Search

This paper presents current information on policy developments, service design, best practices, and approaches to empower the users of health and medical care services for people with intellectual disabilities in Poland. Polish regulations allow systemic support to be provided for all people with disabilities. However, Polish patients with intellectual disabilitiy (PwID) and their caregivers face many barriers. Although a key obstacle is the lack of a standard definition that approaches disability in an interdisciplinary way, PwID are also more likely to experience difficulties in personal communication in medical settings and less likely to encounter specialists prepared to work with this group. There is also a need to pay greater attention to the expectations of PwID. To facilitate a holistic approach to diagnosis and therapy, there needs to be coordination between different specialists, including medical staff, paramedics, psychologists, and teachers. Providing personal communication training for medical personnel, as well as developing dedicated procedures for PwID in primary health care, clinics and hospitals, will improve equal access to health and health literacy for all in Poland. Even so, it is important to respect the autonomy of PwID and the commitment of caregivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Irish health and social care policy has undergone a significant evolution in recent years to address inequalities, improve standards and update models of care to incorporate a rights‐based approach. The following account describes the Irish health and social care system, as delivered in the Republic of Ireland, and details how it operates for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The paper is informed by government policy, legislation, reviews, national plans, parliamentary reports, and population data. Clear progress has been made in shifting from a service‐led to a rights‐based, service‐user led model of care; however, resourcing this fundamental transition in approach to service provision poses challenges for the Irish State. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the older people's mental health workforce development, policy development and implementation process and quantifies the rural service delivery and access impacts over a 15‐year period in New South Wales. It highlights the factors that are considered to be critical to successful rural service development such as commitment to funding parity, investment in strong local service leadership, and development of innovative, locally adapted rural service models. Building on these foundations, the Older People's Mental Health Program in New South Wales was able to address key challenges relating to service access in rural health and develop new, sustainable specialist older people's mental health service networks. A sustained focus on policy and implementation which explicitly supports rural older people's mental health service enhancement, and development of evidence‐based models of care, has significantly improved access to specialist mental health care for older people in rural areas. It has delivered 23 new rural older people's mental health community teams and a 440% increase in the number of people accessing these teams. It has also doubled the number of acute inpatient units and established new specialist mental health‐residential aged care partnership services in rural New South Wales. It has resulted in increased access to services for the "older old," while not diminishing older people's rates of access to general adult mental health services. It has also supported innovative, sustainable rural service models such as "hub and spoke" models and step‐up step‐down inpatient services that build on existing health and hospital infrastructure and link geographically dispersed specialist clinicians and services together in rural service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsDissemination of Choosing Wisely guidelines alone is unlikely to reduce the use of low‐value health services.Interventions by health systems to implement Choosing Wisely guidelines can reduce the use of low‐value services.Multicomponent interventions targeting clinicians are currently the most effective types of interventions. Context: Choosing Wisely aims to reduce the use of unnecessary, low‐value medical services through development of recommendations related to service utilization. Despite the creation and dissemination of these recommendations, evidence shows low‐value services are still prevalent. This paper synthesizes literature on interventions designed to reduce medical care identified as low value by Choosing Wisely and evaluates which intervention characteristics are most effective. Methods: We searched peer‐reviewed and gray literature from the inception of Choosing Wisely in 2012 through June 2019 to identify interventions in the United States motivated by or using Choosing Wisely recommendations. We also included studies measuring the impact of Choosing Wisely on its own, without interventions. We developed a coding guide and established coding agreement. We coded all included articles for types of services targeted, components of each intervention, results of the intervention, study type, and, where applicable, study quality. We measured the success rate of interventions, using chi‐squared tests or Wald tests to compare across interventions. Findings: We reviewed 131 articles. Eighty‐eight percent of interventions focused on clinicians only; 48% included multiple components. Compared with dissemination of Choosing Wisely recommendations only, active interventions were more likely to generate intended results (65% vs 13%, p < 0.001) and, among those, interventions with multiple components were more successful than those with one component (77% vs 47%, p = 0.002). The type of services targeted did not matter for success. Clinician‐based interventions were more effective than consumer‐based, though there is a dearth of studies on consumer‐based interventions. Only 17% of studies included a control arm. Conclusions: Interventions built on the Choosing Wisely recommendations can be effective at changing practice patterns to reduce the use of low‐value care. Interventions are more effective when targeting clinicians and using more than one component. There is a need for high‐quality studies that include active controls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsIntegrated care is best understood as an emergent set of practices intrinsically shaped by contextual factors, and not as a single intervention to achieve predetermined outcomes.Policies to integrate care that facilitate person‐centered, relationship‐based care can potentially contribute to (but not determine) improved patient experiences.There can be an association between improved patient