Skip to main content

A mixed methods evaluation of the Integrated Care Pilot in North-West London

The North-West London Integrated Care Pilot (ICP), originally launched for one year in July 2011 and later extended for a further year, is a large-scale change programme involving two hospitals, two mental health providers, three community health care service providers, five municipal providers of social care, two non-governmental organisations and (by April 2012) 103 general practitioners. Its aims are to improve health outcomes and reduce unnecessary admissions to hospital by pro-actively managing people living with diabetes and/or those aged 75+ through creating better access to more integrated care outside hospital and by enabling effective working of professionals across organisations.  In a paper published in the International Journal of Integrated Care, researchers from Imperial College London and the Nuffield Trust describe the results of the evaluation of the first year of the programme. The evaluation was funded by the Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Charity and the NIHR CLAHRC for NW London.

We found that the pilot had successfully engaged provider organisations, created a shared strategic vision and established governance structures. However, the engagement of clinicians was variable and there was no evidence during the first year of the pilot of a significant reductions in emergency admissions. However, there was some evidence of changes in care processes. We concluded that although the pilot has demonstrated the beginnings of large-scale change, it remains in the early stages and faces significant challenges as it seeks to become sustainable for the longer term. The pilot also showed the importance of National Health Service managers and clinicians having realistic expectations of what can be achieved in a relatively short period of time when implementing major changes in local health services. The evaluation contributed to our understanding of the process and mechanisms of establishing a large-scale integrated care project within health and social care in the National Health Service (See Box 1). It has clearly highlighted the challenges and tensions involved in such a pilot and underlined the need for thorough evaluation and research over a long period of time in order to detect impact.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

UK Covid-19 Inquiry - The Importance of a Strong Primary Healthcare System

In my witness statement for Module 10 of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, I discuss the pandemic's impact through from the perspectives of  primary care and public health, drawing on my extensive experience as a senior academic at Imperial College London and as a practising GP and NHS Public Health Specialist.  I emphasise that the pandemic disproportionately affected people who were clinically vulnerable, the disabled, ethnic minority communities and those living in deprived areas. The pandemic highlighted how structural inequalities, multigenerational housing, and employment in high-risk frontline roles exacerbated health disparities.  My statement also critiques the weakening of public health infrastructure - particularly for the control of infectious diseases - and the lack of integrated health data systems to identify at-risk groups such as the clinically vulnerable. I also advocated for a more robust preventive healthcare model that prioritises community-based primary care ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Relevance Over Recall: Rethinking How AI Uses Clinical Data

Our article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine argues that safe and effective AI in healthcare must incorporate mechanisms that emulate human judgement - down-weighting old, inaccurate or superseded information and prioritising what is recent, clinically relevant and reaffirmed - so that AI supports, rather than disrupts, high-quality patient care.  Clinicians constantly revise, reinterpret and filter past information so that only what is relevant, accurate and timely shapes present-day management decisions; medical records function as dynamic “working tools” rather than fixed archives. By contrast, many AI systems lack this capacity for selective forgetting and often treat all historical data as equally meaningful.  This can lead to outdated or low-confidence diagnoses being repeatedly resurfaced, persistent labels influencing clinical expectations, and irrelevant, long-resolved events cluttering summaries and decision-support outputs. Such indiscriminate recall...
Post a Comment
Read more