Call for evidence: what we're looking for

Do you have evidence to support changes in respiratory policy or service interventions?

We're looking for evidence in the these areas:

  • Treatment and medicines
  • Managing lung disease (either living with it as a patient or managing it as a healthcare professional)
  • End of life care

We want real-world examples of policy or practice that would improve outcomes for lung patients if introduced or replicated across the country within the next 5 years. If you have any costing evidence related to this, please include this too. Please include up to a maximum of 3 suggested changes in your response.

What, in your experience, is the biggest barrier to improving lung health outcomes with reference to treatment and medicines or management of lung disease or end of life care?

If possible, please try to keep written submissions to a maximum of 2 pages (excluding links to published documents, where applicable).

We’re particularly interested in:

  • Evidence that hasn’t yet been widely publicised and that the Taskforce may not be aware of. If you want to highlight a published report, such as a national audit, it is ok to just send the link rather than re-writing its recommendations. However, if there are very specific recommendations within a published document, please indicate these in your submission.
  • Evidence of practice or policy which, if implemented widely, could provide benefits for large numbers of people affected by lung disease.
  • Evidence of practice or policy which, if implemented widely, could provide a very significant benefit for people affected by lung disease, such as a proven increase in life expectancy or quality of life, even if it applies to a small number of people.
  • Evidence which includes analysis of the costs and cost effectiveness of a particular practice or policy intervention.
  • Evidence of practice or policy which could feasibly be implemented within current budgetary constraints and service structures.

We'll assess and compare the evidence we receive according to its potential for reach (the number of people it could affect), impact (what difference would it make to those people), cost effectiveness (how much will it cost relative to the change it could make to people’s lives) and feasibility (how easy would it be to make this happen in the next 5 years). 

Following consultation with the stakeholder forum, each of the values will be weighted in the following way to help us achieve an overall score for each proposal: 

  • Reach - 27%
  • Impact - 29%
  • Cost effectiveness - 22%
  • Feasibility - 22%

For the treatment and medicines theme

We're particularly interested in:

  • Evidence of how to improve patient access to approved medicines.
  • Evidence on the effectiveness of smoking cessation as a treatment for lung disease.
  • Evidence of how to improve patient access to non-pharmacological treatments.
  • Evidence on effective treatment of lung disease in the context of multi-morbidity.
  • Evidence on how we can increase patient participation in clinical trials.
  • Evidence on how data collection could be improved to ensure we have accurate information on what treatments patients are receiving.

For the living with a lung disease (management) theme

We're particularly interested in:

  • Evidence on workforce training to improve management of lung disease.
  • Evidence of how to embed established best practice, such as provision of pulmonary rehabilitation, across the health service.
  • Evidence of models of care which lead to patient-reported improvement in quality of life and ability to manage their own condition.
  • Evidence on how to make best use of social prescribing, such as peer support and exercise.
  • Evidence on how to ensure healthcare professionals have effective patient-centred conversations about managing their condition.
  • Evidence on how the health service can better use recurring appointments for patients to maximum effect.
  • Evidence on the most effective technology for patients in helping them to manage their disease.
  • Evidence on how to provide high quality palliative care, tailored to the needs of respiratory patients.
  • Evidence on how to offer appropriate emotional and mental health support to patients.

For the end of life theme

We're particularly interested in:

  • Evidence of tools or indicators which can help clinicians identify when a respiratory patient is approaching the end of life.

  • Evidence on how clinicians can be properly equipped to have patient-centred conversations and support decision making about end of life.

  • Evidence on how patients' decisions and preferences can be effectively shared with other health professionals.

  • Evidence on how to provide high quality end of life treatment, care and support, tailored to the needs of respiratory patients