Abstract
Objective
The Malta–UK cross-border health care collaboration gives Maltese patients access to highly specialized care that is not available locally. Our aim was to identify the issues that arise in cross-border specialized care for rare childhood diseases.
Methods
We conducted 31 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with policy makers, consultant pediatricians from Mater Dei Hospital in Malta, the Royal Marsden Hospital and Great Ormond Street Hospital in England and the parents of a random sample of children referred for treatment abroad in 2011. We conducted qualitative thematic analysis of the data.
Results
Respondents viewed the collaboration as successful in providing timely access to high quality specialist care. Four factors facilitated implementation: long established personal relationships; communication and data sharing; shared care approach; and well established support systems. The key challenges are logistical, financial, communication and cultural and psychological.
Conclusion
Cross-border care pathways can successfully support access to high quality specialized care that is acceptable to health professionals and patients.
Introduction
A key factor of the debate on cross-border movement of patients within the European Union (EU), culminating in 2011 in the adoption of the Directive on Patients’ Rights in Cross Border Healthcare, 1 has been the potential to provide highly specialized care to those with diseases affecting less than one person in 2000. The Directive seeks to “help small countries with insufficient resources from their health care sector to provide a full range of highly specialized services of the highest quality”, although the same general approach may be useful within countries, illustrated by a recent study of children from Campania needing to obtain care in central and north Italian regions. 2 Although one of the principles underpinning the debate on the management of rare diseases within the EU is that “expertise should travel rather than patients themselves”, “it should be possible for patients to travel to centers when necessary”. 3
Moving to another country can benefit patients but also has drawbacks, such as the need to undertake a journey when unwell and the experience of receiving treatment in an unfamiliar setting far from friends and family. 4 Information on these drawbacks and on ways of overcoming them has been the subject of little research, in part because the incorporation of such mobility into EU policies is recent. 5 It is possible to gain insights from the Malta–United Kingdom (UK) health care collaboration which is based on a reciprocal agreement drawn up in 1975 and updated in 1989 and 2006. 6
The Maltese health care system is funded from general taxation and serves a population of 416,055. 7 It is free at the point of use with requests for overseas referrals originating from Mater Dei Hospital (MDH) which patients with rare diseases attend. Despite continually increasing government expenditure on health care and service developments, Malta’s small population means that the need to send some patients overseas remains. 8 The Malta–UK agreement provides for the referral of a quota of Maltese patients for treatment every year in the UK National Health Service (NHS). 9 In return, British citizens who are temporarily resident in Malta and British pensioners and workers who are permanently resident in Malta are entitled to free health care through a mechanism that is separate from existing EU regulations.
This study is one of four undertaken as part of the Evaluation of Care Across Borders (ECAB) project on cross-border care collaborations. One of the biggest challenges these collaborations face is achievement of a seamless transition of patients between services, 9 with defined care pathways offering a means to achieve this.10,11 Our aim was to describe pediatric cross-border care pathways and to identify factors that support or hinder its operation as reported by policy makers, health professionals and patients’ parents.
Methods
We reviewed previous research, 8 policy documents, 6 and activity data 12 relevant to the Malta–UK pediatric cross-border collaboration. We also conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 6 policy makers, 8 health professionals and 17 parents of patients, using a topic guide that focused on the factors that support service planning and implementation and the challenges that both professionals and parents face. Policy makers included the Maltese Chief Medical Officer, the Maltese High Commissioner to the UK and staff of the Treatment Abroad Unit of the Maltese Ministry of Health, the Elderly and Community Care (MHEC). Health professionals were Maltese and British consultant pediatricians caring for patients referred for treatment abroad in cardiology, oncology, nephrology, neonatology and general pediatrics at MDH in Malta. They included both acute and elective referrals to Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) and the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) in London.
We drew a random sample of 11 (8%) children who had been referred for treatment abroad in 2011 by selecting every 10th patient from all referrals across all specialities (n = 135). Their parents were contacted by phone and information sheets and consent forms mailed to them. Interviews were conducted with one or both parents (or legal guardians), depending on availability and preference. Parents of children who had died since their referral or who were still in England receiving treatment at the time of interview were excluded from the study. The parents of two patients were unable to find time for the interview during the data collection period and so two further randomly selected patients were recruited.
