Impressions


Impressions 32: telehealth in COPD
Written by Sian Williams   
Wednesday, 17 September 2014 16:34

IMPRESS was approached by a commissioner working jointly for the local authority and CCG responsible for telecare and telehealth asking for best practice guidance on care pathways and products that will enable people with COPD to become more independent and reduce their anxiety when their breathing becomes difficult. Other results the commissioner wished to achieve were a reduction in GP and A&E visits, especially if they involved the emergency services.
This was my response:

1. There is no evidence that telehealth is cost-effective in COPD care.  See the diagram from the London Respiratory Team that shows the relative value of a number of interventions for COPD, and also the work from IMPRESS done with the LSE on this.

2. This shows that your top priority investments for COPD (and this would apply to the other main category of breathless patients, people with heart failure ) are flu vaccination, stop smoking (have a look at your data on the percentage of people with a long term condition who are current smokers - it's a new primary care indicator, but you ought to be able to get historic data - for COPD it could be as high as 40%; for asthma it could be as high as 30%) and rehabilitation programmes.  The IMPRESS breathlessness work shows you can combine cardiac and pulmonary rehab as most heart failure patients would benefit but don't get access to cardiac rehab.   The IMPRESS breathlessness algorithm has now been adapted for use by Lambeth and Southwark CCGs and we keenly await an impact assessment.  The important thing here is that they are not creating new services, but joining up existing ones better, sharing knowledge better about who can do what, including the voluntary sector, and sharing the benefits of each others' interventions.

3. Rehab teaches people how to breathe better, and sets it in the context of education about their condition.  It works even better if there is a psychologist on the team.  Therefore seek the views and experience of local respiratory physiotherapists and psychologists.

4. Work with your ambulance service, as if someone is breathless in London and calls 999 for example, 90-95% of people will be taken to ER and probably admitted.  The important issue here is that if they have had pulse oximetry - essential- then those at risk of respiratory failure who need admission will be identified. For them, hospital is the right place.     The other thing to push for is that patients known to the system always get taken to the same hospital. That may not be an issue in all areas of the UK, but it is in cities - people get taken to different hospitals so no healthcare professional sees the whole person and history.

5. If one of your aims is to improve the quality of COPD care at a lower cost so that you can release funds for developments such as more rehabilitation programmes, then consider the work of the London Respiratory Clinical Leadership Group on responsible respiratory prescribing.  http://www.networks.nhs.uk/nhs-networks/london-lungs/responsible-respiratory-prescribing-rrp

6. Finally, if you want to introduce telehealth start with telephones (read Nigel Edwards paper Remote Control  for the NHS Confederation).  Make sure your GPs and respiratory physicians have each others' mobile numbers and have a system to call each other to discuss patients who are breathless, because, and this is the final and most important point, breathlessness is frightening, and people's behaviour is entirely understandable given this.

September 2014

 
Impressions 31 Breathlessness
Written by Sian Williams   
Wednesday, 04 December 2013 11:08

Following on from our groundbreaking work that analysed the relative value of interventions for a COPD population,  IMPRESS decided to take on a new project. It decided to work with the London School of Economics again to apply the same STAR methodology to identify the relative value of interventions for a common symptom that matters to patients. We hypothesised that a symptom-based approach would:

  • Be a more patient-focused approach than a disease-based approach

  • Be more aligned to a holistic patient-centred approach

  • Introduce multiple morbidities into the discussions

  • Engage a wider range of clinicians from more than one specialty

  • Take everyone “out of the box” and therefore potentially lead to innovative thinking about how best to practise population medicine and achieve the greatest health gain/improvement in health outcomes

  • Answer some of the questions that commissioners are already asking about the right balance of generic and disease-specific services for people with long term conditions and how best to address the issues of comorbidities where, for example, it has been estimated only 14-18% of people with COPD only have COPD and when actively assessed for co-morbidities it may be as low as 3%.

    There were a number of common respiratory symptoms that we could have chosen, but we decided that the one that is a high priority on patient agendas, is closest to our previous work and sufficiently prevalent in the population to warrant a service, was chronic breathlessness in adults.

    The few epidemiological studies available seem to point in the direction that chronic breathlessness affects about 10% of the general population, but the magnitude of the problem is greater in specific groups of the population, such as the elderly with about 30% of them being breathless. Despite these significant prevalence rates, breathlessness is mentioned as a reason for encounter in primary care in about 1% of the recorded consultations in general practice. Whether this figure is affected by coding behaviour in primary care or under-reporting of the symptom by patients is for discussion.

We have produced a summary of our conclusions in the form of BITs: Breathlessness IMPRESS tips. There are BITs for patients, clinicians, commissioners of services and also researchers, but we are launching those for clinicians first. They are accompanied by an algorithm to support clinicians and patients. They will be followed by detailed modelling of prevalence and incidence and background epidemiological papers.

