University College London Hospitals | May 2018 | Revolutionising healthcare with AI and data science: UCLH and The Alan Turing Institute announces breakthrough partnership today
University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and the Alan Turing Institute are working in partnership to improve healthcare through artificial intelligence (AI) and data science.
The Alan Turing Institute will use AI and machine learning techniques to enable analysis of large data sets which will identify bottlenecks and barriers, after identification these could be resolved to improve efficiency and reduce patient waiting times. (via UCLH).
Professor Marcel Levi, UCLH chief executive, said:
“With ever increasing numbers of patients and ongoing financial pressures, we need to try something different, something innovative, something longer-term. The partnership with the Alan Turing Institute provides an opportunity to work with the world’s leading data scientists to do just this.
“Imagine a scenario where patients present to A&E with abdomen pain – our standard response is to check bloods, order X-rays or scans and in probably about 80% of cases, discharge for home management. What, if through analysis of thousands of similar scenarios, we were able to identify patterns in the initial presentation of the 20% with serious conditions, such as intestinal perforation or severe infections? This could enable us to fast track them through to a scan and a swift diagnosis and could support clinical decision making to manage the 80% who need no further clinical input more effectively. Machines will never replace doctors, but the use of data, expertise and technology can radically change how we manage our services – for the better”.
Sir Alan Wilson, Institute CEO of the Alan Turing Institute, commented: “At the Turing we believe that data science and AI will revolutionise healthcare: not only through new technologies, as in the recent break-throughs in image recognition, but also through applying cutting-edge algorithms to the every-day problems facing the NHS such as A&E waiting times and other crucial services. We are very proud to be working with UCLH to begin a multi-year research partnership and driving the outputs of our research forward to deliver real impact across the whole NHS.”
This briefing looks at what the vanguards have been doing to improve the way people experience and interact with health and care services, and shares the lessons that other organisations and partnerships can take from the vanguards’ experiences | NHS Providers
This final briefing in the Learning from the new care models series highlights how the vanguards are improving the experiences of people using services and their families.
The briefing looks at the work of the vanguards in the following areas:
Coordinating care around peoples’ needs
Ensuring people receive high-quality care wherever they are
Specialist care closer to home
Reducing the need to travel
Directing people to the right care, faster
Supporting people to manage long-term conditions
Supporting people to develop self-confidence
Tailoring care for people with the greatest needs
Making access to urgent care as simple as possible
Promoting health and wellbeing among people and communities
Helping people connect
Supporting carers to stay well
Working with people to design services that work for them
The added value of patient organisations | The European Patients Forum
The objective of this report is to emphasise the contribution of patient organisations in representing and voicing the situation of a specific population that would otherwise not be represented.
Patient organisations are able to help policy-makers understand the experience of living with a disease or a condition. They use this ‘end-user perspective’ to promote the interests of patients at all stages of policy development and in a range of institutional settings.
The main activities of patient organisations are set out in four different areas: policy, capacity building and education, peer support and research & development (both health and pharmaceutical).
Although conceptual definitions of person-centred care (PCC) vary, most models value the involvement of patients through patient-professional partnerships | BMJ Open
Objective: While this may increase patients’ sense of responsibility and control, research is needed to further understand how this partnership is created and perceived. This study aims to explore the realities of partnership as perceived by patients and health professionals in everyday PCC practice.
Conclusions: In our study, patients appear to value a process of human connectedness above and beyond formalised aspects of documenting agreed goals and care planning. PCC increases patients’ confidence in professionals who are competent and able to make them feel safe and secure. Informal elements of partnership provide the conditions for communication and cooperation on which formal relations of partnership can be constructed.
Patients are increasingly being asked for feedback about their healthcare experiences. However, healthcare staff often find it difficult to act on this feedback in order to make improvements to services | Social Science and Medicine
This paper draws upon notions of legitimacy and readiness to develop a conceptual framework (Patient Feedback Response Framework – PFRF) which outlines why staff may find it problematic to respond to patient feedback.
A large qualitative study was conducted with 17 ward based teams between 2013 and 2014, across three hospital Trusts in the North of England. This was a process evaluation of a wider study where ward staff were encouraged to make action plans based on patient feedback.
Through the development of the PFRF, we found that making changes based on patient feedback is a complex multi-tiered process and not something that ward staff can simply ‘do’.
First, staff must exhibit normative legitimacy – the belief that listening to patients is a worthwhile exercise.
Second, structural legitimacy has to be in place – ward teams need adequate autonomy, ownership and resource to enact change. Some ward teams are able to make improvements within their immediate control and environment.
Third, for those staff who require interdepartmental co-operation or high level assistance to achieve change, organisational readiness must exist at the level of the hospital otherwise improvement will rarely be enacted.
Case studies drawn from our empirical data demonstrate the above. It is only when appropriate levels of individual and organisational capacity to change exist, that patient feedback is likely to be acted upon to improve services.
The two sets of guidance, and a wealth of web based resources and best practice, together supersede the original ‘Transforming Participation in Health and Care’ guidance, which was published in 2013 | NHS England
In response to user feedback, elements of the original guidance have been retained and new features introduced, including a greater focus on people with the greatest health needs, and information on the practicalities of involvement.
The links between individual and collective involvement in health are clear; people who have advanced knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their own health are more likely to get involved at a group/community level in having a say about health and health services. Equally, those who have been involved in the commissioning process (planning, buying and monitoring) health services are more likely to be informed about health and health services; they will therefore be better placed to manage their own health and be involved about decisions relating to their care and treatment.