All interviews were conducted face to face in Maltese or English according to the interviewees’ preference, recorded and transcribed in English. The interviews were coded in NVIVO using a coding frame that was developed as key themes emerged as the analysis was conducted. Triangulation of data from different sources and types of respondent sought to ensure that an accurate picture emerged and that the breadth of experience of patients and providers was captured. The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Ethics Committee and the Malta Health Ethics Committee granted approval for the study.
Results
Malta–UK bilateral agreement and service activity
The agreement provides for free treatment of up to 180 Maltese patients in the UK every year, with patients referred over and above this quota incurring a charge to the Maltese Government. The annual cost to the Maltese Government is around €2.5 million, including administration of the program and referrals in excess of the quota. The services offered are free of charge to the patient. The number of patients requiring treatment in the UK has varied over the years and has always exceeded the agreed quota. In the 1990s, there was a sharp decrease in numbers following the introduction of a cardiac surgery program and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Malta. Over the past decade, the number has been rising slowly and currently around 300 are referred annually, with about a third being children. 12 The majority is in ophthalmology (21%), cardiac surgery (14%), oncology (11%) and neurology (11%). 12
Malta–UK pediatric patient care pathway
When Maltese clinicians decide that it may be appropriate to refer a patient abroad, they discuss the case with the relevant British expert and, if they jointly agree that the patient could benefit from specialist investigations or treatment, a formal application is submitted to the Treatment Abroad Advisory Committee (TAAC) for approval (details appear in Supplementary material). The TAAC of the MHEC, the Treatment Abroad Section (TAS) at Mater Dei Hospital and the Malta High Commission (MHC) in London collaborate to assess the eligibility of patients, manage the referral process and organize transport and accommodation logistics. The TAAC uses several criteria to assess if a new service or treatment should be approved for overseas referral: a proven treatment for the disease exists; the treatment is not available locally; there is evidence of benefit for the patient; and the treatment is approved by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and is provided on the NHS in the UK.
In the case of urgent referrals, approval from the TAAC is made verbally in the first instance so that transfer of the patient is not delayed. Transfers that involve intensive care support are organized with Air Malta (very rarely an air ambulance is used) via Heathrow Airport to a London hospital, requiring a clinical team to travel with the patient. Protocols, procedures, equipment and training are in place to support health care professionals accompanying the patient and total transfer time has been reduced to an average of 8 h from ‘door-to-door’ with the final part of the journey coordinated by the Heathrow Ambulance Service.
Visiting consultant clinics
The Malta–UK collaboration includes British physicians in 12 sub-specialties regularly visiting Malta to conduct outpatient clinics to follow-up patients who received treatment abroad and identify new cases who may benefit from an overseas referral. In addition, twice a year, Mater Dei Hospital functions as a tertiary center when cardiac catheter interventions are conducted by a visiting pediatric cardiologist on 20–30 patients who are spared a trip abroad. The clinics are not covered by the Malta–UK bilateral agreement but are delivered through Service Level Agreements with the overseas specialists. Wherever possible, patients are seen in Malta in the clinics as this is more cost effective than an overseas referral and is also less burdensome on the patients and their families. It also has the additional benefit of contributing to capacity building within the local health care teams through the exchange of expertise and training.
Factors that support service implementation
The interviews identified four factors that support the implementation of the cross-border service: longevity and personal relationships; communication and data sharing; shared care approach; and well established support systems.
Longevity and personal relationships
The Malta–UK bilateral agreement is grounded in longstanding historical links between the two countries: “The key strengths of the service arise from its longevity and well established systems … … . The whole process is well oiled and well established.” (Policy maker)
Many of the Maltese doctors referring patients abroad spent part of their post-graduate medical training in the UK and are familiar with the British health care system. During their time in the UK these doctors invariably developed enduring professional and personal relationships with colleagues which form the foundation for the links with referral centers. The UK specialists endeavor to maintain a single point of contact in Malta, facilitating clear and prompt communication. They share new protocols and guidelines and, usually Maltese doctors are able to contact UK specialists directly via phone or email to discuss cases as they arise. Clinical decisions about referrals can be made promptly, as explained by one health professional: “when you have enough numbers you can establish a well oiled service with established protocols and procedures and you can get to know the doctors at the other end very well.” (Maltese doctor)
This, together with years of fruitful working relationships, has established confidence and trust in the Maltese professionals:
“With overseas patients it always works better if you know who you’re dealing with at the other end. […] Even if you never met somebody personally but work with them over a distance over a period of time you do establish a good working relationship. And I’m sure that’s the most important thing really because you have to be confident in the referrals that you’re getting, and people in Malta have to be confident that we will deal with what’s needed and will send the patient back sorted.” (British doctor)
Maltese doctors are confident that their referrals will be dealt with swiftly; in fact urgent cases can be seen by UK specialists within 24 h although it usually takes at least 48 h if passports need to be issued. The main limiting factor for most referrals is bed availability in the UK but this is the same challenge faced by NHS patients in England referred to specialist tertiary centers.
