to be given to supporting separating parents to achieve quality relationships with their child and a cordial, child-focused parenting alliance. Further qualitative research about children and young people's experiences will be useful in confirming and extending these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with serious mental illness die about 20 years earlier than the general population from preventable diseases. Shared-care arrangements between general practitioners and mental health services can improve consumers' access to preventive care, but implementing shared care is challenging. This scoping review sought to describe current evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the participation and engagement of primary care (specifically general practitioners) in shared-care arrangements with community mental health services for preventive health care of this population. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, APA PsychINFO and EBM Reviews from 2010 to 2022. Data was extracted against a Microsoft Excel template developed for the review. Data was synthesised through tabulation and narrative methods. Results: We identified 295 records. After eligibility screening and full-text review, seven studies were included. Facilitators of engagement included a good fit with organisation and practice and opportunities to increase collaboration, specific roles to promote communication and coordination and help patients to navigate appointments, multidisciplinary teams and teamwork, and access to shared medical/health records. Barriers included a lack of willingness and motivation on the part of providers and low levels of confidence with tasks, lack of physical structures to produce capacity, poor alignment of funding/incentives, inability to share patient information and challenges engaging people with severe mental illness in the service and with their care. Conclusion: Our results were consistent with other research on shared care and suggests that the broader literature is likely to be applicable to the context of general practitioner/mental health services shared care. Specific challenges relating to this cohort present difficulties for recruitment and retention in shared care programs. Sharing "goals and knowledge, mutual respect" and engaging in "frequent, timely, accurate, problem-solving communication", supported by structures such as shared information systems are likely to engage primary care in shared care arrangements more than the traditional focus on incentives, education, and guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Improved management of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has resulted in improved life expectancy for people living with HIV and an ageing population with a significant comorbidity burden. Shared care models, involving the co-ordinated liaison between general practitioners and specialist physicians, have been advocated for in Australia to provide comprehensive care. People living with HIV in rural areas have reduced access to general practice and therefore shared care. This study explores the perspectives of people living with HIV on the barriers and enablers to accessing shared care in an Australian rural setting. Methods: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults living with HIV who either resided in or accessed care in a rural area of Australia. Interviews were conducted via video conferencing, phone or face-to-face. Transcripts were imported into NVivo, coded and analysed in alignment with a conceptual framework of healthcare access defined by Levesque and colleagues. Results: Thirteen interviews were conducted in total. Participants' narratives demonstrated the substantial influence of accessibility to general practice on their ability to engage in effective shared care. Challenges included the perception that general practitioners would not provide additive value to participants' care, which restricted the ability to both seek and engage in the shared care model. Healthcare beliefs, expectations and experiences with stigma led participants to prioritise the perceived interpersonal qualities of specialist care above a shared care system. Access to shared care was facilitated by continuity of care in general practice but logistical factors such as affordability, transport and availability impacted the ability to access regular high-quality healthcare. Conclusions: Navigating patient priorities and anticipated stigma in general practice within the resource limitations of rural healthcare were barriers to effective shared care. General practitioners' ability to build rapport and long-term relationships with participants was instrumental in the perception of valuable care. Strategies are required to secure continuity of care with interpersonally skilled general practitioners to ensure provision of quality primary care for people living with HIV, which can be supported by specialist physicians in a shared care model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Families (and sometimes courts) make important decisions regarding child physical custody arrangements post‐separation, and shared parenting arrangements are increasingly common in most developed countries. Shared arrangements may be differentially associated with parental satisfaction, and these associations may vary across countries. Using data from surveys of separated mothers in Wisconsin and Finland, the present study explores this possibility and is guided by three aims: (a) to identify child and family characteristics associated with sole and shared child placements 6 