Rising demand for health care has prompted interest in new technologies to support a shift of care from hospital to community and primary care, which may require clinicians to undertake new working practices. A predictive risk stratification tool (Prism) was developed for use in primary care to estimate patients’ risk of an emergency hospital admission. As part of an evaluation of Prism, we aimed to understand what might be needed to bring Prism into effective use by exploring clinicians and practice managers’ attitudes and expectations about using it. We were informed by Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) which examines the work needed to bring an innovation into use. We conducted 4 focus groups and 10 interviews with a total of 43 primary care doctors and colleagues from 32 general practices. All were recorded and transcribed. Analysis focussed in particular on the construct of ‘coherence’ within NPT, which examines how people understand an innovation and its purpose. Respondents were in agreement that Prism was a technological formalisation of existing practice, and that it would function as a support to clinical judgment, rather than replacing it. There was broad consensus about the role it might have in delivering new models of care based on active management, but there were doubts about the scope for making a difference to some patients and about whether Prism could identify at-risk patients not already known to the clinical team. Respondents did not expect using the tool to be onerous, but were concerned about the work which might follow in delivering care. Any potential value would not be of the tool in isolation, but would depend on the availability of support services. Policy imperatives and the pressure of rising demand meant respondents were open to trying out Prism, despite underlying uncertainty about what difference it could make. Controlled Clinical Trials no. ISRCTN55538212 .

Aim: We evaluated the introduction of a predictive risk stratification model (PRISM) into primary care. Contemporaneously National Health Service (NHS) Wales introduced Quality and Outcomes Framework payments to general practices to focus care on those at highest risk of emergency admission to hospital. The aim of this study was to evaluate the costs and effects of introducing PRISM into primary care. Methods: Randomised stepped wedge trial with 32 general practices in one Welsh health board. The intervention comprised: PRISM software; practice-based training; clinical support through two ‘general practitioner (GP) champions’ and technical support. The primary outcome was emergency hospital admissions. Results: Across 230 099 participants, PRISM implementation increased use of health services: emergency hospital admission rates by 1 % when untransformed (while change in log-transformed rate Δ_L=0.011, 95% CI 0.010 to 0.013); emergency department (ED) attendance rates by untransformed 3 % (while Δ_L=0.030, 95% CI 0.028 to 0.032); outpatient visit rates by untransformed 5 % (while Δ_L=0.055, 95% CI 0.051 to 0.058); the proportion of days with recorded GP activity by untransformed 1 % (while Δ_L=0.011, 95% CI 0.007 to 0.014) and time in hospital by untransformed 3 % (while Δ_L=0.029, 95% CI 0.026 to 0.031). Thus NHS costs per participant increased by £76 (95% CI £46 to £106). Conclusions: Introduction of PRISM resulted in a statistically significant increase in emergency hospital admissions and use of other NHS services without evidence of benefits to patients or the NHS.

Background: Ambulance services have a vital role in the shift towards the delivery of health care outside hospitals, when this is better for patients, by offering alternatives to transfer to the emergency department. The introduction of information technology in ambulance services to electronically capture, interpret, store and transfer patient data can support out-of-hospital care. Objective: We aimed to understand how electronic health records can be most effectively implemented in a pre-hospital context in order to support a safe and effective shift from acute to community-based care, and how their potential benefits can be maximised. Design and setting: We carried out a study using multiple methods and with four work packages: (1) a rapid literature review; (2) a telephone survey of all 13 freestanding UK ambulance services; (3) detailed case studies examining electronic health record use through qualitative methods and analysis of routine data in four selected sites consisting of UK ambulance services and their associated health economies; and (4) a knowledge-sharing workshop. Results: We found limited literature on electronic health records. Only half of the UK ambulance services had electronic health records in use at the time of data collection, with considerable variation in hardware and software and some reversion to use of paper records as services transitioned between systems. The case studies found that the ambulance services’ electronic health records were in a state of change. Not all patient contacts resulted in the generation of electronic health records. Ambulance clinicians were dealing with partial or unclear information, which may not fit comfortably with the electronic health records. Ambulance clinicians continued to use indirect data input approaches (such as first writing on a glove) even when using electronic health records. The primary function of electronic health records in all services seemed to be as a store for patient data. There was, as yet, limited evidence of electronic health records’ full potential being realised to transfer information, support decision-making or change patient care. Limitations: Limitations included the difficulty of obtaining sets of matching routine data for analysis, difficulties of attributing any change in practice to electronic health records within a complex system and the rapidly changing environment, which means that some of our observations may no longer reflect reality. Conclusions: Realising all the benefits of electronic health records requires engagement with other parts of the local health economy and dealing with variations between providers and the challenges of interoperability. Clinicians and data managers, and those working in different parts of the health economy, are likely to want very different things from a data set and need to be presented with only the information that they need. Future work: There is scope for future work analysing ambulance service routine data sets, qualitative work to examine transfer of information at the emergency department and patients’ perspectives on record-keeping, and to develop and evaluate feedback to clinicians based on patient records. Study registration: This study is registered as Health and Care Research Wales Clinical Research Portfolio 34166. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

