patient access to medical records: a longitudinal

19
Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal evaluation of a care information exchange in North West London. Sagar R Jilka, Hester Wadge, Dilkushi Poovendran, Dalton Coker, Ara Darzi, Erik Mayer Centre for Health Policy, Imperial College London 1 @DrSagarJilka

Upload: others

Post on 11-Apr-2022

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal evaluation of a care information exchange in North West London. Sagar R Jilka, Hester Wadge, Dilkushi Poovendran, Dalton Coker, Ara Darzi, Erik Mayer

Centre for Health Policy, Imperial College London

1

@DrSagarJilka

Page 2: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

2

What will the CIE mean for patients?

• The ability to view, add and share information about their care.

• The opportunity to take more control of their own health and care.

• New ways of communicating with health and social care professionals in their network.

Page 3: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

3

What will the CIE mean for HCPs?

• The confidence of having a more complete record of care

• Tools to support communication with fellow health and social care professionals and with individuals

• The opportunity to change ways of working to improve delivery of care

Page 4: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

CIE could be the solution

4

GPs

Acute hospitals

Mental health

hospitals

Community care

Social care

Patient

Care information about a patient is held on different systems in different parts of the NHS.

The CIE will help break down the barriers between the different care settings.

GPs

Acute hospitals

Mental health

hospitals

Community care

Social care

Patient

Page 5: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

North West London is a good test bed

• NWL consists of 8 CCGs

• ~1.9million people in NWL

• Relatively young

group compared with

the national and

London rate

5Source: http://www.centrallondonccg.nhs.uk/media/21113/North-West-London-five-year-strategic-plan-draft.pdf

Page 6: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Hospital admissions in NWL

6

From 2009 to 2015, the highest admission rate in NWL was 2,499 per 100,000.

The lowest was 754 per 100,000.

Across London the admission rate is 1,287 and the national average is 890 per 100,000 patients.

Page 7: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Emergency admissions in NWL

7

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

180000 230000 280000 330000 380000

Eme

rge

ncy

ad

mis

sio

ns

pe

r 1

00

,00

0 C

CG

P

op

ula

tio

n

CCG Population

Emergency admissions for NWL CCGs, 2009-2015Diabetes related

Page 8: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Brent has the second best ‘GP to patient ratio’

CCG Number of Active GPs

Number of registered patients

Number of patients per GP

CCG 1 304 260,612 857

CCG 2 388 369,166 951

CCG 3 254 242,428 954

CCG 4 223 212,847 954

CCG 5 211 209,683 993

CCG 6 256 304,147 1,188

CCG 7 345 426,086 1,235

CCG 8 228 304,686 1,336

8

The CCG with greatest emergency admissions has the second best patient to GP ratio across NWL, suggesting that the high admission rate isn’t just a question of not having enough GPs.

Page 9: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

But low success rate in getting a GP appointment

Percentage of patients who said they were able to get an appointment last time they tried to see or speak to a GP or nurse

CCGPractices National Average

The last time you wanted to see or speak to a GP or nurse, were you able to get an appointment to see or speak to someone?

Comparisons are indicative only: differences may not be statistically significant, particularly at practice level due to low numbers of responses

Base: All those completing a questionnaire: National (815,057); CCG (6,353); Practice bases range from 59 to 122. Data from the Jan 2016 GPPS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