or more years after separation; (b) to estimate associations of children's post‐separation placements with maternal satisfaction with placements and expense sharing; (c) to examine whether the relationship between post‐separation placement and maternal satisfaction varies by mothers' earnings and the quality of parents' relationships. We find that Finnish mothers with shared placement are more satisfied with their placement than are their counterparts with sole placement, while we find the inverse is true for Wisconsin mothers. Moreover, parental satisfaction with shared placement, overall and relative to sole placement, varies greatly depending on the quality of a mother's relationship with the other parent; and differences in relationship quality in Wisconsin and Finland may help explain the difference in satisfaction with shared placement in the two locations. In both Finland and Wisconsin, we find mothers with shared placement are more satisfied with the way expenses are shared between parents than are mothers with sole placement. Associations between placement and satisfaction are robust to extensive controls for child and maternal characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction International and national guidelines highlight the need for general practitioner involvement during and after active cancer treatment and throughout long-term follow-up care. This paper aimed to evaluate patients’ acceptance of radiation oncology shared follow-up care using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at two cancer care centres in the Illawarra Shoalhaven region of Australia. A sample of patients scheduled for a radiation oncology follow-up consultation in 2021 were sent a 32-point self-complete paper-based survey. Data were analysed using descriptive, parametric and non-parametric statistical analysis. This paper followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS). Results Of the 414 surveys returned (45% response rate), the acceptance for radiation oncology shared cancer follow-up care was high (80%). Patients treated with only radiotherapy were 1.7 times more likely to accept shared follow-up care than those treated with multiple modalities. Patients who preferred follow-up care for fewer than three years were 7.5 times more likely to accept shared care than those who preferred follow-up care for five years. Patients who travelled more than 20 minutes to their radiation oncologist or to the rural cancer centre were slightly more likely to accept shared care than those who travelled less than twenty minutes to the regional cancer centre. A high understanding of shared care (Intervention Coherence) and a positive feeling towards shared care (Affective Attitude) were significant predictive factors in accepting shared radiation oncology follow-up care. Conclusion Health services need to ensure patient preferences are considered to provide patient-centred cancer follow-up care. Shared cancer follow-up care implementation should start with patients who prefer a shorter follow-up period and understand the benefits of shared care. However, patients’ involvement needs to be considered alongside other clinical risk profiles and organisational factors. Future qualitative research using the TFA constructs is warranted to inform clinical practice change.

In the United States access to healthcare continues to be a major issue. Although "top down" public policy approaches hold promise for expanding access, a lack of political consensus has hindered progress. A review of the literature was conducted to investigate the efficacy of clinical interventions aimed at expanding access to care from the "bottom up." The greatest improvements in access to care over the past decade have harnessed teledermatology, shared care, appointment scheduling strategies, and team-based care. Optimization of these approaches will require additional population-based, dermatology-specific research. It is clear that dermatologists, using a "bottom up approach," can significantly expand access to care in their communities in a manner that is economically viable and maintains quality of care and patient satisfaction.

Introduction: Epilepsy is the most common neurological condition globally. Integrating health and social care is fundamental in epilepsy management, but the scope of progress in this area is unclear. This scoping review aimed to capture the range and type of integrated care components and models in epilepsy management. Methods: Four databases were searched for articles published since 2010 that reported on integrated care in epilepsy. Data were extracted and synthesised into components of integrated care that had been implemented or recommended only. Models of integrated care were identified, and their components tabulated. Results: Fifteen common and interrelated components of integrated care emerged that were aligned with four broad areas: healthcare staff and pathways (e.g., epilepsy nurses); tasks and services (e.g., care coordination); education and engagement (e.g., shared decision making); and technology for diagnosis and communication (e.g., telehealth). Twelve models of integrated care were identified; seven were implemented and five were recommended. Discussion: There is a growing evidence-base supporting integrated, person-centred epilepsy care, but implementation is challenged by entrenched silos, underdeveloped pathways for care, and deficits in epilepsy education. Conclusion: Integrating epilepsy care relies on changes to workforce development and policy frameworks to support whole-of-system vision for improving care.