It has been an intellectually challenging piece of work. The cost-effectiveness evidence-base that we found for COPD does not exist for chronic and disabling breathlessness and therefore there is significant uncertainty. We needed to agree on a definition of breathlessness, identify the main underlying causes and bring together prevalence and incidence data for these causes: COPD, uncontrolled asthma, heart failure, anaemia, and obesity, singly or in combination and with or without anxiety, and distinguish between chronic and acute breathlessness. It seems as though some basic truths have been “blind-spots” in the research literature. For example, most patients and clinicians would say that breathlessness is a relatively common symptom for obese people (a belief also confirmed by the epidemiological data available, which show that about 50% of obese patients are breathless and up to 70% of obese elderly complain of some degree of breathlessness) and yet the recent excellent Royal College of Physicians Action on Obesity report has one mention and no discussion of breathlessness.  In heart failure breathlessness may not be the cardinal symptom, which might be tiredness, however, the literature suggests up to 93% of people with heart failure, mainly elderly, suffer from breathlessness. The sensation may be perceived by the individual as part of their normal ageing process. We had many debates about when breathlessness is disabling and warrants an intervention and what that intervention should be.

The interaction between breathlessness and anxiety is complex and so this is another reason why this project has been worth doing, because it forces discussions about the interaction between mental and physical health and highlights the need for healthcare professionals to have skills to promote both. For example, panic disorder is ten times more common in the population with COPD than in the general population. However, anxiety is under-diagnosed and under- treated in primary care despite strong evidence of the effectiveness of talking therapies.

There are few straightforward answers when you combine general practice, community and hospital clinicians from different specialties and disciplines to reach consensus about coding, symptom-scoring, patient and population interventions though much learning. It is also challenging when you bring together literature from medicine, psychology, and public health. There are also few examples of symptom-based services in operation and even fewer examples of how these are commissioned; that is, how they are paid for or monitored. However, we have reached some conclusions that could make a difference today to people with chronic and disabling breathlessness. We also have a reasonably long list of research questions that we encourage academic health science networks to investigate. We see this as the beginning of a debate about how to best set up a breathlessness service for a population. We welcome feedback, examples of good practice, and case studies and urge those setting up services to evaluate their cost and their outcomes, and to publish their findings.

One of our conclusions is that local breathlessness services and pathways will need to grow from what already exists provided by health and local authorities, and also will depend on the local populations’ needs and health status. Disabling breathlessness is more common in deprived populations. Therefore we would encourage the local stakeholders involved in developing, approving and implementing joint strategic needs assessments to use our work as the basis for a local (and ultimately electronic) version.

What is certain is that the service will need to integrate mental and physical health pathways and services, and a common and consistent approach to behaviour change across a number of health specialties and public health. It is also certain that the normal consultation arrangements are not fit for purpose to assess a breathless person. We strongly recommend that services review the tests of change that a number of areas are undertaking to provide longer appointments in long term conditions in both primary and out-patients settings. We also want to reinforce the power of taking time with the patient to take a full history, once the immediate decision about whether to admit a patient has been made. At an individual level, always be mindful of three dimensions: the person’s mental health, their social context as well as their physical health, remember that breathlessness is not always caused by one single factor and that all breathlessness is stressful to some extent; the question is to what extent.

For a referenced version of this blog/introduction go here

 Also available:

IMPRESS Breathlessness algorithm

IMPRESS BITs for clinicians 

IMPRESS BITs for patients

IMPRESS BITs for commissioners

IMPRESS BITs for researchers
IMPRESS guide to breathlessness methodology scope definitions prevalence
Summary prevalence tables

 

IMPRESS Working Party on Breathlessness
December 2013 updated February 2014

IMPRESS Breathlessness Working Party

Dr Noel Baxter, GP, Southwark
Dr Angel Chater, Registered Health Psychologist and Sport and Exercise Psychologist, Lecturer in Behavioural Medicine UCL School of Pharmacy Centre for Behavioural Medicine

Dr Mark Dancy, Consultant Cardiologist, North West London Hospitals Trust

Dr Sarah Elkin, Lead in Respiratory Medicine at Imperial College NHS Trust and Honorary Senior Lecturer at Imperial College London

Professor Ahmet Fuat, Professor of Primary Care Cardiology, Durham University, GP, GP Tutor and GPSI Cardiology, Darlington

Dr Steve Holmes, GP Shepton Mallet, Co-chair of IMPRESS

Professor Mike Kirby, Visiting Professor University of Hertfordshire, UK Editor Primary Care Cardiovascular Journal

Dr Basil Penney, GP, Darlington, GPSI Respiratory Medicine and GP Respiratory Lead, Darlington Clinical Commissioning Group

