geoffrey bryant, circs: a centralised capacity and capability building team for regional cancer...

Post on 02-Jun-2015

289 Views

Category:

Health & Medicine

1 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Geoff Bryant, Service Performance Manager, Central Integrated Regional Cancer Service (CIRCS) delivered this presentation at the 2013 Cancer Centres Symposium in Australia. The annual event explores current opportunities and challenges surrounding cancer centre policy, funding, operations, innovations and development. For more information about the annual event, please visit the conference website: http://www.informa.com.au/cancercentressymposium

TRANSCRIPT

CIRCS To champion safe and high quality care for people

affected by cancer

Fifth annual national cancer centre symposium

Melbourne 9 December 2013

•  A centralised capacity and capability building team for regional cancer services in Queensland

•  Why is there a need for a centralised capability development team? •  The value of a multidisciplinary team •  How we influence •  Challenges and opportunities

What is CIRCS? •  CIRCS is the Central Integrated Regional Cancer

Service •  CIRCS is both a network of cancer service providers and

a team to build cancer service capacity •  Successful application for Regional Cancer Centre

(RCC) funds: •  $67 million for new building (including radiotherapy bunkers) in

Rockhampton •  $17 million for new, larger facilities in Bundaberg and Hervey Bay •  Plus Queensland Government operational funding (around $26

million over 2010-14) to fund service expansion and underpin integration between Royal Brisbane & Women’s Hospital (RBWH) and regional CIRCS facilities

What is CIRCS? •  Team collaborating with Department of Health and

Hospital and Health Service (HHS) stakeholders to build capability and capacity in regional Queensland, including:

•  contributing to development of innovative workforce models •  planning for service growth and change across the CIRCS HHSs •  providing advice in relation to funding and activity modelling •  driving improvements in education for the cancer workforce •  delivering clinical training for nursing and allied health •  auditing and improving cytotoxic safety •  supporting implementation of RCCs in Central Queensland, Wide

Bay and Metro North HHSs

•  My focus will be this ‘incarnation’ of CIRCS

“Central” •  Reflects former Queensland Health area health service

structure •  Now no equivalent teams in north or south areas •  ‘Default’ role as cancer service development and

advisory group in Queensland •  Activities increasingly extend to statewide or multi-

regional level. Examples include: •  Cancer service ICT scoping and project planning •  Remote supervision of chemotherapy guidelines •  Clinical training for nursing and allied health professionals,

statewide and in regional areas

•  CIRCS’ geographic remit is expansive – covers five HHSs

•  Brisbane (northside) to Central Queensland to NT border

•  71% larger in area than UK & Ireland

•  Indicative driving times: •  Rockhampton to Brisbane: 7 hours •  Longreach to Rockhampton: 7.5

hours •  Bundaberg to Kawana: 3.25 hours •  Hervey Bay to Brisbane: 3.25 hours

Geography

Population and incidence •  2011 population: 1.65 million (37% of Queensland

population) •  Around 850,000 live in Metro North HHS •  About 12,000 live in Central West HHS

•  Fastest population growth: •  Sunshine Coast, Wide Bay and Central Queensland HHSs: 2% p.a.

•  Total estimated 2013 cancer incidence: •  10,870

•  Top five tumour types relatively consistent across HHSs:   Prostate   Melanoma   Breast

  Colorectal   Lung

Demography •  Covers relatively wealthy to very disadvantaged

•  Metro North HHS (13% in lowest quintile) •  Wide Bay HHS (56% in lowest quintile)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Population in most

disadvantaged quintile

Private health insurance rate

(b)

Delayed access to health care due to cost or travel barriers

(c)

Selected socio-economic measures

Metro North

Sunshine Coast

Wide Bay

Central Queensland

Central West

Demography •  Extends from quite youthful to quite old

•  Metro North / Central Queensland HHSs (36% aged 45 years +) •  Wide Bay HHS (49% aged 45 years +)

Service profile •  Ranges from good to poor access to cancer services

•  Major variations in surgical self-sufficiency •  Metro North HHS: equivalent of 8 linacs, 63 day unit chairs, 64

beds •  Central West HHS: no linacs, day unit chairs or dedicated cancer

beds; one oncologist visits two days annually

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Metro North Sunshine Coast Wide Bay Central Qld Central West

Cancer surgery self-sufficiency - selected procedures and tumours (2001-2010)

Breast conserving surgery

Mastectomy

Colectomy - for colon cancer

Anterior resection - for colon cancer Colectomy - for rectal cancer

Service profile •  Significant reliance on outreach services

•  Major facilities currently at RBWH and Nambour Hospital •  Outreach within HHSs (e.g. 960 sessions p.a. within Metro North

(MN)) •  Outreach across HHSs (e.g. 449 sessions from MN to CQ; 402

from MN to WB)

Governance •  Structurally hosted by Metro North HHS •  High level governance provided by board of five Chief

Executives •  Day-to-day management and direction from:

•  Medical director – senior radiation oncologist (0.5 FTE) •  Nursing director

•  Currently ‘dotted line’ link to Statewide Cancer Clinical Network by virtue of medical director chairmanship