Over-the-counter medicines are generally considered safe, however, they may be problematic for people who have kidney disease. This article outlines advice for patients before taking any over-the-counter medicines, supplements or herbal medicines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dental therapists have a vital role to play in the provision of dentistry in the UK. This article examines the role of dental therapists in carrying out aesthetic dentistry in the UK dental practice setting. Patient access through collaborative working, especially through a shared care model, referral, and direct access will be discussed. In addition, two clinical cases are presented to demonstrate the provision of aesthetic anterior dental restorations by dental therapists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The drive for patients to be actively involved in their own healthcare received significant attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. For patients living with wounds, shared care usually encompasses aspects of care planning, and wound care tasks, but the suddenness of the pandemic meant many patients were unsure how to do this sufficiently. Objectives: The aim of this project was to explore experiences of shared wound care during a pandemic from a patient and healthcare professional perspective. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with 25 patients living with wounds and five informal carers. A healthcare professional focus group (n=5) explored experiences of providing shared care information to patients. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: The patient and carer interviews revealed five main themes (explanation of wound and wound type; access to healthcare services and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; wound education; patient and carer involvement in shared care tasks; the type of wound education that would be most helpful) and eight subthemes. The healthcare professional focus group revealed three main themes (patients who could be involved in shared care; trust education and standardising guidance; supporting people to share care) and five subthemes. Conclusions: This study has highlighted the importance of targeted education for patients living with wounds and their informal carers. Standardising education and guidance for healthcare professional is important to build confidence. Early patient engagement in shared care and personalised care plans are key to maximise acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The National Wound Care Strategy Programme states there are a number of unwarranted variations within wound care across the UK leading to elongated healing times, heightened patient suffering, escalation of costs and increased burden to wound care services. There has been discussion and exploration surrounding the lack of equity across the UK in relation to practitioners being able to access to tissue viability skills and knowledge. The Tissue Viability Leading Change Framework (TVLC) is a framework to assist healthcare practitioners, and those aspiring to work in tissue viability/wound care, to understand the skills and knowledge required in this specialist area of care. TVLC includes 13 different capabilities presented on an online platform. To ascertain which of the 13 capabilities was deemed most important to the user, a survey was distributed to a group of clinicians during the Wounds UK annual conference 2022 aiming to gain greater understanding of the needs and focus of clinical practitioners currently working within the field of wound care. Declaration of interest: The creation of TVLC Framework was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Urgo Medical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: International and national guidelines highlight the need for general practitioner involvement during and after active cancer treatment and throughout long-term follow-up care. This paper aimed to evaluate patients' acceptance of radiation oncology shared follow-up care using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at two cancer care centres in the Illawarra Shoalhaven region of Australia. A sample of patients scheduled for a radiation oncology follow-up consultation in 2021 were sent a 32-point self-complete paper-based survey. Data were analysed using descriptive, parametric and non-parametric statistical analysis. This paper followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS). Results: Of the 414 surveys returned (45% response rate), the acceptance for radiation oncology shared cancer follow-up care was high (80%). Patients treated with only radiotherapy were 1.7 times more likely to accept shared follow-up care than those treated with multiple modalities. Patients who preferred follow-up care for fewer than three years were 7.5 times more likely to accept shared care than those who preferred follow-up care for five years. Patients who travelled more than 20 minutes to their radiation oncologist or to the rural cancer centre were slightly more likely to accept shared care than those who travelled less than twenty minutes to the regional cancer centre. A high understanding of shared care (Intervention Coherence) and a positive feeling towards shared care (Affective Attitude) were significant predictive factors in accepting shared radiation oncology follow-up care. Conclusion: Health services need to ensure patient preferences are considered to provide patient-centred cancer follow-up care. Shared cancer follow-up care implementation should start with patients who prefer a shorter follow-up period and understand the benefits of shared care. However, patients' involvement needs to be considered alongside other clinical risk profiles and organisational factors. Future qualitative research using the TFA constructs is warranted to inform clinical practice change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To critically assess the effectiveness and implementation of different models of post-treatment cancer survivorship care compared to specialist-led models of survivorship care assessed in published systematic reviews. Methods: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from January 2005 to May 2021. Systematic reviews that compared at least two models of cancer survivorship care were included. Article selection, data extraction, and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors. The models were evaluated according to cancer survivorship care domains, patient and caregiver experience, communication and decision-making, care coordination, quality of life, healthcare utilization, costs, and mortality. