Changing general surgery procedures could improve care for patients and save the NHS millions

The Getting it Right First Time (GIRFT) programme has completed a review of general surgery and stated that the NHS could see a significant reduction in the amount of people unnecessarily admitted for emergency general surgery if more acute hospitals introduced consultant-led surgical assessments at their ‘front door’.

Analysis by the GIRFT team shows this change could lead to up to 30% fewer general surgery emergency admissions a year where no operation is delivered, and could cut the NHS’s annual cost for this (£361million) by £108m.

CLAHRC North Thames is evaluating the planned changes to orthopaedics, to identify lessons to inform future efforts to improve the organisation and delivery of services.

New King’s Fund report on the GIRFT programme

A new report from healthcare think tank the King’s Fund sets out progress in delivering the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) programme deliver improvements in quality and reductions in the cost of orthopaedic care in England.

Tackling variations in clinical care Assessing the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) programme gives an overview of the programme, how clinicians have responded and what it has already highlighted in terms of variations of care across the NHS.

 

 

 

 

 

The CLAHRC is carrying out an evaluation of the planned changes to orthopaedics, to identify lessons to inform future efforts to improve the organisation and delivery of services.

Trends in evidence use in public health decision-making

A new CLAHRC publication offers valuable insight into the types of evidence used by decision-makers working in public health. In 2013, responsibility for public health services and planning shifted from the “health” boundary to local authority control. These services can range from health checks to open access sexual health.

CLAHRC researchers examined English local public health decision-making in a new review of what evidence is used and how by those planning, designing and commissioning services.

The review, published in a new paper in the Journal Implementation Science identifies three clear trends in evidence use

  • the primacy of local evidence
  • the important role of local experts in providing evidence and knowledge, and
  • the high value placed on local evaluation evidence despite the varying methodological rigour.

Barriers to the use of research evidence included issues around access and availability of applicable research evidence, and indications that the use of evidence could be perceived as a bureaucratic process.

This is part of a wider project entitled Exploring decision-making processes and knowledge requirements in public health

 

Read the full paper

Kneale et al. Implementation Science (2017) 12:53
DOI 10.1186/s13012-017-0577-9
The use of evidence in English local public health decision-making: a systematic scoping review

Dylan Kneale

Dylan completed an ESRC-funded PhD at the Institute of Education (UCL) examining transitions to parenthood and a Postdoctoral Fellowship examining housing transitions, both using birth cohort data. Prior to returning to the IOE in late 2014, he was Head of Policy and Research at Relate (a charity specialising in the delivery of counselling and promotion of mental wellbeing) and Head of Research at the International Longevity Centre-UK (ILC-UK), a think-tank exploring the implications of an ageing society. At the IOE, his research broadly involves synthesising evidence for social policy and developing methods to enhance the use of evidence in decision-making, including exploring the potential of large datasets in informing social policy. Substantively he is interested in issues encompassing demography, public health and social exclusion.