Multidisciplinary expertise •  Team comprises members with various clinical and non-

clinical backgrounds: •  Medical •  Nursing •  Nursing education •  Allied health •  Finance and audit •  Service management, development and improvement •  Project management •  Stakeholder engagement •  Data analysis and management

•  10 team members (including 0.5 FTE medical director)

Influence without authority •  CIRCS primarily:

•  provides advice, clinical training and support •  contributes to strategic and policy development for cancer care •  collects and disseminates ‘benchmark’ and ‘best practice’ data •  coordinates collaboration between disparate stakeholders •  connects subject matter experts to those in need of insight •  develops frameworks and guidelines to assist facilities adopt new or

enhanced service approaches

•  We do not have: •  authority to require HHSs to take action •  an official role beyond our stakeholder HHSs

Why is CIRCS necessary? •  HHS structure

•  Isolates perceptions of demand, cost, value etc •  Propensity to internal v aggregate view of ‘best’ decision

•  Multidisciplinary expertise •  Not feasible to have all skills engaged in each (especially small)

HHSs

•  Efficiency •  Specialised knowledge ‘on tap’ as required •  Peaks and troughs within HHSs ~ stable demand across HHSs

•  Some project-based need •  RCC funds and implementation, but…

Why is CIRCS necessary? •  Huge challenges posed by regional geography in

Queensland •  Widely distributed demand •  Expensive infrastructure •  Tyranny of distance •  Workforce attraction •  Increasing private sector service delivery

•  All these drive the need for a coordinated approach and integration

Approaches •  Identifying collaborators

•  Rural and Remote Network •  Department of Health policy and planning teams

–  Determining health need –  Patient Transport Subsidy Scheme policy

•  Non-CIRCS HHSs –  Other metropolitan HHSs on issues commonly affecting both

•  Subject-matter experts –  Townsville HHS on cancer ICT –  Cancer Institute NSW on clinical training materials and eviQ

Approaches •  Clinical and workforce benchmarks

•  Increases objectivity and consistency of activity and workforce estimates

•  Additional robust tool to complement local knowledge •  Baseline from which variations warrant justification •  Focus on efficiency •  Challenges status quo service models •  But…one size does not fit all

Benchmark examples

Approaches •  Telehealth technology

•  Practice what is preached •  Improve access and counter tyranny of distance •  Build workforce capacity in often ‘forgotten’ facilities •  Better cost calculus than face-to-face •  Increase familiarity with technology

Telehealth technology examples

  Leisa – in Brisbane

  ‘Chester’ – at Blackall Hospital

Approaches •  Project management methodologies

•  Adding rigour to service development projects •  Identify ‘ripple effect’ and engage key stakeholders •  Avoid re-work and scope creep •  Continuous risk mitigation

•  Seniority- and role-blind participation •  Flat structure •  Skills-based allocation of duties

Project management examples

Approaches •  Ongoing engagement

•  Conduit for relationship building and issue escalation •  Establishing structures to assist drive progress •  Cultivate support and communities of interest

Challenges •  Interference on local ‘turf’

•  Us (on the ground, in the know) v them (central, uninformed) •  “But this case is special…”

•  Meeting demands of metro and regional stakeholders •  Frequently opposite sides of the same coin •  Identifying systemic challenges to rally around •  Objectivity and rigour

Challenges •  Reliance on factors other than evidence

•  Best guesses •  Decisions at last minute – poor processes •  Desirable v minimum essential resources •  There is always evidence to the contrary but does it ‘fit’

–  Is the distance the difference?

Opportunities to be more effective

•  Increased focus by Department on regional service enhancement

Opportunities to be more effective

•  State-based financial incentives to substitute some ‘fly in / fly out’ outreach with telehealth

•  Financial limitations and increased need for rigour •  Profile building by CIRCS

•  Statewide cancer service strategy •  Health service planning processes

–  Global view, multiple perspectives, cancer focus

•  New medical contracts and Right of Private Practice review

Opportunities to be more effective

•  Health Workforce Australia •  Cancer care •  Rural and remote

•  Tenacity and perseverance also helps!

Recent examples •  Queensland Remote Chemotherapy Supervision

Guidelines •  Wide Bay HHS radiation oncology service demand

analysis •  Cairns and Hinterland HHS cancer service review •  Standardised education resources

–  CVADs – theory and simulation across Queensland through videoconference facilities

–  ADAC –  Queensland Cancer Education Program (QCEP)

Current major projects •  Cancer service ICT platforms •  Encouraging uptake and embedding remote supervision

of chemotherapy in rural and remote hospitals •  Framework for multiple models of multidisciplinary care •  Collaboration with Central Queensland HHS to develop

service model for new radiotherapy and expanded medical oncology services

•  Continuing expansion of telehealth-based education to metro and regional cancer professionals

•  Impact analysis of new regional radiotherapy services, including adequacy of existing funding models

The future… •  Centre of expertise for cancer service development

issues: •  Activity based funding •  Workforce / activity planning •  Service and MDT models •  Procuring expert clinical advice •  Education program management and delivery

•  Statewide remit?

•  Closing the access gap and improving quality and outcomes

top related