Search

Background: On average, people with schizophrenia and psychosis die 13-30 years sooner than the general population (World Psychiatry 10 (1):52-77, 2011). Mental and physical health care is often provided by different organisations, different practitioners and in different settings which makes collaborative care difficult. Research is needed to understand and map the impact of new collaborative ways of working at the primary/secondary care interface (PloS One 7 (5); e36468). The evaluation presented in this paper was designed to explore the potential of a Community and Physical Health Co-ordinator role (CPHC) (CPHCs were previously Care Co-ordinators within the Community Mental Health Team, Community in the title CPHC refers to Community Mental Health) and Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) meetings across primary and community care, with the aim of improving collaboration of mental and physical health care for service users with Severe Mental Illness (SMI). Methods: Data collection took place across five general practices (GPs) and a Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) in the Northwest of England, as part of a process evaluation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of GP staff (n= 18) and CMHT staff (n=4), a focus group with CMHT staff (n=8) and a survey completed by 13 CMHT staff, alongside cardiovascular risk data and MDT actions. Framework analysis was used to manage and interpret data. Results: The results from the evaluation demonstrate that a CPHC role and MDT meetings are effective mechanisms for improving the collaboration and co-ordination of physical health care for SMI service users. The findings highlight the importance of embedding and supporting the CPHC role, with an emphasis on protected time and continuing professional roles and integrating multiple perspectives through MDT meetings. Considering the importance of physical health care for SMI service users and the complex environment, these are important findings for practitioners, researchers and policy makers in the field of primary care and mental health. Conclusion: There is an increasing focus on integration and collaborative working to ensure the delivery of quality care across the whole patient pathway, with a growing need for professionals to work together across service and professional boundaries. The introduction of a two pronged approach to collaboration has shown some important improvements in the management of physical health care for service users with SMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives This article considers evidence regarding lay involvement in the NHS, following the White Paper’s commitment to rebuild public confidence in an NHS ‘accountable to patients and open to the public and shaped by their views’. It looks at two aspects of lay involvement: the lay board member’s involvement in primary care group (PCG) decision-making and the engagement of the PCG with the wider public. Methods The paper analyses data from the first sweep of the annual Tracker Survey of a sample of PCGs in England, led by the National Primary Care Research and Development Centre in collaboration with the King’s Fund between September and December 1999. It draws specifically from the postal questionnaires sent to lay members. Firstly, however, it contextualizes this data by reviewing the history of lay involvement before 1997 in the NHS and particularly in primary care. Conclusions The paper concludes that, during the first 6 months of their operation, the lay voice was faintly heard in PCGs. The lay member’s role in decision-making at board-level was peripheral. The majority rated their involvement in key aspects of decision-making as low and their influence on decision-making below that of other board members including the Chief Officer, the chair and the GP board members. Beyond the arena of the board, what little contact there was with the lay voice has taken the shape of informing rather than consulting. Mitigating factors include the early stage at which the survey was completed and the lack of precedents for lay involvement in primary care in a broad sense on which PCGs can draw. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The NHS Health Check programme is a prevention initiative offering cardiovascular risk assessment and management advice to adults aged 40-74 years across England. Its effectiveness depends on uptake. When it was introduced in 2009, it was anticipated that all those eligible would be invited over a 5-year cycle and 75% of those invited would attend. So far in the current cycle from 2013 to 2018, 33.8% of those eligible have attended, which is equal to 48.5% of those invited to attend. Understanding the reasons why some people do not attend is important to maximise the impact of the programmes.Aim: To review why people do not attend NHS Health Checks.Design and Setting: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.Method: An electronic literature search was carried out of MEDLINE, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey, the Cochrane Library, NHS Evidence, Google Scholar, Google, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry from 1 January 1996 to 9 November 2016, and the reference lists of all included papers were also screened manually. Inclusion criteria were primary research studies that reported the views of people who were eligible for but had not attended an NHS Health Check.Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Reasons for not attending included lack of awareness or knowledge, misunderstanding the purpose of the NHS Health Check, aversion to preventive medicine, time constraints, difficulties with access to general practices, and doubts regarding pharmacies as appropriate settings.Conclusion: The findings particularly highlight the need for improved communication and publicity around the purpose of the NHS Health Check programme and the personal health benefits of risk factor detection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focused ethnography is an applied and pragmatic form of ethnography that explores a specific social phenomenon as it occurs in everyday life. Based on the literature a problem-focused research question is formulated before the data collection. The data generation process targets key informants and situations so that relevant results on the pre-defined topic can be obtained within a relatively short time-span. As part of a theory based evaluation of alternative forms of consultation (such as video, phone and email) in primary care we used the focused ethnographic method in a multisite study in general practice across the UK. To date there is a gap in the literature on using focused ethnography in healthcare research.The aim of the paper is to build on the various methodological approaches in health services research by presenting the challenges and benefits we encountered whilst conducing a focused ethnography in British primary care. Our considerations are clustered under three headings: constructing a shared understanding, dividing the tasks within the team, and the functioning of the focused ethnographers within the broader multi-disciplinary team.As a result of using this approach we experienced several advantages, like the ability to collect focused data in several settings simultaneously within in a short time-span. Also, the sharing of experiences and interpretations between the researchers contributed to a more holistic understanding of the research topic. However, mechanisms need to be in place to facilitate and synthesise the observations, guide the analysis, and to ensure that all researchers feel engaged. Reflection, trust and flexibility among the team members were crucial to successfully adopt a team focused ethnographic approach. When used for policy focussed applied healthcare research a team-based multi-sited focused ethnography can uncover practices and understandings that would not be apparent through surveys or interviews alone. If conducted with care, it can provide timely findings within the fast moving context of healthcare policy and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A key element of the United Kingdom (UK) health policy reform in relation to chronic disease management is the introduction of a national programme seeking to promote self-care from within the National Health Service (NHS). The mainstay of the Expert Patients Programme (EPP) is a sixweek training course that provides the opportunity for anyone with a long-term condition to develop new skills to manage their condition better on a day-to-day basis. The course forms part of the NHS self-care support programme, is administered by Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and delivered by people who have personal experience of living with a long-term condition. The NHS' official Expert Patients Programme website presently states that, "Pilot EPP courses began at 26 NHS PCT sites across England in May 2002, and by May 2004 approximately 300 PCTs had either actively implemented pilot courses or had committed to joining. The majority of PCTs are now coming to the end of the pilot phase, with many implementing plans to make EPP sustainable for the long-term." The NHS website heralds the pilot "a success." A national, postal survey of PCT EPP Leads was undertaken in order to examine both the evolvement of EPP during its pilot stage and future plans for the programme. A questionnaire was sent out to the 299 PCTs known to have committed to the EPP pilot, and an excellent 100% response rate was obtained over a 3-month period (April-July 2005). One marker of success of the Expert Patients Programme implementation is the actual running of courses by the Primary Care Trusts. This paper explores the extent to which the implementation of the pilot can indeed be viewed as a "success," primarily in terms of the number of courses run, and considers the extent to which PCTs have carried out all that they were committed to do. Findings suggest that the more time an EPP Lead dedicates to the Programme, the more likely it is that EPP has run successfully in the past, and the more likely it is that it will continue to run successfully in the future. Other factors indicating future EPP success include collaborating across PCTs to share co-ordinators, tutors, and funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationing of National Health Service expenditure is inevitable, difficult, controversial, and it is unusual for the public to have a direct say in setting healthcare spending priorities at the local level. This paper presents a case study of public involvement in the allocation of some £60 million by a Primary Care Trust in North West London. Market research based techniques were used to demonstrate that the public are indeed capable of making these rationing decisions, given the right support. The results of a collective decision making process are reported, as are the effects on healthcare spending in this locality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increasing burden of chronic disease is recognised globally. Within the English National Health Service, patients with chronic disease comprise of half of all consultations in primary care, and 70% of inpatient bed days. The cost of prescribing long-term medications for those with physical chronic diseases is rising and there is a drive to reduce medicine wastage and costs. While current policies in England are focused on the latter, there has been little previous research on patient experience of ordering and obtaining regular medication for their chronic disease. This paper presents findings from England of a qualitative study and survey of patients and their carers' experiences of community and primary care based services for physical chronic diseases. Although not the primary focus of the study, the results highlighted particular issues around service delivery of repeat prescriptions. Methods: We conducted 21 qualitative in-depth interviews with 30 patients and family carers' in two Primary Care Trusts in England. Participants were receiving community based care for diabetes, respiratory, neurological or complex co-morbidities, and ranged in age from 39-92 years old. We used a broadly inductive approach to enable themes around patient experience to emerge from the data. Results: While the study sought to gain an overview of patient experience, the findings suggested that the processes associated with ordering and obtaining regular medication - the repeat prescription, was most frequently described as a recurring hassle of managing a long-term condition. Issues for patients and carers included multiple journeys to the surgery and pharmacy, lack of synchrony and dissatisfaction with the length of prescriptions. Conclusion: Much literature exists around medication waste and cost, which led to encouragement