Children and Young People's Health Partnership (CYPHP) Evelina London model of care: protocol for an opportunistic cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) to assess child health outcomes, healthcare quality and health service use

James Joseph Newham, Julia Forman, Michelle Heys, Simon Cousens, Claire Lemer, Mohamed Elsherbiny, Rose-Marie Satherley, Raghu Lingam, Ingrid Wolfe, James Joseph Newham, Julia Forman, Michelle Heys, Simon Cousens, Claire Lemer, Mohamed Elsherbiny, Rose-Marie Satherley, Raghu Lingam, Ingrid Wolfe

Abstract

Introduction: Children and young people (CYP) in many high-income settings have poor healthcare outcomes, especially those with long-term conditions (LTCs). Emergency and outpatient hospital service use is increasing unsustainably. To address these problems, the Children and Young People's Health Partnership (CYPHP) has developed and is evaluating an integrated model of care as part of a health systems strengthening programme across two boroughs of London, UK that are characterised by mixed ethnic populations and varying levels of deprivation. The CYPHP Evelina London model of care comprises proactive case-finding and triage, specialist clinics and transformative education and training for professionals working with CYP. Services are delivered by multidisciplinary health teams with an emphasis on increased coordination across primary, community and hospital settings and integration of physical and mental healthcare that accounts for the CYP's social context.

Methods and analysis: The phased roll out of the CYPHP Evelina London model allows an opportunistic population-based evaluation using a cluster randomised controlled trial design. Seventy general practices across two London boroughs, grouped into 23 clusters, were randomised to provide either the CYPHP model of care (n=11) or enhanced usual care (n=12).The evaluation will measure the impact of the CYPHP Evelina London model of care on child and parent health and well-being, healthcare quality and health service use up to 2 years postimplementation. A population-level evaluation will use routinely collected pseudonymised healthcare data to conduct a service-use analysis for all CYP registered with a participating general practice (n=~90 000) with the rate of non-elective admissions as the primary outcome. We will seek consent from a subset of this population, with specific conditions (target n=2138) to assess the impact on patient-reported outcomes using the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) and Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEBWMS) as, respectively, the child- and parent-related primary outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval obtained from South West-Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Findings will be generalisable to community-based models of care, especially in urban settings. Our process evaluation will identify barriers and enablers of implementation and delivery of care salient to the context and condition.

Trial registration number: NCT03461848; Pre-results.

Keywords: child health; cluster randomised controlled trial; integrated care.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Timeline of cluster randomised controlled trial process. CYPHP, Children and Young People’s Health Partnership.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Diagram of patients, services and levels of the evaluation. CYPHP, Children and Young People’s Health Partnership; CYP, children and young people; QALY, quality-adjusted life year.

References

    1. Fraser J, Sidebotham P, Frederick J, et al. . Learning from child death review in the USA, England, Australia, and New Zealand. Lancet 2014;384:894–903. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61089-2
    1. Hardelid P, Dattani N, Davey J, et al. . Overview of child deaths in the four UK countries. Child Health Reviews–UK. London: Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. 2013. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. Wolfe I, Thompson M, Gill P, et al. . Health services for children in western Europe. Lancet 2013;381:1224–34. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62085-6
    1. Liu T, Lingam R, Lycett K, et al. . Parent-reported prevalence and persistence of 19 common child health conditions. Arch Dis Child 2018;103:548–56. 10.1136/archdischild-2017-313191
    1. Miller GF, Coffield E, Leroy Z, et al. . Prevalence and costs of five chronic conditions in children. J Sch Nurs 2016;32:357–64. 10.1177/1059840516641190
    1. Mansfield A. BMA board of Science. Growing up in the UK: ensuring a healthy future for our children BMA. 2013. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. Wolfe I, Cass H, Thompson MJ, et al. . Improving child health services in the UK: insights from Europe and their implications for the NHS reforms. BMJ 2011;342:d1277 10.1136/bmj.d1277
    1. Cheung R. International comparisons of health and wellbeing in early childhood. 2018. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. Viner RM, Blackburn F, White F, et al. . The impact of out-of-hospital models of care on paediatric emergency department presentations. Arch Dis Child 2018;103:128–36. 10.1136/archdischild-2017-313307
    1. Braithwaite J. Changing how we think about healthcare improvement. BMJ 2018;361:k2014 10.1136/bmj.k2014
    1. Davies SC, Lemer C, Strelitz J, et al. . Our children deserve better: prevention pays. Lancet 2013;382:1383–4. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62004-8
    1. Brussels European Union. European commission health and consumers directorate‐general. The 2014 EU summit on chronic diseases: conference conclusions. 2014. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. NHS England. Five Year Forward View. 2014. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. World Health Organization. Integrated care models: An overview. WHO Regional Office for Europe. 2016. (accessed 15 Oct 2018).
    1. Wolfe I, Satherley R, Scotney E, et al. . A systematic review and meta-analysis of integrated and chronic care models to improve child health. Submitted to JAMA Pediatr 2018.
    1. Das R, Forman J, Elsherbiny M, et al. . The relationships between deprivation and hospital service use for children and young people locally and nationally: Learning from research to inform innovative service delivery and tackle inequalities Presented at HERON Conference: London, England, 2018.
    1. Wolfe I, Lemer C, Heys M, et al. . New integrated care models to improve health, healthcare quality, and patterns of service use among children and young people Presented at Public Health England Conference. Warwick, England, 2018.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, et al. . Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care 2005;14:26–33. 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155
    1. Caille A, Kerry S, Tavernier E, et al. . Timeline cluster: a graphical tool to identify risk of bias in cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2016;354:i4291 10.1136/bmj.i4291
    1. Varni JW, Seid M, Rode CA. The PedsQL: measurement model for the pediatric quality of life inventory. Med Care 1999;37:126–39. 10.1097/00005650-199902000-00003
    1. Goodman R. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1997;38:581–6. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x
    1. Meltzer H, Gatward R, Corbin T, et al. . The mental health of young people looked after by local authorities in England. London: The Stationery Office, 2003.
    1. Nathan RA, Sorkness CA, Kosinski M, et al. . Development of the asthma control test. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;113:59–65.
    1. Charman CR, Venn AJ, Williams HC. The patient-oriented eczema measure: development and initial validation of a new tool for measuring atopic eczema severity from the patients' perspective. Arch Dermatol 2004;140:1513–9. 10.1001/archderm.140.12.1513
    1. Stevens K. The development of a preference based paediatric health related quality of life measure for use in economic evaluation: The University of Sheffield, 2008.
    1. Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, et al. . The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007;5:63 10.1186/1477-7525-5-63
    1. Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Seid M, et al. . The PedsQL 4.0 as a pediatric population health measure: feasibility, reliability, and validity. Ambul Pediatr 2003;3:329–41. 10.1367/1539-4409(2003)003<0329:TPAAPP>;2
    1. Hammersley VS, Walker S, Elton R, et al. . Protocol for the adolescent hayfever trial: cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational intervention for healthcare professionals for the management of school-age children with hayfever. Trials 2010;11:84 10.1186/1745-6215-11-84
    1. Kidger J, Stone T, Tilling K, et al. . A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a support and training intervention to improve the mental health of secondary school teachers and students - the WISE (Wellbeing in Secondary Education) study. BMC Public Health 2016;16:1060 10.1186/s12889-016-3737-y
    1. Hayes RJ, Moulton LH. Cluster Randomised Trials. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.
    1. Thorne K, Jerzembek GS, Cheung W-Y, et al. . MATRICS: a method for aggregating the reporting of interventions in complex studies. Trials 2011;12:A147 10.1186/1745-6215-12-S1-A147

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren