scholarly journals The children and young people’s health partnership (cyphp) evelina london model of care

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Raghu Lingam ◽  
James Newham ◽  
Rose Satherley ◽  
Ingrid Wolfe
BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e027302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rose-Marie Satherley ◽  
Judith Green ◽  
Nick Sevdalis ◽  
James Joseph Newham ◽  
Mohamed Elsherbiny ◽  
...  

IntroductionChildren and young people (CYP) in the UK have poor health outcomes, and there is increasing emergency department and hospital outpatient use. To address these problems in Lambeth and Southwark (two boroughs of London, UK), the local Clinical Commissioning Groups, Local Authorities and Healthcare Providers formed The Children and Young People’s Health Partnership (CYPHP), a clinical-academic programme for improving child health. The Partnership has developed the CYPHP Evelina London model, an integrated healthcare model that aims to deliver effective, coordinated care in primary and community settings and promote better self-management to over approximately 90 000 CYP in Lambeth and Southwark. This protocol is for the process evaluation of this model of care.Methods and analysisAlongside an impact evaluation, an in-depth, mixed-methods process evaluation will be used to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementing the model of care. The data collected mapped onto a logic model of how CYPHP is expected to improve child health outcomes. Data collection and analysis include qualitative interviews and focus groups with stakeholders, a policy review and a quantitative analysis of routine clinical and administrative data and questionnaire data. Information relating to the context of the trial that may affect implementation and/or outcomes of the CYPHP model of care will be documented.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been reviewed by NHS REC Cornwall & Plymouth (17/SW/0275). The findings of this process evaluation will guide the scaling up and implementation of the CYPHP Evelina London Model of Care across the UK. Findings will be disseminated through publications and conferences, and implementation manuals and guidance for others working to improve child health through strengthening health systems.Trial registration numberNCT03461848


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e027301 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Joseph Newham ◽  
Julia Forman ◽  
Michelle Heys ◽  
Simon Cousens ◽  
Claire Lemer ◽  
...  

IntroductionChildren and young people (CYP) in many high-income settings have poor healthcare outcomes, especially those with long-term conditions (LTCs). Emergency and outpatient hospital service use is increasing unsustainably. To address these problems, the Children and Young People’s Health Partnership (CYPHP) has developed and is evaluating an integrated model of care as part of a health systems strengthening programme across two boroughs of London, UK that are characterised by mixed ethnic populations and varying levels of deprivation. The CYPHP Evelina London model of care comprises proactive case-finding and triage, specialist clinics and transformative education and training for professionals working with CYP. Services are delivered by multidisciplinary health teams with an emphasis on increased coordination across primary, community and hospital settings and integration of physical and mental healthcare that accounts for the CYP’s social context.Methods and analysisThe phased roll out of the CYPHP Evelina London model allows an opportunistic population-based evaluation using a cluster randomised controlled trial design. Seventy general practices across two London boroughs, grouped into 23 clusters, were randomised to provide either the CYPHP model of care (n=11) or enhanced usual care (n=12).The evaluation will measure the impact of the CYPHP Evelina London model of care on child and parent health and well-being, healthcare quality and health service use up to 2 years postimplementation. A population-level evaluation will use routinely collected pseudonymised healthcare data to conduct a service-use analysis for all CYP registered with a participating general practice (n=~90 000) with the rate of non-elective admissions as the primary outcome. We will seek consent from a subset of this population, with specific conditions (target n=2138) to assess the impact on patient-reported outcomes using the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) and Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEBWMS) as, respectively, the child- and parent-related primary outcomes.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval obtained from South West-Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Findings will be generalisable to community-based models of care, especially in urban settings. Our process evaluation will identify barriers and enablers of implementation and delivery of care salient to the context and condition.Trial registration numberNCT03461848; Pre-results.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e047085
Author(s):  
Marina Soley-Bori ◽  
Raghu Lingam ◽  
Rose-Marie Satherley ◽  
Julia Forman ◽  
Lizzie Cecil ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe Children and Young People’s Health Partnership (CYPHP) Evelina London Model of Care is a new approach to integrated care delivery for children and young people (CYP) with common health complaints and chronic conditions. CYPHP includes population health management (services shaped by data-driven understanding of population and individual needs, applied in this case to enable proactive case finding and tailored biopsychosocial care), specialist clinics with multidisciplinary health teams and training resources for professionals working with CYP. This complex health system strengthening programme has been implemented in South London since April 2018 and will be evaluated using a cluster randomised controlled trial with an embedded process evaluation. This protocol describes the within-trial and beyond-trial economic evaluation of CYPHP.Methods and analysisThe economic evaluation will identify, measure and value resources and health outcome impacts of CYPHP compared with enhanced usual care from a National Health Service/Personal Social Service and a broader societal perspective. The study population includes 90 000 CYP under 16 years of age in 23 clusters (groups of general practitioner (GP) practices) to assess health service use and costs, with more detailed cost-effectiveness analysis of a targeted sample of 2138 CYP with asthma, eczema or constipation (tracer conditions). For the cost-effectiveness analysis, health outcomes will be measured using the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the Child Health Utility 9 Dimensions (CHU-9D) measure. To account for changes in parental well-being, the Warwick-Edinburg Mental Well-being Scale will be integrated with QALYs in a cost–benefit analysis. The within-trial economic evaluation will be complemented by a novel long-term model that expands the analytical horizon to 10 years. Analyses will adhere to good practice guidelines and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence public health reference case.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received ethical approval from South West-Cornwall and Plymouth Research Ethics Committee (REC Reference: 17/SW/0275). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, made available in briefing papers for local decision-makers, and provided to the local community through website and public events. Findings will be generalisable to community-based models of care, especially in urban settings.Trial registration numberNCT03461848.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerrie-anne Frakes ◽  
Sharon Brownie ◽  
Lauren Davies ◽  
Janelle B. Thomas ◽  
Mary-Ellen Miller ◽  
...  

