Cristina J Thompson

Primary contact physiotherapy services reduce waiting and treatment times for patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions in Australian emergency departments: an observational study

QUESTION Can primary contact physiotherapists reduce waiting and treatment times and facilitate faster discharge in Australian emergency departments? DESIGN Data on patients treated by primary contact physiotherapists were collected prospectively and compared with historical and concurrent cohorts of patients treated by other clinicians, using diagnosis and urgency. PARTICIPANTS Twenty-nine primary contact physiotherapists, working at 10 sites, treated a total of 14 452 patients with musculoskeletal conditions in triage categories 3, 4 and 5. OUTCOME MEASURES Data were analysed for two time periods: baseline (historical control) and implementation (12 to 15 months). A concurrent control cohort within the implementation period was selected using diagnosis (ICD-10-AM) and urgency of treatment (triage category). Waiting time, treatment time, and time to discharge from the emergency department were compared across periods and between cohorts. RESULTS Significant differences were found in waiting and treatment times. On average, patients treated by primary contact physiotherapists waited 31minutes less than those treated by other practitioners and had an average treatment time of 108minutes compared with 148minutes. Overall, 93% of patients treated by primary contact physiotherapists and 75% treated by other practitioners were discharged from the emergency department within a 4-hour time period. To address concerns that these results could be due to other differences between cohorts, multiple regression models were used and the results were still significantly in favour of the primary contact physiotherapists. CONCLUSION A primary contact physiotherapist model in hospital emergency departments can reduce waiting and treatment times for patients with musculoskeletal presentations, resulting in better performance in achieving discharge within the 4-hour national target. [Bird S, Thompson C, Williams KE (2016) Primary contact physiotherapy services reduce waiting and treatment times for patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions in Australian emergency departments: an observational study.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 209-214].

A Delphi study to develop indicators of cancer patient experience for quality improvement

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop prioritised indicators to measure cancer patient experience and thus guide quality improvement in the delivery of patient care.MethodsA Delphi study, consisting of two surveys and three workshops, was employed to gather expert opinions on the most important indicators to measure. Survey participants were 149 health professionals, academics/technical experts and consumers. The first survey was based on a literature review which identified 105 elements of care within 14 domains of patient experience. These were rated on a 7-point Likert scale, with ‘1’ representing high importance. Elements with mean ratings between 1.0 and 2.0 were retained for the second survey. The 43 least-important elements were omitted, four elements were revised and nine new elements added. Consensus was defined as at least 70% of participants rating an element ‘1’ or ‘2’. Multivariate and cluster analyses were used to develop 20 draft indicators, which were presented to 51 experts to refine and prioritise at the three workshops.ResultsAll elements in the second survey were rated ‘1’ or ‘2’ by 81% of participants. Workshop participants agreed strongly on the four most important indicators: coordinated care, access to care, timeliness of the first treatment, and communication. Other indicators considered highly important were follow-up care for survivors; timeliness of diagnosis; information relating to side effects, pain and medication; comprehensibility of information provided to patients; and needs assessment.ConclusionsExperts identified priorities with a high level of consensus, providing a rigorous foundation for developing prioritised indicators of quality in cancer patient experience.

Attributes of innovations and approaches to scalability – lessons from a national program to extend the scope of practice of health professionals

The context for the paper was the evaluation of a national program in Australia to investigate extended scopes of practice for health professionals (paramedics, physiotherapists, and nurses). The design of the evaluation involved a mixed-methods approach with multiple data sources. Four multidisciplinary models of extended scope of practice were tested over an 18-month period, involving 26 organizations, 224 health professionals, and 36 implementation sites. The evaluation focused on what could be learned to inform scaling up the extended scopes of practice on a national scale. The evaluation findings were used to develop a conceptual framework for use by clinicians, managers, and policy makers to determine appropriate strategies for scaling up effective innovations. Development of the framework was informed by the literature on the diffusion of innovations, particularly an understanding that certain attributes of innovations influence adoption. The framework recognizes the role played by three groups of stakeholders: evidence producers, evidence influencers, and evidence adopters. The use of the framework is illustrated with four case studies from the evaluation. The findings demonstrate how the scaling up of innovations can be influenced by three quite distinct approaches – letting adoption take place in an uncontrolled, unplanned, way; actively helping the process of adoption; or taking deliberate steps to ensure that adoption takes place. Development of the conceptual framework resulted in two sets of questions to guide decisions about scalability, one for those considering whether to adopt the innovation (evidence adopters), and the other for those trying to decide on the optimal strategy for dissemination (evidence influencers).