experiences and system benefits, but these outcomes of integrated care are of different orders and do not necessarily align.Policymakers should critically evaluate integrated care programs to identify and manage conflicts and tensions between a program's aims and the context in which it is being introduced. Context: Integrated care is a broad concept, used to describe a connected set of clinical, organizational, and policy changes aimed at improving service efficiency, patient experience, and outcomes. Despite examples of successful integrated care systems, evidence for consistent and reproducible benefits remains elusive. We sought to inform policy and practice by conducting a systematic hermeneutic review of literature covering integrated care strategies and concepts. Methods: We used an emergent search strategy to identify 71 sources that considered what integrated care means and/or tested models of integrated care. Our analysis entailed (1) comparison of strategies and concepts of integrated care, (2) tracing common story lines across multiple sources, (3) developing a taxonomy of literature, and (4) generating a novel interpretation of the heterogeneous strategies and concepts of integrated care. Findings: We identified four perspectives on integrated care: patients' perspectives, organizational strategies and policies, conceptual models, and theoretical and critical analysis. We subdivided the strategies into four framings of how integrated care manifests and is understood to effect change. Common across empirical and conceptual work was a concern with unity in the face of fragmentation as well as the development and application of similar methods to achieve this unity. However, integrated care programs did not necessarily lead to the changes intended in experiences and outcomes. We attribute this gap between expectations and results, in part, to significant misalignment between the aspiration for unity underpinning conceptual models on the one hand and the multiplicity of practical application of strategies to integrate care on the other. Conclusions: Those looking for universal answers to narrow questions about whether integrated care "works" are likely to remain disappointed. Models of integrated care need to be valued for their heuristic rather than predictive powers, and integration understood as emerging from particular as well as common contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a statement of the American Geriatrics Society's (AGS) core policy priorities and the Society's positions on federal programs and policies that support older Americans as articulated to the new administration. Among the AGS priorities discussed in this paper are health reform, Medicare, and Medicaid. The AGS is committed to leveraging its expertise to inform regulatory and legislative policy proposals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Health, social care, charitable and justice sectors are increasingly recognising the need for trauma‐informed services that seek to recognise signs of trauma, provide appropriate paths to recovery and ensure that services enable people rather than retraumatise. Foundational to the development of trauma‐informed services is collaboration with people with lived experience of trauma. Co‐production principles may provide a useful framework for this collaboration, due to their emphasis on lived experience, and intent to address power imbalances and promote equity. This article aims to examine trauma‐informed and co‐production principles to consider the extent to which they overlap and explore how to tailor co‐production approaches to support people who have experienced trauma. Methods: Bridging Gaps is a collaboration between women who have experienced complex trauma, a charity that supports them, primary care clinicians and health researchers to improve access to trauma‐informed primary care. Using co‐production principles, we aimed to ensure that women who have experienced trauma were key decision‐makers throughout the project. Through reflective notes (n = 19), observations of meetings (n = 3), interviews with people involved in the project (n = 9) and reflective group discussions on our experiences, we share learning, successes and failures. Data analysis followed a framework approach, using trauma‐informed principles. Results: Co‐production processes can require adaptation when working with people who have experienced trauma. We emphasise the need for close partnership working, flexibility and transparency around power dynamics, paying particular attention to aspects of power that are less readily visible. Sharing experiences can retrigger trauma. People conducting co‐production work need to understand trauma and how this may impact upon an individual's sense of psychological safety. Long‐term funding is vital to enable projects to have enough time for the establishment of trust and delivery of tangible results. Conclusions: Co‐production principles are highly suitable when developing trauma‐informed services. Greater consideration needs to be given as to whether and how people share lived experiences, the need for safe spaces, honesty and humility, difficult dynamics between empowerment and safety and whether and when blurring boundaries may be helpful. Our findings have applicability to policy‐making, funding and service provision to enable co‐production processes to become more trauma‐informed. Public Contribution: Bridging Gaps was started by a group of women who have experienced complex trauma, including addiction, homelessness, mental health problems, sexual exploitation, domestic and sexual violence and poverty, with a general practitioner (GP) who provides healthcare to this population, alongside a support worker from the charity One25, a charity that supports some of the most marginalised women in Bristol to heal and thrive. More GPs and healthcare researchers joined the group and they have been meeting fortnightly for a period of 4 years with the aim of improving access to trauma‐informed primary care. The group uses co‐production principles to work together, and we aim to ensure that women who have experienced trauma are key decision‐makers throughout our work together. This article is a summary of our learning, informed by discussion, observations and interviews with members of the group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services have been implemented with the dual aims of preventing harmful outcomes associated with early‐onset psychosis and improving prognosis. However, concerns have been raised regarding the ethical implications of involving young people in EIP services. One way to ensure high ethical standards and promote good practice in EIP delivery is through governance of clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate the normative dimensions of good practice in EIP