Faced with significant health and workforce challenges, the Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service commenced an innovative student-assisted clinical model of care ‐ The Capricornia Allied Health Partnership (CAHP) in 2010. The clinic supports pre-entry allied health student clinical placements to: (1) address service delivery gaps for previously underserved people with chronic disease; (2) facilitate hospital avoidance and early discharge from the local hospital; (3) provide an attractive clinical placement opportunity for allied health students that will potentially lead to future recruitment success, and (4) demonstrate leadership in developing interprofessional skills of future health workforce trainees. This case study details the conceptual background of the initial model, the key features of the clinical placement and service delivery model, and discusses the current and future evaluation of the clinic.


2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 684-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Grieve ◽  
Vibeke Porsdal ◽  
John Hutton ◽  
Charles Wolfe

Objectives: This study compared the relative cost-effectiveness of stroke care provided in London and Copenhagen.Methods: Hospitalized stroke patients at centers in London (1995–96) and Copenhagen (1994–95) were included. Each patient's use of hospital and community health services was recorded for 1 year after stroke. Center-specific unit costs were collected and converted into dollars using the Purchasing Power Parity Index. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated comparing a Copenhagen model of stroke care to a London model, using regression analysis to adjust for case-mix differences.Results: A total of 625 patients (297 in Copenhagen, 328 in London) were included in the analysis. Most patients in London (85%) wereadmitted to general medical wards, with 26% subsequently transferred to a stroke unit. In Copenhagen, 57% of patients were directly admitted to a stroke or neurology unit, with 23% then transferred to a separate rehabilitation hospital. The average length of total hospital stay was 11 days longer in Copenhagen. Patients in Copenhagen were less likely to die than those in London; for patients with cerebral infarction the hazard ratio after case-mix adjustment was 0.53 (95% CI from 0.35 to 0.80). However, a lower proportion of patients with hemorrhagic stroke died in London. The ICER of using the Copenhagen compared with the London model of care ranged from $21,579 to $37,444 per life-year gained for patients with cerebral infarctions.Conclusions: The ICERs of the Copenhagen compared with the London model of care were within a range generally regarded as cost-effective.


Diabetes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 335-OR
Author(s):  
SARAH L. SY ◽  
MEDHA MUNSHI

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Suderman ◽  
Carolyn McIntyre ◽  
Christopher Sellar ◽  
Margaret L. McNeely

A growing body of research evidence supports the benefit of exercise for cancer survivors both during and after cancer treatment. The purpose of this paper is to provide an update on our previously published review in 2006 on the state of the evidence supporting exercise for survivors of cancer as well as guidelines for integrating exercise programming in the cancer clinical setting. First, we provide a brief overview on the benefits of exercise as well as preliminary evidence supporting the implementation of community-based exercise programs. Second, we summarize the principles and goals of exercise, and the identified barriers to exercise among cancer survivors. Finally, we propose an interdisciplinary model of care for integrating exercise programming into clinical care including guidelines for medical and pre-exercise screening, exercise testing and programming considerations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document