Communication and data sharing
Communication between health professionals and patients is straightforward because English is one of the official languages in Malta and all health professionals and most patients and their relatives have a good working knowledge. When patients and their relatives do not understand English, UK health professionals are aware of the free interpreting service offered by Maltese Franciscan friars in London. Parents reported that the consenting process was clear and explicit in the UK and that they perceived a greater involvement in decision making with regards to their child’s care when compared to Malta: “the best thing about the care in London is that our son is reviewed by a multidisciplinary team and they then discuss treatment options with us in a very candid way.” (Parent)
Full medical records are not shared between the two countries but health professionals can access relevant information through the electronic or physical exchange of detailed patient summaries, results of biochemical, radiological and pathology investigations. Health professionals communicate by phone or email and maintain an open dialogue about patients, keeping each other updated with developments. The initial referral will include a detailed patient summary and, every time the patient is seen in the UK, the Maltese clinicians are updated on the assessment, investigations, interventions and care plan, including follow-up, through a letter (patient discharge summary): “When we arrived at the hospital the Consultant knew everything about my son’s case because the Maltese doctors had brought him up to date. I brought the case summary and investigations with me. They explained in great detail what procedure they were going to carry out on my son and why.” (Parent)
Shared care approach
The service is implemented using a ‘shared care’ approach, a model of integrated health care delivery based on collaboration between Maltese and UK health care professionals. Two interviewees explain that: “these personal acquaintances then become care sharing opportunities. The shared-care approach is a multidimensional type of arrangement where a relationship with a hospital and a particular consultant is present.” “[…] it works on mutual respect. Shared care has that as the basis. We recognise the Maltese team’s extremely good training and their good sound clinical judgment and the ability to produce really good data on echo.” (British doctor)
All the investigations and interventions that can be done in Malta are done there but when patients arrive in the UK they follow the same care pathways as NHS patients and are managed using the same protocols and procedures: “From a practical point of view we don’t make a distinction between Maltese patients and UK patients, we’re able to give them the same treatment provided all the correspondence is in place from the Malta High Commission.” (British doctor)
The tertiary centers in the NHS adopt the same principles of shared care that they would with District General Hospitals or primary care providers in the UK, with an emphasis on good communication and accurate and timely transfer of information.
When patients return to Malta, the local clinicians ensure continuity of care, implementing the agreed care plan and follow-up as appropriate through out-patient clinics in Malta, visiting consultants’ clinics or planned reviews in the UK. The clinics are reported to be highly successful because the Maltese team prepare all the patients with up to date notes and investigations and the clinics are run jointly by the Maltese and British team, providing opportunities for learning and service development. The British clinicians expressed confidence that agreed plans would be followed by their Maltese counterparts.
Well established support systems
The health care provided is supported by well-functioning systems for transport, accommodation and communication. Patients have named contacts in Malta and the UK to help with logistics and staff often work beyond their job description, offering voluntary support to patients. A number of charities offer social, psychological and financial support to patients and their families who often have to rapidly come to terms with making an unexpected journey under difficult circumstances. There is often uncertainty around the duration of the patient’s stay and plans can change as the clinical picture evolves, so the system has to be flexible to accommodate this. The NHS also offers flexibility when booking follow-up appointments, which can be organized outside term-time so that children do not miss out on school.
Reported challenges
Interviewees were overwhelmingly positive about the service and expressed their hope that the collaboration continues. However, delivering a cross-border service presents a number of challenges for health professionals and patients alike. We describe these under four themes: logistical; financial; communication and cultural; and psychological.