through examination of clinical guideline documents published in England over the past 15 years. Methods: A total of 14 clinical guidelines and relevant policy documents for EIP were retrieved and analysed using a mixed inductive and deductive thematic approach. Themes were derived from the data itself, whereas the development of broader categories was performed through a constant comparison with the scientific literature describing ethical issues in EIP. Results: Ethical touchpoints of good practice in EIP included both procedural and substantive factors, which were seen to be interdependent and mutually constitutive. These ethical touchpoints were largely implicit in the documents analysed. Procedural requirements of EIP service delivery consisted of norms and rules pertaining to EIP service structure, adherence to codes of ethics, inclusivity, patient and family centredness and appropriate treatment provision. Substantive factors consisted of moral attributes that should be cultivated by healthcare professionals working in EIP: competency, empathy, sensitivity and trustworthiness. Conclusions: We argue that, to ensure good practice in EIP, procedural and substantive ethical expectations embedded in EIP guideline documents should be made explicit in EIP service and care delivery. We suggest that the procedural and substantive factors highlighted in this paper contribute useful dimensions for the eventual evaluation of good practice in EIP services across England. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsA large body of scientific work examines the mechanisms through which social determinants of health (SDOH) shape health inequities. However, the nuances described in the literature are infrequently reflected in the applied frameworks that inform health policy and programming.We synthesize extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing key mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities for mitigating the impact of harmful SDOH.In light of scarce existing SDOH mitigation strategies, the framework addresses an important research‐to‐practice translation gap and missed opportunity for advancing health equity. Context: The reduction of health inequities is a broad and interdisciplinary endeavor with implications for policy, research, and practice. Health inequities are most often understood as associated with the social determinants of health (SDOH). However, policy and programmatic frameworks for mitigation often rely on broad SDOH domains, without sufficient attention to the operating mechanisms, and effective SDOH mitigation strategies remain scarce. To expand the cadre of effective SDOH mitigation strategies, a practical, heuristic framework for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers is needed that serves as a roadmap for conceptualizing and targeting the key mechanisms of SDOH influence. Methods: We conduct a critical review of the extant conceptual and empirical SDOH literature to identify unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms and to synthesize an integrated framework for conceptualizing such mechanisms. Findings: We highlight eight unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms that emerge from landmark SDOH research. Building on these principles, we introduce and apply a conceptual model that synthesizes key SDOH mechanisms into one organizing, heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing the key SDOH mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities to maximize potential impact for mitigating a given health inequity. Conclusions: Our synthesis of the extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework addresses a scarcity of peer‐reviewed organizing frameworks of SDOH mechanisms designed to inform practice. The framework represents a practical tool to facilitate the translation of scholarly SDOH work into evidence‐based and targeted policy and programming. Such tools designed to close the research‐to‐practice translation gap for effective SDOH mitigation are sorely needed, given that health inequities in the United States and in many other parts of the world have widened over the past two decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Important changes in the delivery of Veteran emergency care in the early 2000s in the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) emergency departments and urgent care clinics substantially elevated the role of emergency medicine (EM) in Veteran health care. Focused on enhancing the quality of care, emergency care visits in both VA and non‐VA (community) care locations have nearly doubled from the 1980s to more than 3 million visits in Fiscal Year 2022. Recognizing the need to plan for continued growth and the opportunity to address key research priorities, the VA Office of Emergency Medicine, together with the VA Health Services Research and Development Service, collaborated to convene a State of the Art Conference on Veteran Emergency Medicine (SAVE) in the winter of 2022. The goal of this conference was to identify research gaps and priorities for implementation of policies for three priority groups: geriatric Veterans, Veterans with mental health and substance use complaints, and Veterans presenting to non‐VA (community) emergency care sites. In this article we discuss the rationale for the SAVE conference including a brief history of VA EM and the planning process and conclude with next steps for findings from the conference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsLow‐value care is common in clinical practice, leading to patient harm and wasted spending. Much of this low‐value care stems from the use of medical device‐based procedures.We describe here a novel academic‐policymaker collaboration in which evidence‐based clinical coverage for device‐based procedures is implemented through prior authorization‐based policies for Louisiana's Medicaid beneficiary population.This process involves eight steps: 1) identifying low‐value medical device‐based procedures based on clinical evidence review, 2) quantifying utilization and reimbursement, 3) reviewing clinical coverage policies to identify opportunities to align coverage with evidence, 4) using a low‐value device selection index, 5) developing an evidence synthesis and policy proposal, 6) stakeholder engagement and input, 7) policy implementation, and 8) policy evaluation. This strategy holds significant potential to reduce low‐value device‐based care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The apportionment of responsibility for health policy within multi‐level states should be sensitive to a number of conflicting normative pressures, some of which militate for placing decision‐making authority at the higher reaches of policy‐making structures, while others would seem to require placing them lower down this structure. The