Due to the ageing population, the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders will continue to rise, as well as healthcare expenditure. To overcome these increasing expenditures, integration of orthopaedic care should be stimulated. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention aimed to achieve this by facilitating collaboration between primary care and the hospital, in which specialised medical care is shifted to a primary care setting. The present study aims to evaluate the referral decision following orthopaedic care in PC+ and in particular to evaluate the influence of diagnostic tests on this decision. Therefore, retrospective monitoring data of patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care was used. Data was divided into two periods; P1 and P2. During P2, specialists in PC+ were able to request additional diagnostic tests (such as ultrasounds and MRIs). A total of 2,438 patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the referral decision following PC+ (back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care). Independent variables were consultation- and patient-related predictors. To describe variations in the referral decision, logistic regression modelling was used. Results show that during P2, significantly more patients were referred back to their GP. Moreover, the multivariable analysis show a significant effect of patient age on the referral decision (OR 0.86, 95% CI = 0.81– 0.91) and a significant interaction was found between the treating specialist and the period (p = 0.015) and between patient’s diagnosis and the period (p < 0.001). Despite the significant impact of the possibility of requesting additional diagnostic tests in PC+, it is important to discuss the extent to which the availability of diagnostic tests fits within the vision of PC+. In addition, selecting appropriate profiles for specialists and patients for PC+ are necessary to further optimise the effectiveness and cost of care.
Purpose: To describe nurses' support interventions for medication adherence, and patients' experiences and desired improvements with this care. Patients and methods: A two-phase study was performed, including an analysis of questionnaire data and conducted interviews with members of the care panel of the Netherlands Patients Federation. The questionnaire assessed 14 types of interventions, satisfaction (score 0-10) with received interventions, needs, experiences, and desired improvements in nurses' support. Interviews further explored experiences and improvements. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and a thematic analysis approach. Results: Fifty-nine participants completed the questionnaire, and 14 of the 59 participants were interviewed. The satisfaction score for interventions was 7.9 (IQR 7-9). The most common interventions were: "noticing when I don't take medication as prescribed" (n = 35), "helping me to find solutions to overcome problems with using medications" (n = 32), "helping me with taking medication" (n = 32), and "explaining the importance of taking medication at the right moment" (n = 32). Fifteen participants missed ≥1 of the 14 interventions. Most mentioned the following: "regularly asking about potential problems with medication use" (33%), "regularly discussing whether using medication is going well" (29%), and "explaining the importance of taking medication at the right moment" (27%). Twenty-two participants experienced the following as positive: improved self-management of adequate medication taking, a professional patient-nurse relationship to discuss adherence problems, and nurses' proactive attitude to arrange practical support for medication use. Thirteen patients experienced the following as negative: insufficient timing of home visits, rushed appearance of nurses, and insufficient expertise about side effects and taking medication. Suggested improvements included performing home visits on time, more time for providing support in medication use, and more expertise about side effects and administering medication. Conclusion: Overall, participants were satisfied, and few participants wanted more interventions. Nurses' support improved participants' self-management of medication taking and enabled patients to discuss their adherence problems. Adequately timed home visits, more time for support, and accurate medication-related knowledge are desired.
Background: Patient involvement in interprofessional education (IPE) is a new approach in fostering person-centeredness and collaborative competencies in undergraduate students. We developed the Patient As a Person (PAP-)module to facilitate students in learning from experts by experience (EBEs) living with chronic conditions, in an interprofessional setting. This study aimed to explore the experiences of undergraduate students, EBEs and facilitators with the PAP-module and formulate recommendations on the design and organization of patient involvement in IPE. Methods: We collected data from students, EBEs and facilitators, through eight semi-structured focus group interviews and two individual interviews (N = 51). The interviews took place at Maastricht University, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences and Regional Training Center Leeuwenborgh. Conventional content analysis revealed key themes. Results: Students reported that learning from EBEs in an interprofessional setting yielded a more comprehensive approach and made them empathize with EBEs. Facilitators found it challenging to address multiple demands from students from different backgrounds and diverse EBEs. EBEs were motivated to improve the personcentredness of health care and welcomed a renewed sense of purpose. Conclusions: This study yielded six recommendations: (a) students from various disciplines visit an EBE to foster a comprehensive approach, (b) groups of at least two students visit EBEs, (c) students may need aftercare for which facilitators should be receptive, (d) EBEs need clear instruction on their roles, (e) multiple EBEs in one session create diversity in perspectives and (f) training programmes and peer-to-peer sessions for facilitators help them to interact with diverse students and EBEs.