An ageing population increases demand on health and social care. New approaches are needed to shift care from hospital to community and general practice. A predictive risk stratification tool (Prism) has been developed for general practice that estimates risk of an emergency hospital admission in the following year. We present a protocol for the evaluation of Prism. We will undertake a mixed methods progressive cluster-randomised trial. Practices begin as controls, delivering usual care without Prism. Practices will receive Prism and training randomly, and thereafter be able to use Prism with clinical and technical support. We will compare costs, processes of care, satisfaction and patient outcomes at baseline, 6 and 18 months, using routine data and postal questionnaires. We will assess technical performance by comparing predicted against actual emergency admissions. Focus groups and interviews will be undertaken to understand how Prism is perceived and adopted by practitioners and policy makers. We will model data using generalised linear models and survival analysis techniques to determine whether any differences exist between intervention and control groups. We will take account of covariates and explanatory factors. In the economic evaluation we will carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis to examine incremental cost per emergency admission to hospital avoided and will examine costs versus changes in primary and secondary outcomes in a cost-consequence analysis. We will also examine changes in quality of life of patients across the risk spectrum. We will record and transcribe focus groups and interviews and analyse them thematically. We have received full ethical and R&D approvals for the study and Information Governance Review Panel (IGRP) permission for the use of routine data. We will comply with the CONSORT guidelines and will disseminate the findings at national and international conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. The proposed study will provide information on costs and effects of Prism; how it is used in practice, barriers and facilitators to its implementation; and its perceived value in supporting the management of patients with and at risk of developing chronic conditions. Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN no. ISRCTN55538212 .

The UK shielding policy intended to protect people at the highest risk of harm from COVID-19 infection. We aimed to describe intervention effects in Wales at 1 year. Retrospective comparison of linked demographic and clinical data for cohorts comprising people identified for shielding from 23 March to 21 May 2020; and the rest of the population. Health records were extracted with event dates between 23 March 2020 and 22 March 2021 for the comparator cohort and from the date of inclusion until 1 year later for the shielded cohort. The shielded cohort included 117,415 people, with 3,086,385 in the comparator cohort. The largest clinical categories in the shielded cohort were severe respiratory condition (35.5%), immunosuppressive therapy (25.9%) and cancer (18.6%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to be female, aged ≥50 years, living in relatively deprived areas, care home residents and frail. The proportion of people tested for COVID-19 was higher in the shielded cohort (odds ratio [OR] 1.616; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.597-1.637), with lower positivity rate incident rate ratios 0.716 (95% CI 0.697-0.736). The known infection rate was higher in the shielded cohort (5.9% vs 5.7%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to die (OR 3.683; 95% CI: 3.583-3.786), have a critical care admission (OR 3.339; 95% CI: 3.111-3.583), hospital emergency admission (OR 2.883; 95% CI: 2.837-2.930), emergency department attendance (OR 1.893; 95% CI: 1.867-1.919) and common mental disorder (OR 1.762; 95% CI: 1.735-1.789). Deaths and healthcare utilisation were higher amongst shielded people than the general population, as would be expected in the sicker population. Differences in testing rates, deprivation and pre-existing health are potential confounders; however, lack of clear impact on infection rates raises questions about the success of shielding and indicates that further research is required to fully evaluate this national policy intervention.

Background. Achieving knowledge translation in healthcare is growing in importance but methods to capture impact of research are not well developed. We present an attempt to capture impact of a programme of research in prehospital emergency care, aiming to inform the development of EMS models of care that avoid, when appropriate, conveyance of patients to hospital for immediate care. Methods. We describe the programme and its dissemination, present examples of its influence on policy and practice, internationally, and analyse routine UK statistics to determine whether conveyance practice has changed. Results. The programme comprises eight research studies, to a value of >£4 m. Findings have been disseminated through 18 published papers, cited 274 times in academic journals. We describe examples of how evidence has been put into practice, including new models of care in Canada and Australia. Routine statistics in England show that, alongside rising demand, conveyance rates have fallen from 90% to 58% over a 12‐year period, 2,721 million fewer journeys, with publication of key studies 2003–2008. Comment. We have set out the rationale, key features, and impact on practice of a programme of publicly funded research. We describe evidence of knowledge translation, whilst recognising limitations in methods for capturing impact.