LAN

CEL

OT

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

THE

STO

NEB

RID

GE

PR

AC

TIC

E

GLA

DST

ON

E M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

HIL

LTO

P M

EDIC

AL

PR

AC

TIC

E

PR

IMA

RY

CA

RE

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

HA

ZELD

ENE

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

ALP

ERTO

N M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

SMS

MED

ICA

L P

RA

CTI

CE

THE

EAG

LE E

YE

THE

LAW

MED

ICA

L G

RO

UP

PR

AC

TIC

E

THE

WIL

LESD

EN M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

PR

EMIE

R M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

BU

CK

ING

HA

M R

D S

UR

GER

Y

THE

FRYE

NT

WA

Y SU

RG

ERY

HA

RN

ESS

HA

RLE

SDEN

PR

AC

TIC

E

BR

ENTF

IELD

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

CH

UR

CH

EN

D M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

BLE

SSIN

G M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

CH

ICH

ELE

RO

AD

SU

RG

ERY

CR

EST

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

AK

SYR

MED

ICA

L P

RA

CTI

CE

THE

SUN

FLO

WER

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

RO

UN

DW

OO

D P

AR

K M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

NEA

SDEN

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

KIN

GS

EDG

E M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

ELLI

S P

RA

CTI

CE

STA

G L

AN

E M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

PA

RK

RO

AD

SU

RG

ERY

AC

TON

LA

NE

SUR

GER

Y

CC

G

STA

NLE

Y C

OR

NER

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

WA

LM L

AN

E SU

RG

ERY

THE

SUR

GER

Y

PEA

RL

MED

ICA

L P

RA

CTI

CE

LAN

FRA

NC

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

FRYE

NT

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

BR

ENT

GP

AC

CE

SS U

NIT

HA

RN

ESS-

WEM

BLE

Y

CH

UR

CH

LA

NE

SUR

GER

Y

PR

ESTO

N R

OA

D S

UR

GER

Y

THE

STA

G -

HO

LLYR

OO

D P

RA

CTI

CE

STA

VE

RTO

N S

UR

GER

Y

ST.G

EOR

GES

MED

ICA

L C

ENTR

E

WEM

BLE

Y P

AR

K D

RIV

E M

EDIC

AL

CEN

TRE

CR

ICK

LEW

OO

D B

RO

AD

WA

Y SU

RG

ERY

%Yes = %Yes + %Yes, but I had to call back closer to or on the day

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

GP

pra

ctic

e 4

GP

pra

ctic

e 5

GP

pra

ctic

e 6

GP

pra

ctic

e 7

GP

pra

ctic

e 8

GP

pra

ctic

e 9

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

0

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

1

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

2

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

3

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

4

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

5

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

6

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

7

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

8

GP

pra

ctic

e 1

9

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

0

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

1

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

2

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

3

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

4

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

5

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

6

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

7

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

8

GP

pra

ctic

e 2

9

CC

G

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

0

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

1

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

2

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

3

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

4

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

5

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

6

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

7

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

8

GP

pra

ctic

e 3

9

GP

pra

ctic

e 4

0

GP

pra

ctic

e 4

1

GP

pra

ctic

e 4

2

GP

pra

ctic

e 4

3

Page 10: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Inconclusive evidence for electronic patient record access

10Jilka et al., JMIR 2015

We found mixed responses to patient related outcome measures as a result of access to electronic medical records.

Page 11: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Evaluation questions

11

1

2

3

HCP attitudes: What are HCPs’ attitudes towards the CIE?

Patient experience: To what extent do patients who use the CIE become more engaged with their care?

Utilisation: How does using the CIE alter a patients’ patterns of healthcare utilisation?

Page 12: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Evaluation method

12

Recruitment

HCPs

CIE Use

(4-6 months)

Baseline Data Collection

Follow-Up Data

Collection

Opportunity to use

the CIE

(capture CIE usage

data)

Questionnaire

(Patient Activation

Measure)

Online survey

Interviews

Questionnaire

(PAMs)

CIE usage data

Online survey

Interviews

CIE usage data

Patients

Page 13: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

13

Staff have concerns about the CIE impact

50% of respondents thought that patient access to their electronic medical record would increase a

doctor’s workload

Page 14: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

How can we use the survey data?

• This data will help us understand how a HCP’s attitude towards the CIE changes over time.

• Understanding this will help implementation teams assuage concerns and provide the right information to clinical teams.

14

Page 15: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

The PAM measures patient involvement

15

® Insignia Health, LLC © 2013 1

Patient Activation Measure (PAM) 13™

License Materials

© Insignia Health, LLC 2014

Page 16: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

16

Group PAM Score = 53

Preliminary analysis

Page 17: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

How can we use this data?

17

• We can use the PAM to investigate if patients become more engaged with their health after using the CIE.

• Therefore we hope to see improved activation scores amongst those using the CIE.

• The PAM can also be used to help guide the discussion between HCP and patient – contributing to the action plan to improve patient self-management.

Page 18: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Conclusions

• The CIE is an ambitious programme attempting to link patients with their medical records across care settings.

• We are evaluating how effective the CIE will be to patients and HCPs to help understand its impact in relation to recent policy levers around patient access to medical records.

• Our evaluation also encompasses an economic analysis.– We will be using the HES data presented earlier to

support the the economic modeling.

18

Page 19: Patient access to medical records: A longitudinal

Acknowledgements

19

Many thanks to the Sowerby team at the

Centre for Health Policy:

• Mr. Erik Mayer

• Ms. Hester Wadge

• Dr. Matthew Harris

• Ms. Rhia Roy

• Ms. Dilkushi Poovendran

• Prof. Ara Darzi

• The Big Data Analytics Unit (Imperial)

• Imperial College Healthcare charity

• CIE implementation team

• Stephen Janering, John Kelly, Felicia Opoku

• CIE evaluation steering committee

• Health & Social Care Information Centre. @DrSagarJilka