Greenhalgh Trisha, Darbyshire Julie L, Lee Cassie, Ladds Emma, Ceolta-Smith Jenny
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Rd, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
BMC Med. 2024 Apr 15;22(1):159. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03371-6.
Long covid (post covid-19 condition) is a complex condition with diverse manifestations, uncertain prognosis and wide variation in current approaches to management. There have been calls for formal quality standards to reduce a so-called "postcode lottery" of care. The original aim of this study-to examine the nature of quality in long covid care and reduce unwarranted variation in services-evolved to focus on examining the reasons why standardizing care was so challenging in this condition.
In 2021-2023, we ran a quality improvement collaborative across 10 UK sites. The dataset reported here was mostly but not entirely qualitative. It included data on the origins and current context of each clinic, interviews with staff and patients, and ethnographic observations at 13 clinics (50 consultations) and 45 multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings (244 patient cases). Data collection and analysis were informed by relevant lenses from clinical care (e.g. evidence-based guidelines), improvement science (e.g. quality improvement cycles) and philosophy of knowledge.
Participating clinics made progress towards standardizing assessment and management in some topics; some variation remained but this could usually be explained. Clinics had different histories and path dependencies, occupied a different place in their healthcare ecosystem and served a varied caseload including a high proportion of patients with comorbidities. A key mechanism for achieving high-quality long covid care was when local MDTs deliberated on unusual, complex or challenging cases for which evidence-based guidelines provided no easy answers. In such cases, collective learning occurred through idiographic (case-based) reasoning, in which practitioners build lessons from the particular to the general. This contrasts with the nomothetic reasoning implicit in evidence-based guidelines, in which reasoning is assumed to go from the general (e.g. findings of clinical trials) to the particular (management of individual patients).
Not all variation in long covid services is unwarranted. Largely because long covid's manifestations are so varied and comorbidities common, generic "evidence-based" standards require much individual adaptation. In this complex condition, quality improvement resources may be productively spent supporting MDTs to optimise their case-based learning through interdisciplinary discussion. Quality assessment of a long covid service should include review of a sample of individual cases to assess how guidelines have been interpreted and personalized to meet patients' unique needs.
NCT05057260, ISRCTN15022307.
长新冠(新冠后状况)是一种复杂的病症,表现多样,预后不确定,目前的管理方法差异很大。有人呼吁制定正式的质量标准,以减少所谓的护理“邮政编码抽奖”现象。本研究的最初目的是检查长新冠护理的质量本质,并减少服务中不必要的差异,后来演变为专注于研究在这种情况下标准化护理为何如此具有挑战性。
在2021年至2023年期间,我们在英国的10个地点开展了一项质量改进合作项目。此处报告的数据集大多但并非完全是定性的。它包括每个诊所的起源和当前背景数据、对工作人员和患者的访谈,以及在13个诊所(50次会诊)和45次多学科团队(MDT)会议(244个患者病例)上的人种学观察。数据收集和分析受到临床护理(如循证指南)、改进科学(如质量改进周期)和知识哲学等相关视角的影响。
参与的诊所在某些主题的评估和管理标准化方面取得了进展;仍存在一些差异,但通常可以解释。诊所有着不同的历史和路径依赖,在其医疗生态系统中占据不同的位置,服务的病例组合多样,包括很大比例的合并症患者。实现高质量长新冠护理的一个关键机制是当地的多学科团队对循证指南无法轻松解答的不寻常、复杂或具有挑战性的病例进行审议。在这种情况下,通过个案(基于案例)推理进行集体学习,从业者从特殊情况中总结经验并推广到一般情况。这与循证指南中隐含的通则推理形成对比,在通则推理中,推理被认为是从一般情况(如临床试验结果)到特殊情况(个体患者的管理)。
并非长新冠服务中的所有差异都是不必要的。很大程度上是因为长新冠的表现如此多样且合并症常见,通用的“循证”标准需要大量的个性化调整。在这种复杂的情况下,质量改进资源可以有效地用于支持多学科团队通过跨学科讨论优化他们基于案例的学习。长新冠服务的质量评估应包括对个别病例样本的审查,以评估指南是如何被解读和个性化以满足患者的独特需求的。
NCT05057260,ISRCTN15022307。