Linkage of routinely collected NHS data to evaluate liaison mental health services: challenges and lessons learned

Author:

Guthrie Elspeth1ORCID,House Allan1ORCID,Smith Chris2ORCID,Relton Sam1ORCID,Romeu Daniel1ORCID,Saraiva Sonia1ORCID,Trigwell Peter3,West Robert1ORCID,Shuweihdi Farag1ORCID,Crawford Mike4ORCID,Fossey Matt5ORCID,Hewison Jenny1ORCID,Hulme Claire6ORCID,Tubeuf Sandy7ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

2. Department of Computer Science, University of York, York, UK

3. National Inpatient Centre for Psychological Medicine, Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, UK

4. Department of Brain Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK

5. Veterans and Families Institute for Military Social Research, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK

6. Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

7. Institute of Health and Society (IRSS) and Institute of Economic and Social Research (IRES), Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain, Belgium

Abstract

Background Liaison mental health services provide mental health care to patients in acute hospital settings. Evaluation of liaison services is challenging due to their heterogeneous organisation and delivery, high case throughput and varied patient case mix. We aimed to link routinely collected National Health Service data from secondary care settings, chosen for their service characteristics, to data from primary care to evaluate hospital-based liaison mental health services in England. Methods We planned to compare patients referred to hospital-based liaison services with comparable patients in the same hospital not referred to liaison services and comparable patients in hospitals without any liaison services. We designed and enacted a methodology to link data from: (1) Hospital Episode Statistics, a database controlled by the National Health Service Digital and (2) ResearchOne, a primary care database controlled by The Phoenix Partnership. Results Obtaining approvals for the steps prespecified in the methodological protocol took 907 days. Enactment following approvals took 385 days. Data supplied from Hospital Episode Statistics contained 181,063 patients from 6 hospitals (mean = 30,177, standard deviation = 28,875.86) who matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data supplied from ResearchOne contained 33,666 (18.6%) of these patients from the 6 hospitals (mean = 5611, standard deviation = 5206.59). Discussion Time required for approvals and enactment was attributable to slowness of data handling processes within each data holder and to resolution of technical and organisational queries between them. Variation in number of patients for which data was supplied between databases and between hospitals was attributable to coding inconsistencies and to the limited intersection of patient populations between databases and variation in recording practices between hospitals. Conclusion Although it is technically feasible to link primary and secondary care data, the current system is challenging, complicated, unnecessarily bureaucratic, time consuming and costly. This limits the number of studies that could be conducted with these rich data sources. Funding This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number 13/58/08.

Funder

Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) Programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health and Care Research

Reference46 articles.

1. A history of liaison psychiatry in the UK;Aitken;BJPsych Bull,2016

2. Consultation-liaison psychiatry: the first half century;Lipowski;Gen Hosp Psychiatry,1986

3. The history of General Hospital psychiatry;Mayou;Br J Psychiatry,1989

4. Consultation-liaison psychiatry: a historical overview;Schwab;Psychosomatics,1989

5. NHS England. Report of the Fourth Survey of Liaison Psychiatry in England. 2019. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/report-of-the-4th-survey-of-liaison-psychiatry-in-england/ (accessed 19 October 2023).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3