Veel ouderen ervaren tijdens en na ziekenhuisopname functieverlies. ‘Function Focused Care in Hospital’, ook wel bekend als bewegingsgerichte zorg, is een interventie gericht op het voorkomen en verminderen van functieverlies bij ouderen tijdens een ziekenhuisopname. Verpleegkundigen moedigen patiënten aan tot actieve betrokkenheid in de dagelijkse zorgmomenten.Doel Doel van dit project is de effectiviteit bepalen van Function Focused Care in Hospital op het fysiek functioneren van patiënten die opgenomen zijn in de Nederlandse ziekenhuizen. Resultaten Nederlandstalig scholingsprogramma en handboek van de Function Focused Care in Hospital-benadering voor de ziekenhuissetting; Een evaluatie van het proces en de uitkomsten van de Function Focused Care-benadering. Looptijd 01 november 2020 - 31 oktober 2025 Aanpak Er is een haalbaarheidsstudie uitgevoerd, die uitwees dat de interventie geschikt is voor de Nederlandse praktijk. Op de neurologische en geriatrische afdelingen van drie ziekenhuizen is Function Focused Care in Hospital in de dagelijkse zorg geïmplementeerd en geëvalueerd op effectiviteit. Over de interventie Function Focused Care (FFC) is een zorgbenadering waarin verpleegkundigen patiënten actief betrekken bij alle zorgmomenten om hun fysiek functioneren te optimaliseren. Eerder onderzoek heeft laten zien dat FFC een positief effect heeft op fysieke activiteit, mobiliteit en ADL bij ouderen in de wijk en de langdurige zorg. Ook laten studies in de acute zorg belovende resultaten zien van FFC op fysieke activiteit en mobiliteit bij ouderen opgenomen in het ziekenhuis. Voorbeelden van zorg volgens de FFC-benadering zijn met de patiënt naar de badkamer lopen in plaats van wassen op bed, of de maaltijd aan tafel nuttigen in plaats van zittend in bed eten. De essentie van FFC is het behouden of, indien mogelijk, verbeteren van het fysieke functioneren. Tijdens de hele ziekenhuisopname wordt de patiënt aangemoedigd meer tijd te laten besteden aan fysieke activiteit op een op de patiënt aangepast niveau. Co-financiering Het project wordt mede gefinancierd door ZonMW, projectnummer 520002003.
The pressure on the European health care system is increasing considerably: more elderly people and patients with chronic diseases in need of (rehabilitation) care, a diminishing work force and health care costs continuing to rise. Several measures to counteract this are proposed, such as reduction of the length of stay in hospitals or rehabilitation centres by improving interprofessional and person-centred collaboration between health and social care professionals. Although there is a lot of attention for interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP), the consortium senses a gap between competence levels of future professionals and the levels needed in rehabilitation practice. Therefore, the transfer from tertiary education to practice concerning IPECP in rehabilitation is the central theme of the project. Regional bonds between higher education institutions and rehabilitation centres will be strengthened in order to align IPECP. On the one hand we deliver a set of basic and advanced modules on functioning according to the WHO’s International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and a set of (assessment) tools on interprofessional skills training. Also, applications of this theory in promising approaches, both in education and in rehabilitation practice, are regionally being piloted and adapted for use in other regions. Field visits by professionals from practice to exchange experiences is included in this work package. We aim to deliver a range of learning materials, from modules on theory to guidelines on how to set up and run a student-run interprofessional learning ward in a rehabilitation centre. All tested outputs will be published on the INPRO-website and made available to be implemented in the core curricula in tertiary education and for lifelong learning in health care practice. This will ultimately contribute to improve functioning and health outcomes and quality of life of patients in rehabilitation centres and beyond.
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a major problem. In the USA alone there are 15 million people with an AUD and more than 950,000 Dutch people drink excessively. Worldwide, 3-8% of all deaths and 5% of all illnesses and injuries are attributable to AUD. Care faces challenges. For example, more than half of AUD patients relapse within a year of treatment. A solution for this is the use of Cue-Exposure-Therapy (CET). Clients are exposed to triggers through objects, people and environments that arouse craving. Virtual Reality (VRET) is used to experience these triggers in a realistic, safe, and personalized way. In this way, coping skills are trained to counteract alcohol cravings. The effectiveness of VRET has been (clinically) proven. However, the advent of AR technologies raises the question of exploring possibilities of Augmented-Reality-Exposure-Therapy (ARET). ARET enjoys the same benefits as VRET (such as a realistic safe experience). But because AR integrates virtual components into the real environment, with the body visible, it presumably evokes a different type of experience. This may increase the ecological validity of CET in treatment. In addition, ARET is cheaper to develop (fewer virtual elements) and clients/clinics have easier access to AR (via smartphone/tablet). In addition, new AR glasses are being developed, which solve disadvantages such as a smartphone screen that is too small. Despite the demand from practitioners, ARET has never been developed and researched around addiction. In this project, the first ARET prototype is developed around AUD in the treatment of alcohol addiction. The prototype is being developed based on Volumetric-Captured-Digital-Humans and made accessible for AR glasses, tablets and smartphones. The prototype will be based on RECOVRY, a VRET around AUD developed by the consortium. A prototype test among (ex)AUD clients will provide insight into needs and points for improvement from patient and care provider and into the effect of ARET compared to VRET.