Dr Louise Restrick, Integrated Consultant Respiratory Physician, Whittington Health and Islington CCG, London Respiratory Network Lead

Sam Roberts, Director of Community Academic Partnerships, UCLPartners

Jane Scullion, Respiratory Nurse Consultant University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Respiratory Clinical Lead Midlands and East

Dr Shahrad Taheri, Bariatric physician and lead for weight management services and senior lecturer in Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital and Royal College of Physicians Action on Obesity nominee


Writers:
Chiara De Poli, Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science

Siân Williams, IMPRESS Programme Manager

Original meeting facilitated by: Mara Airoldi, Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science


With additional contributions from:
Dr Suzanna Hardman, Consultant Cardiologist with an Interest in Community Cardiology, Whittington Health, Honorary Senior Lecturer UCL

Dr David Kingdon, Professor of Mental Health Care Delivery University of Southampton, representing National Clinical Director, Mental Health

Dr Mike Ward, Consultant Respiratory Physician, Co-chair IMPRESS

Dr Vince Mak, Integrated Care Consultant, North West London Hospitals Trust

Maria Buxton, Consultant Respiratory Physiotherapist, North West London Hospitals Trust and Ealing Hospital Trust, Brent

Helen Marlow, Pharmaceutical Adviser NHS England (London)

Sandy Walmsley, Respiratory Nurse Specialist, Solihull Care Trust

Dr Rob Fowler, Consultant physician in respiratory, general and geriatric medicine, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust

Dr Matt Kearney, Department of Health England

Leah Herridge, Redesign Manager (Long Term Conditions) Pathway Commissioning, NHS Southwark Clinical Commissioning Group
Mark da Rocha, Service Redesign & Primary Care Development; CVD Lead, NHS Lambeth & Southwark Clinical Commissioning Groups
Dr Eric Cajeat, NHS Lambeth Clinical Commissioning Group



The Health Foundation, registered charity number 286967, funded the LSE team and the design of the algorithm

 

Thanks to these organisations for their support

BTS: http://www.brit-thoracic.org.uk/
Health Foundation: http://www.health.org.uk/
IMPRESS: http://www.impressresp.com/
LSE: http://www.lse.ac.uk/management/research/initiatives/sympose/home.aspx
PCRS-UK: http://www.pcrs-uk.org/

 

 
Impressions 30 - breathlessness, National Voices, what happens to all the regional teams' resources
Written by Sian Williams   
Friday, 26 April 2013 10:44

Sorry for the rather long gap between blogs - it's not for lack of behind the scenes activity.

From the user's perspective, IMPRESS resources continue to meet a need for many clinicians and commissioners.  There have been 45,500 downloads in the last year!

Breathlessness

Meanwhile, IMPRESS has been working with colleagues from the London School of Economics, primary and secondary care cardiology, the RCP Action on Obesity and behaviour change experts to develop guidance for commissioners, providers and patients on the detection and management of breathlessness and what breathlessness services might look like.  This work extends our thinking on value by considering how best to address the challenges of multi-morbidity starting with a particular and common symptom such as disabling and long-term breathlessness.  We are in the process of producing BITs: Breathlessness IMPRESS Tips, that will be fully referenced and cover prevention, diagnosis, management at an individual and population level.  It's not easy work, as it brings together opinion and evidence from different fields such as COPD, asthma, obesity, dysfunctional breathing and heart failure and different patient and professional perspectives, but it is very illuminating, and we hope to debate our BITs with you over the coming months.  If you want to get involved please contact Siân Williams at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Our plan is to launch our BITs for clinicians, commissioners, patients and researchers by mid-November to coincide with World COPD day, but there are opportunities to get involved in commenting before that.


Integration

Meanwhile, keep an eye on the tweets, which bring you the latest news about research, policy or other news.    You'll have seen the National Voices narrative about integration, which is a great starting point for local discussions:

National Voices: Integrated care: what do patients, service users and carers want?

People want co-ordination. Not necessarily (organisational) integration.
People want care. Where it comes from is secondary.


There are also some interesting developments in patient-held records, that support care integration: have a look at Patients Know Best: the patient/carer holds an electronic web-based record and they decide which healthcare professional they permit to access it. It can also be used for electronic communication, and is showing gains in time for patients and healthcare professionals.  BMJ 2012;345:e5575

 

There is also a regional rollout of electronic end of life registers - some of these are including templates for COPD advance care planning.  Does anyone have the full list of how to access these?


Regional resources

We're also going to load onto the website resources from the regional teams.   Whilst this is work in progress, have a look at two of the regional teams' material:

 The London Respiratory Team's webcasts on value  here

East Midlands Respiratory Network here



 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 2