principle of subsidiarity is a structural principle that addresses in a manner that is neutral with respect to these values a way of addressing the conflicting claims of these values. Standard accounts of federalism fare poorly with respect to the criterion of subsidiarity. While central governments are at first glance better equipped to apply such a principle to the issue of the distribution of authority, there are strong empirical grounds for thinking that centralized governments will non‐neutrally privilege central authorities in applying the principle. Federal structures that admit of overlapping jurisdictions, and that therefore require that deliberation among federal parties occur as a condition of the problem of the distribution of powers over health care being solved, are most amenable to solving problems of distribution of authority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Examine policies of aged care organisations relating to healthcare and lifestyle decision‐making. Methods: Seven aged care organisations submitted policy documents. Policies were analysed using the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) "Decision‐Making Principles" as a framework. Senior staff (N = 9) with policy development roles participated in follow‐up interviews. Results: The structure and content of policy documents varied significantly between organisations. Most acknowledged the need to support the rights of care recipients in decision‐making; however, the nature of this support was often unclear. Interview themes included factors relating to "organisational contexts" "policy development and implementation" and "ethical challenges." An overarching theme among high‐performing organisations was "proactive response aimed at pre‐empting decision‐making dilemmas". We provide recommendations for policy development, including a self‐assessment audit tool. Conclusion: Aged care provider organisations may need to review policies in the areas of healthcare and lifestyle decision‐making to meet current best practice principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore whether a Rawlsian approach might provide a guiding philosophy for the development of a healthcare system, in particular with regard to resolving tensions between different groups within it. We argue that an approach developed from some of Rawls' principles – using his 'veil of ignorance' and both the 'difference' and 'just savings' principles which it generates – provides a compelling basis for policy making around certain areas of conflict. We ask what policies might be made if those making them did not know if one was patient, doctor, nurse or manager – in this generation or the next. We first offer a brief summary of Rawls' approach and how we intend to extrapolate from it. We examine how this adapted Rawlsian framework could be applied to specific examples of conflict within healthcare; we demonstrate how this framework can be used to develop a healthcare service which is both sustainable (in its training and treatment of staff, and in encouraging research and innovation) and open (to protect the powers and opportunities of those using the health service). We conclude that while Rawls' approach has previously been rejected as a means to address specific healthcare decisions, an adapted veil of ignorance can be a useful tool for the consideration of how a just health service should be constructed and sustained. Turning the theoretical into the practical (and combining Rawls' thought experiment with Scanlonian contractarianism), managers, doctors, patients, carers and nurses could come together and debate conflicting issues behind a hypothetical veil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In this article, we provide a comprehensive analysis and a normative assessment of rationing through inconvenience as a form of rationing. By “rationing through inconvenience” in the health sphere, we refer to a nonfinancial burden (the inconvenience) that is either intended to cause or has the effect of causing patients or clinicians to choose an option for health‐related consumption that is preferred by the health system for its fairness, efficiency, or other distributive desiderata beyond assisting the immediate patient. We argue that under certain conditions, rationing through inconvenience may turn out to serve as a legitimate and, compared to direct rationing, even a preferable tool for rationing; we propose a research agenda to identify more precisely when that might be the case and when, alternatively, rationing through inconvenience remains ethically undesirable. After defining and illustrating rationing through inconvenience, we turn to its moral advantages and disadvantages over other rationing methods. We take it as a starting assumption that rationing, understood as scarce‐resource prioritization, is inevitable and, in a society that has goals beyond optimizing health care for individual patients—such as improving societal health care, education, or overall welfare—prudent and fair. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's views on his father's health and discusses his experience in hospital with doctors and social workers behavior. Topics discussed include cold treatment affect a poor family without knowledge of the health system; his meeting with medical director of a unique specialty hospital that provides palliative care for adult patients; and Medicare program benefits.

The need for quality of life, both as a concept and as a measure, to be applied to policy and practice has been noted in the disability literature for several years. In 2012, Schalock and Verdugo introduced a conceptual model to help service organizations evaluate if congruence exists among their systems, policies, and practices and, if misalignments exist, to make changes through policy and systems change. Their model focuses on two levels, system-level processes and organization-level practices, at three consecutive stages of use: inputs, throughputs, and outputs. In this article, the authors extend the work of Schalock and Verdugo by adding a third level of application, individual- and family-level living, and propose the inclusion of outcomes as a fourth stage of use representing a consequence of outputs. We recognize the dynamic interaction among all components of the conceptual framework and, like Schalock and Verdugo, argue for alignment both vertically (system, organization, and individual and family living levels) and horizontally (inputs, throughputs, outputs, and outcomes) within our revised conceptual framework. Based on this, the authors propose that quality of life outcomes (the ongoing effects of outputs) should be an ultimate focus of service organizations and policy development if quality of life is to be enhanced for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]