What is known about the topic?
What does this paper add?
Background
Nepean Blue Mountains primary Health network Cancer screening program
Prioritised quality improvement areas | Supportive Strategies |
---|---|
Data entry and extraction | • Establish and/or clean practice cancer screening register • Establish and utilise provider reminder and patient recall system • Support Information Technology and conduct periodic clinical audits – data analysis and feedback |
Education and training | • Practice staff training including consumer engagement and quality improvement coaching • Support practice nurse participation in Well Women’s Screening course • Promote PDSA (Plan, Do, Study, Act) approaches/cycles |
Resources and community promotion | • Incentive payments and continuing professional development (CPD) • Establish/promote women’s health checklist • Develop Health Pathways (localised health and referral information) for cancer screening • Provide information on the local mobile breast screening service • Provide community-based liaison workers and educators • Provide educational materials for display in practices • Provide practice information packs and information at NBMPHN website |
Research aims
Methods
Evaluation scope and oversight
Setting
Study design
Participant recruitment
Data collection and analysis
Results
Participant | Number | Local Government Area |
---|---|---|
NBMPHN Staff and Contractors e.g. Aboriginal liaison (designated below as PHN) | 5 (males = 3) | N/A |
General Practitioners (GP) | 6 (male = 6) | Lithgow (1x PN) Hawkesbury (2x GP, 3x PM, 1x PN) Penrith (2x PM, 1x PN, 3xGP) Blue Mountains (3x PM, 1x PN, 1x GP) |
Practice Nurses (PN) | 4 (female = 4) | |
Practice Managers (PM) | 8 (female = 7) | |
Total Participants | 23 |
Major theme | Subtheme |
---|---|
Setup and Program Implementation | • Staff, contractor and committee roles • Governance structures • Funding adequacy and disbursement • Communication strategies • Providing program information • Practice-based support • Information technology challenges • Motivation to participate |
Patient and Community Education and Promotion | • General practice screening education for patients • Suggestions to promote community-based screening education • Patient empowerment |
Engaging Patients and Communities in Screening | • General practice strategies in engaging patients in screening • Challenges for general practice in engaging patients in screening |
Practice Enhancement | • Leadership and teamwork • Practice learning activities • Quality improvement initiatives • Program sustainability |
Setting up and implementing the Cancer screening program
Senior management and management here were supporting enough of the program to give us the interest and attention to help it along its way...I appreciated the early meetings which helped embed the [advisory] committee and the work they were doing. PHN 4
… it was quite useful to get financial assistance because it involved time and effort from our practice nurses. GP 1
Communications with general practices were prioritised by the NBMPHN and supported by face to face contact enabling a good understanding of individual practice needs and how to best implement improvements. Program staff at the PHN were considered accessible and supportive, providing personalised assistance. They helped practices set realistic goals and provided information including concerning data extraction.If the funding comes to the practice, I think it will be better … doctors, when they’re doing their screening - they already get paid by Medicare, or they already charge the patient. PM 2
Practice-based support also included online programs, workshops and mentoring by other staff. Practice staff described their learning and skill development and valued improvements to patient care.They began at the beginning at the program, just identifying what numbers the practice had … the size of the practice, and the staff that we have … They certainly do try to personalise it … you can get a goal that’s appropriate for this practice, so that was really good. PN 1
… program officers going out and really engaging and understanding what the practices need and having that two-way communication, not just the one-way communication where you’re updating them with changes. PHN 5
I had to learn it first so that I could relay it onto everybody else what is happening and if I didn’t have the PHN here to help me do that, I would be stuck. PM 4
Information Technology was a challenge for many practices often requiring tailored support. Practice software was described as inadequate and sometimes provided unreliable or inconsistent data with staff unable to determine which patients needed screening. There was no way to flag patients if they had been screened elsewhere or did not require screening. Valuable time was taken in patient consultations when software was difficult to operate, and not all GPs used computers. Poor connectivity between software programs and problems with data entry meant PHN staff sometimes had to extract data manually.IT support has been very good, they’ve shown us lots of opportunities that we weren’t aware of, to extract data and use that to enhance our recall programs and improve the overall care to our patients. GP 2
… in [practice software] there’s no ability for them to build a register. They actually have to do advanced queries, and those advanced queries spit out different results to what [clinical audit tool] spits out. PHN 5