Logistical challenges
The first time that patients travel to the UK for treatment they are at their most vulnerable, especially if there is uncertainty about the diagnosis, prognosis and expected duration of stay. As one interviewee put it: “We did not know how long we would have to stay in London for, in these situations the treatment plan is decided on a day by day basis and everything depended on the outcome of the operation.” (Parent)
Although there are well established systems in place to support the organization of travel and accommodation for patients and their families, they often report being unsure of what to expect and the idea of traveling to a big city like London can seem daunting. Getting around on public transport with a small child is reported as being a challenge, particularly so when the child has limited mobility. Most parents interviewed reported that their employers were flexible and supportive, although there were concerns in cases of prolonged absence or when frequent travel was required. Parents were grateful for the subsidized accommodation provided by Maltese Franciscan nuns in London. Families attending GOSH preferred the hospital accommodation, whose location makes it more convenient and cheaper, but space may not always be available and only short stays are allowed. Some parents remarked that they were unaware of this accommodation until their arrival at GOSH. For non-urgent cases, there are occasional delays with obtaining follow-up appointments and those families who travel to England regularly become used to navigating the system and often communicate directly with clinical teams.
Financial challenges
Although patients and their carers do not incur any direct health care related costs they face costs related to travel and accommodation combined with potential loss of income. Living costs in central London can be very high, particularly for those families staying for a prolonged period of time, contributing to a significant financial burden. However, the patient group who tend to have the longest stays are the oncology patients who are able to access free accommodation in apartments near the hospital, which are run by the Puttinu Cares Foundation (a Maltese charity) and funded by the Maltese Government. In the long term, families can also face loss of income due to prolonged absence from work when caring for a sick child. As explained by one parent: “when we came back after those 9 months in London we had used up all of our savings and we were in a very difficult financial position [….]. I was not able to work because I was constantly taking care of him and it is difficult to keep up a job when you have to leave at the drop of a hat.” (Parent)
The Maltese Government provides an allowance for meals for patients when they are no longer hospitalized but remain under review as an out-patient. The MHEC, TAS and MHC work closely with a number of charities that offer financial support to families, picking up some of the costs that are not covered by the agreement. They support all families who request help but will provide particular attention to those who are most needy with some assistance provided on a means tested basis. Patients with rare diseases may have more difficulty raising funds if a relevant disease-specific charity does not exist and some families take their own initiative to raise money through local communities and support networks.
Cultural and communication challenges
Communication with parents can be a challenge when they have just received a diagnosis of a serious illness and learned that they may be referred for treatment abroad: “First of all the families are in shock about the diagnosis and the fact that they need to go abroad for treatment. They start getting information from lots of different sources. Malta is small and people are able to get connected easily. But this means that they may get conflicting information and messages and it can be a challenge to correct this misinformation and explain to patients/carers that … specifics of treatment for one case may not apply to them.” (Key informant)
Overall the NHS was perceived to be excellent at responding to patients’ and relatives’ cultural needs and there were numerous accounts of NHS staff going out of their way to support Maltese families. Maltese culture has the family at its core13,14 and when patients are unwell the extended family comes together to provide support. This means that a number of relatives may accompany the patient and this is reported as sometimes being challenging for NHS staff to manage, especially when visitor policies are not respected. Another key challenge is around communicating the kind of NHS care that tertiary centers provide. Patients and relatives are often unaware that these centers do not offer a full spectrum of health care and that if their child needs emergency care then they may be referred to a different hospital, which can cause undue stress and anxiety. Inevitably there are different approaches to service delivery in the two countries and some parents report feeling worried when, for example, their child is discharged from hospital at what they perceive to be soon after an intervention.