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were also synthesized. Results: Twelve systematic reviews were included, capturing 53 primary studies. Effectiveness for managing survivors' physical and psychosocial outcomes was found to be no different across models. Nurse-led and primary care provider-led models may produce cost savings to cancer survivors and healthcare systems. Barriers to the implementation of different models of care included limited resources, communication, and care coordination, while facilitators included survivor engagement, planning, and flexible services. Conclusions: Despite evidence regarding the equivalent effectiveness of nurse-led, primary care-led, or shared care models, these models are not widely adopted, and evidence-based recommendations to guide implementation are required. Further research is needed to address effectiveness in understudied domains of care and outcomes and across different population groups. Implications for Cancer Survivors: Rather than aiming for an optimal "one-size fits all" model of survivorship care, applying the most appropriate model in distinct contexts can improve outcomes and healthcare efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Rising demand for healthcare continues to impact all sectors of the health service. As a result of the growing ageing population and the burden of chronic disease, healthcare has become more complex, and the need for more efficient management of specialist medication across the healthcare interface is of paramount importance. With the rising number of pharmacists working in primary care in clinical roles, is this a role that pharmacists could support to ensure the successful execution of shared care agreement (SCA) in primary care for these patients? Aim of the review Systematic review to identify activities and assess the interventions provided by pharmacists in primary care on SCA provision and how it affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients. Method Primary studies in English which tested the intervention or obtained views of stakeholders related to pharmacist input to shared care agreement within primary care were included. The following electronic databases were systematically searched from the date of inception to November 2021: AMED®, CINAHL®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), EMBASE®, EMCARE®, Google Scholar, HMIC®, MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, Scopus and Web of Science®. Grey literature sources were also searched. The search was adapted according to the respective database-specific search tools. It was searched using a combination of Medical Subject Heading terms (MeSH), free-text search terms and Boolean operators. Results A total of 5244 titles/abstracts were screened after duplicates were removed, and 64 full articles were assessed for eligibility. On examination of full text, no studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Conclusion This review highlights the need for further research to evaluate how pharmacists in general practice can support the safe and effective integration of specialist medication in primary care with the use of SCA. Systematic review registration NIHR PROSPERO No: 2020 CRD42020165363 .

Oncology programs across Canada are reaching capacity as more Canadians are diagnosed with and treated for cancer each year. There is an increasing need to share care with family doctors, however it is unclear how this type of care impacts patient experiences, particularly while receiving active treatment. Retrospective data from the 2021 Ambulatory Oncology Patient Satisfaction Survey (AOPSS) in Alberta, Canada was used in this study. A unique question on the Alberta survey asks patients about their family doctor's involvement during their cancer care. Patient satisfaction across the six domains of person-centred care on the AOPSS was analyzed based on how involved a patient's family doctor was. Compared to patients who indicated their family doctor was "Not involved", patients with "Very involved" family doctors had significantly higher satisfaction scores in all six domains of care. The three domains which showed the largest positive impact of family doctor involvement were: Coordination & Integration of Care, Emotional Concerns, and Information, Communication & Education. The results demonstrate that involving family doctors in cancer care can be beneficial for patients. Based on the observed satisfaction increases in this study, shared care models may be preferred by many patients. These models of care can also help alleviate strain and capacity issues within cancer programs. The results could be used to support recommendations for cancer care teams to regularly involve and communicate with family doctors, to ensure that patients receive comprehensive and tailored care from all their health care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the transition of cooperative co‐parenting during the divorce process. Eighteen parents, representing eight co‐parenting pairs and two individuals who had just undergone mandatory mediation for parents applying for separation, participated in the study. Through in‐depth interviews with parents who were classified as cooperative during the mediation process, we examined how they reason and the struggles they face during the divorce transition. The study applied a sociocultural perspective, focusing on the cultural ideals of equal parenthood, and used the concepts of boundaries and shared care as analytical tools. A main finding is that maintaining cooperative co‐parenting requires hard work, even in no‐or low‐conflict divorces, but the parents do it for their children. The results showed that the transforming process involved efforts to (1) continue established parenting practices, (2) shield the children and (3) deal with their own emotions. The underlying premises for successful co‐parenting are trust in each other's ability to take care of the children and their own knowledge of the emotional bonds between the children and each parent. In turn, these premises motivate parents to manage their own emotional turmoil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]