… you have to add the PAP smear in manually but nobody knew that that was the case with mammograms, so there’s no historical data. Even if I started it today it would only be recorded from today...and it would be wildly inaccurate. PM 1
It takes 20 clicks … you have to go into a different section, set the reminders in and a GP’s consult is 15 minutes, the patient might have multiple issues. You are now taking away from the patient. PHN 5
Interviewees described their motivation for participating. Some noted being motivated to provide high quality patient care through better recall and screening rates. Others were motivated to role-model these activities for GP trainees. For most interviewees, financial incentives were not considered motivating.We’ve only got two doctors that use the computers completely...that also makes it difficult for PHN because then … this has to be done manually. PM 8
The cancer screening recall system wasn’t running smoothly before that, so the patient was missing care of their screening. I knew that if we got the right system in place that would be good for the patient. GP 3
Maintaining motivation was considered paramount and interviewees recommended regular, ongoing PHN support including practice meetings; auditing and frequent feedback. Comparing results with other practices, was seen as a powerful motivator by some practices. Others noted the importance of celebrating successes even small ones. Some interviewees suggested that without continued motivation, screening activities could decline, especially with competing priorities and lack of time to maintain the IT skills required.They [PHN] gave us information about the cancer screening rates within our region … they were all very low so that was a big enough incentive to … increase those levels. GP 6
It’s helpful to have PHN representation at our meetings just to remind everyone of the support that’s there. GP 4
We are a big practice, we’re a busy practice, and at the moment clinical always comes first so patient care and treatment room duties are higher up my priority list. PN 2
Patient and community education and promotion
Every month we have a health promotion drive – we have mufti days, to draw attention to it. We put the posters up, we encourage, we put pop-ups on our website for patients when they’re doing their online bookings because it goes through our website and just say, “Have you had your faecal occult checked?” whatever the topic happens to be. PM 3
I think it’s just because it’s more in the GPs minds now, so they’re likely to trigger when they’re seeing a patient and have that conversation with them. PM 7
Community-based workshops and events were also reported as promoting cancer screening. However, it was noted that some population groups such as men and Aboriginal women were hard to reach and requiring tailored education strategies. This was where involving an Aboriginal voice in the program’s implementation, who could liaise with the community, was especially helpful.I think if the health professionals, like the doctors and nurses, are talking about screening with them [patients] they're more likely to consider screening, or it might spread culturally to their friends or family, they might talk about screening with their friends or family. PN 3
… with men [for FOBT], if there was a big football game on you’d get in early to get a ticket or you’d get in early for something that you want. Now, using the same idea, we’re saying get in early to have this test - an earlier diagnosis means better treatment...PHN 3
… gathering the people [Aboriginal women] to come in, … was the really hard part. I had to build a rapport, so I mainly concentrated on trying to get that to happen. The events were easy. It was just getting the rapport, building that … they’d come but it would take a lot of chatting to them. PHN 2
Screening education was regarded as empowering consumers and it was also encouraging for practice staff to see patients engage in cancer screening.… we had an aunty [Aboriginal Elder] or two aunties mostly that used to come, and they’d provided a space to be in, and then helped with the setting up of morning teas and lunches and things. So I’ve worked closely with each of those people. PHN 2
The last three results in some women’s files is their mammogram, their FOBT, and a cervical screening, so they seem to be doing it simultaneously, they’re like, “okay well I’m on the bandwagon I might as well get it all done now”. PN 1
Engaging patients and communities in screening
You can target those people that haven’t been through and you put a warning on that patient’s file saying, “Encourage screening” and “FOBT” or whatever it might be. PN 1
However, there were challenges with other clinical priorities and similarly other patient priorities. Some patients did not respond to reminders or conversations. Equipment and technological challenges were also reported by GPs and practice staff. They related difficulties accessing bowel screening kits and with communication of results, which often required manual entry into practice software. Practice staff also described the fear and anxiety around cancer screening for some patients.We developed a policy that people will get three reminders for things, so if they’ve got a mobile, they get a text from the practice and then if nothing happens, I write to them, and then they get a phone call… [Practice manager] developed a letter saying you’re due for your cervical screening. PN 4