Psychological challenges
The parents’ stories of the period leading up to their child’s diagnosis were all unique but equally difficult, full of uncertainty and anxiety. These emotions were heightened when the diagnosis was made immediately after the birth of the child, when both mother and baby are at their most vulnerable. Soon after coming to terms with the diagnosis the parents were then faced with the prospect of their child’s referral to the UK for further investigations or treatment. All the parents interviewed took this news in their stride, being aware of the provisions for rare illnesses and having full confidence that this was the best option for their child. Parents whose children were emergency transfers, sometimes with intensive care support, have a different experience to those less urgent transfers when families have a longer time to get used to the idea of the referral and to plan for practical challenges such as child care for family members left behind and obtaining approval for time off work. The stress about the uncertain outcome of the child’s treatment and the caring role that the parents may need to assume was reported by some to be overwhelming when combined with being in an unfamiliar place: “In the beginning, the first time we went up, it was very traumatic, a very difficult experience for us. Thankfully the operation was successful. It took me at least 2 weeks to accept the fact that my son had made it and really alive and going to get better.” (Parent)
One of the biggest challenges for the parents is being away from family and friends, which can leave them feeling isolated and vulnerable. This combined with the significant financial pressures can sometimes lead to strained relationships. Several parents described long days spent at their child’s bedside with no reprieve and, in the absence of relatives, they often turn to health professionals for support. To a large extent the multidisciplinary teams provide psychological support for the family but, in some cases, parents are referred to a social worker or psychologist: “We found support in each other and from the health professionals in the hospital whom we felt comfortable enough with to share our feelings.”(Parent) “They welcomed us with open arms and we met so many incredible health professionals who were ready to support us with everything.” (Parent)
Discussion
Policy makers, health professionals and patients value the Malta–UK cross-border collaboration as it meets a clear patient need and is also a vehicle for professional and service development. Our findings highlight four factors that support the implementation of this cross-border service: first, the longevity of the service has allowed personal relationships to flourish, establishing mutual confidence and trust between professionals. Second, language is not a barrier between health professionals and patients and health professionals communicate regularly sharing data and keeping each other up-to-date with developments. Third, the service is implemented through a model of integrated health care delivery across borders which involves both patient and health care professional mobility. The success of the approach is based on collaboration, a clear understanding and respect of roles and responsibilities, good communication and accurate and timely transfer of information to support continuity of care. And fourth, well established support systems for transport, accommodation and communication combined with flexible health care systems that are responsive to the needs of patients and their families.
Implementing a service to deliver specialist care for rare diseases across borders presents a number of challenges. The first is logistical, and although there are well established systems to support travel and accommodation for patients and their families, they are often unsure what to expect and uncertainty around the duration of stay can cause problems with employers. The second is financial, with accommodation and cost of flights for relatives, transport and food in London posing a significant financial burden. The third is cultural, whereby the different approaches to service delivery in the two countries can take some time for parents to get used to. Finally, parents face difficult psychological challenges when coming to terms with their child’s diagnosis, a referral to the UK, possible prolonged absence from work, separation from family and friends and financial difficulties.
This study has a number of limitations. First, we were only able to conduct a small number of interviews with parents. However, the accounts they gave were consistent with each other and with information provided by health professionals. Second, caution is required because the Malta–UK collaboration has some specific features that do not apply to other settings, including the fact that many Maltese doctors have trained in the UK and that the Maltese and UK approaches to specialist training are virtually identical. Cultural and linguistic differences do not pose a particular challenge in this example but these may be important in other cross-border care collaborations for rare diseases within the EU.
Our study offers valuable lessons accumulated from 37 years of experience that are applicable to other contexts and cross-border collaborations. The Malta–UK collaboration is a good example of how cross-border collaborations in the context of rare diseases can serve to support local service development and innovation through the exchange of training and expertise with centers for excellence. The strict referral criteria and protocols and centralized authorization process have ensured that only those patients who would benefit from treatment abroad are referred and the visiting consultant clinics complement this by providing the opportunity for joint follow up and management of patients without an overseas referral.
While the Directive on Patients’ Rights and Cross Border Health Care 1 had its inception in two European Court of Justice Rulings involving relatively straightforward cross-border provision of Services (spectacles and dental treatment15,16), the trend towards the development of Centres of Reference for Rare Diseases will mean that patients with serious and chronic conditions might take the opportunities arising from cross-border care. The impact will be greatest in the small EU Member States which are unlikely to have the required volumes and consequent expertise and resources in the area of rare diseases. Local authorities must also be mindful of the potential for cross-border patient mobility encouraged by the Directive 1 to divert resources abroad, to the detriment of local service development and innovation.
This study contributes to a small but growing body of literature that offers insights into the relationships between referring district hospitals and specialized referral centers in larger countries, so as to provide seamless transitions for patients. What literature exists consists largely of studies of assisted reproductive services17,18 which may have limited implications for the wider issue of cross-border care. There is a need for further research into cultural, linguistic and other differences that have an impact on patients receiving cross-border care, particularly children and their families. Children are likely to be over represented in cross-border care because of rare disorders. 19
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
We thank the parents and patients that participated in this study for allowing us into their homes and sharing their experiences with us, and the health professionals and policy makers for giving up their time and providing us with the information and documents.
Funding
This work was supported by the European Union 7th Framework Programme EU Cross Border Care Collaboration (EUCBCC). Contract no: 242058. Sole responsibility lies with the authors and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. The funder played no role in the design of the study, the interpretation of the findings, the writing of the paper, or the decision to submit.
