What evidence is there on the effectiveness of different models of delivering urgent care? A rapid review

Abstract

BackgroundIn 2013 NHS England set out its strategy for the development of an emergency and urgent care system that is more responsive to patients’ needs, improves outcomes and delivers clinically excellent and safe care. Knowledge about the current evidence base on models for provision of safe and effective urgent care, and the gaps in evidence that need to be addressed, can support this process.ObjectiveThe purpose of the evidence synthesis is to assess the nature and quality of the existing evidence base on delivery of emergency and urgent care services and identify gaps that require further primary research or evidence synthesis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and the Web of Science.MethodsWe have conducted a rapid, framework-based, evidence synthesis approach. Five separate reviews linked to themes in the NHS England review were conducted. One general and five theme-specific database searches were conducted for the years 1995–2014. Relevant systematic reviews and additional primary research papers were included and narrative assessment of evidence quality was conducted for each review.ResultsThe review was completed in 6 months. In total, 45 systematic reviews and 102 primary research studies have been included across all five reviews. The key findings for each review are as follows: (1) demand – there is little empirical evidence to explain increases in demand for urgent care; (2) telephone triage – overall, these services provide appropriate and safe decision-making with high patient satisfaction, but the required clinical skill mix and effectiveness in a system is unclear; (3) extended paramedic roles have been implemented in various health settings and appear to be successful at reducing the number of transports to hospital, making safe decisions about the need for transport and delivering acceptable, cost-effective care out of hospital; (4) emergency department (ED) – the evidence on co-location of general practitioner services with EDs indicates that there is potential to improve care. The attempt to summarise the evidence about wider ED operations proved to be too complex and further focused reviews are needed; and (5) there is no empirical evidence to support the design and development of urgent care networks.LimitationsAlthough there is a large body of evidence on relevant interventions, much of it is weak, with only very small numbers of randomised controlled trials identified. Evidence is dominated by single-site studies, many of which were uncontrolled.ConclusionsThe evidence gaps of most relevance to the delivery of services are (1) a requirement for more detailed understanding and mapping of the characteristics of demand to inform service planning; (2) assessment of the current state of urgent care network development and evaluation of the effectiveness of different models; and (3) expanding the current evidence base on existing interventions that are viewed as central to delivery of the NHS England plan by assessing the implications of increasing interventions at scale and measuring costs and system impact. It would be prudent to develop a national picture of existing pilot projects or interventions in development to support decisions about research commissioning.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme.

Patterns of low acuity patient presentations to emergency departments in New South Wales, Australia

“…Increasing GP density was strongly associated with decreased adjusted odds of LAP ED presentations across all three remoteness strata, and suggests that a way to reduce LAP load in EDs could be to increase the number of GP services; particularly during non‐business hours and weekends where the effect of GP density was even stronger. The co‐localisation of GPs to EDs represents a potential way to increase accessible primary care, and also could lead to improved efficiencies, including reduced costs, as suggested by several studies conducted in Europe . However, this is yet to be comprehensively demonstrated in an Australian context.…”

“…The colocalisation of GPs to EDs represents a potential way to increase accessible primary care, and also could lead to improved efficiencies, including reduced costs, as suggested by several studies conducted in Europe. 19,20 However, this is yet to be comprehensively demonstrated in an Australian context.…”

Calling for confirmation, reassurance, and direction: Investigating patient compliance after accessing a telephone triage advice service

“…Subsequently, the patients take decisions and actions that impact on their own health, an ED and health system care outcomes . Understanding and responding effectively to this issue is critical to realizing enhancements in the quality of care and outcomes for individuals, patient cohorts, the functioning of EDs and the hospitals that encompass them, and the health system more broadly …”

Telephone advice nursing : communication, patient satisfaction and tool development

“…In several countries, TAN is integrated in the existing health structure (Souza-Junior et al 2016); for example, in the UK the principal entry point for access to urgent care is a free national telephone-based 24-hour service that provides assessment and triage. Non-clinical call handlers perform the first assessment and when it is deemed necessary, the call is transferred to a telenurse (Turner et al 2015). Similarly, Australia has a free national 24hour helpline for non-urgent health concerns staffed by telenurses.…”