Sometimes … we’ve got other things as priority and … we need to look at that first … when you’re too busy you just let it go [cancer screening] … PM 2
… with breast screening and mammography, the reports were entered as documents when we got those reports back and therefore they had no coding on them … GP 1
Just public knowledge and fear, of getting the cervical screen done … it’s only a little town that we work in and they’re worried that we might talk about what their screening process involves, or they all talk about the myths, you know of getting a cervical smear done … PN 1
Practice enhancement
We have practice meetings where we all meet over a lunch time, to update them on what’s happening. So for everyone to be aware of what we want to achieve with the data extraction, they all need to know about it and why we’re doing it. GP 2
Interviewees noted that the PHN provided learning activities and responsive support throughout the program. Information was available through websites, face to face learning and through a range of resources such as screening Health Pathways and “cheat” sheets for practice staff working with IT. Practice staff described how training improved their efficiency. They became more aware of screening rates and proficient with data entry and cleansing.It has been really frustrating … it led to quite a few frustrations and initially it felt like, well, why would the staff bother when there’s no direction from the leadership, and it evolved and we decided, we’ll do it ourselves. PM 3
I've got a very good liaison officer at the PHN so if I do have any problems I usually just write to her or give her a ring and she will steer me in the right direction. PM 8
The PHN and the Local Health District and one of our doctors have been working a lot on pathways [Health Pathways] which I think is really helpful and the doctors are finding that really useful … because otherwise you’re just sending the patients from pillar to post. PM 1
Training was perceived to build staff skills and knowledge, and staff members took on additional roles. Some practice staff felt time constrained with pressing clinical responsibilities while others recommended additional learning activities such as peer to peer workshops and enhanced training for practices and staff with poor IT literacy.I think it helped improve her [PN] knowledge of particular programs and probably even the importance of updating the records and keeping all the data, doing a data cleanse … . PM 6
We've got a practice nurse who previously wasn’t doing much practice nurse stuff, was doing more reception work … now we've got her doing more practice nurse things, including looking at [data extraction tool], and doing the audits and extractions from there. GP 6
It [webinar training] was always on when it was unsuitable for me, plus I find it very hard to have the time to devote to just sitting down at the computer. PN 3
Practice staff spoke enthusiastically about quality improvements and increased screening rates. Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were reported to support setting realistic goals and implementation of appropriate activities. Practices refined recall and reminder systems, and developed proficiency in data entry and clinical audit, and in use of data extraction and other practice software. Access to Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points was valued by many GPs interviewed, although not all were aware of this incentive.We still have two GPs that don't use the computer, if they had something like IT support for them the doctors would feel more comfortable to use the computer...PN 3
This program really enabled those patients to be picked up who are actually dropping out of being screened and may have been dropping out because we weren’t reminding them. GP 1
I think that’s one of the most useful tools [PDSA] actually throughout the program because it did give the admin staff a better guidance, so it did tell us what to do, how to do it, when to do it kind of thing … PM 5
The PHN considered the support they were providing to general practices as crucial in sustaining improvements achieved. Practice staff expressed commitment to continue quality improvement initiatives but some also recommended ongoing PHN support to maintain focus on cancer screening. Most respondents thought data collection and analysis should be performed by the PHN.We were already doing screening, but we didn't have the [data extraction tool]. Or even if we did we weren't checking on our screening rates. PN 3
I try to make sure that they understand how to do that next time, because it’s important for me that once I leave the program that that becomes a sustainable practice that they are able to implement themselves. PHN 5
Once they get used to it [implementing quality improvement initiatives] they [practice staff] are quite smooth, they are quite good with it, and they are still doing it. GP 5
They [PHN] run the tests, the data extraction … probably once a quarter. I'm pretty happy with it because I don't have time to have it more often than that. PN 3
Discussion
Strengths and limitations
Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
-
Western Sydney University Human Research Ethics Committee (H12252)
-
Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of NSW (1276/17).