from the NHS in England to reduce dosage units to a 28-day supply. While there has been an acknowledgement that longer supplies may be suitable for people with stable chronic conditions, it appears that there is limited evidence on the impact of shorter length prescriptions on patient and carer experience, adherence and health outcomes. Recent policy documents within England also fail to address possible links between patient experience, adherence and flaws within repeat prescription service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A growing proportion of people are living with long term conditions. The majority have more than one. Dealing with multi-morbidity is a complex problem for health systems: for those designing and implementing healthcare as well as for those providing the evidence informing practice. Yet the concept of multi-morbidity (the presence of >2 diseases) is a product of the design of health care systems which define health care need on the basis of disease status. So does the solution lie in an alternative model of healthcare? Discussion: Strengthening generalist practice has been proposed as part of the solution to tackling multi-morbidity. Generalism is a professional philosophy of practice, deeply known to many practitioners, and described as expertise in whole person medicine. But generalism lacks the evidence base needed by policy makers and planners to support service redesign. The challenge is to fill this practice-research gap in order to critically explore if and when generalist care offers a robust alternative to management of this complex problem. We need practice-based evidence to fill this gap. By recognising generalist practice as a 'complex intervention' (intervening in a complex system), we outline an approach to evaluate impact using action-research principles. We highlight the implications for those who both commission and undertake research in order to tackle this problem. Summary: Answers to the complex problem of multi-morbidity won't come from doing more of the same. We need to change systems of care, and so the systems for generating evidence to support that care. This paper contributes to that work through outlining a process for generating practice-based evidence of generalist solutions to the complex problem of person-centred care for people with multi-morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There have been clear policy themes in the development of primary care in the last two decades. Devolving decision-making power using localised purchasing has developed into commissioning, making health service providers part of a competitive market-based service with a user-driven approach, whilst protecting service standards through bottom-up planning and a vigorous quality system: these are the main tried and tested strategies in health systems reform across the world. More recently the UK coalition government announced in its White Paper (Department of Health (DH), 2010a, 2010b) that local general practitioners (GPs) will be given responsibility for taking these policies on to the next stage with devolved National Health Service (NHS) budgets (£80bn) given to GP consortia whereby GPs would be at the centre of commissioning nearly all healthcare services, with the important aim of producing a major impact on public health and health inequalities. This paper examines the effectiveness of local GP commissioning in improving primary care services in the UK NHS using meta-ethnographic analysis, an interpretative qualitative research approach, and review of the relevant published evidences. The evidence on GP commissioning is positive but limited and its effectiveness cannot be predicted with great certainty largely due to insufficient data on services provision, lack of commissioning skills analysis and the continuous changes in government policies. This paper concludes that local commissioning of health services should best address people's health in the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the findings of two studies on how patients with allergic rhinitis and rhinosinusitis are treated and the record-keeping system in which patients in primary care are coded in Great Britain. He offers information on rhinitis and rhinosinusitis which are reportedly usually managed in primary care and can affect the lives of patients significantly. He comments that most primary care guideline developers fail to include ways to implement their guideline statements.

Objective The aim of this paper is to explore variations in lay perceptions of user involvement in clinical governance. Context The English National Health Service has sought to build a dependable health service through enhanced effectiveness, responsiveness and consistency. Clinical governance, a policy for improving service quality, is a key pillar of these reforms. It is a statutory duty of primary care organizations to ensure that users are involved in all service planning and decision making, including clinical governance. Yet surveys indicated that user involvement in clinical governance was underdeveloped and underutilized. Design Focus groups were conducted with different types of lay people to explore their perceptions around public involvement in different aspects of clinical governance policy. Results Content analysis of the transcripts reveals that different groups of lay people varied in their desired role perspective and preferred type of involvement in different aspects of clinical governance policy. Drawing upon existing models of user involvement, we identified three role perspectives that lay people could take in user involvement – consumer, advocate and citizen. We compared our findings regarding the desired type of involvement with existing models of user involvement, and identified a new type of involvement, overseeing, that is relevant to clinical governance policy. Conclusions These findings suggest that to facilitate user involvement in clinical governance, it would be necessary to use different strategies to accommodate the differing role perspectives and types of involvement desired by different groups of lay people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK faces a public health challenge arising from unhealthy behaviours. Some health care workers engage in the same unhealthy behaviours as the general population. This paper explores the issues arising from some primary care staff adopting unhealthy behaviours upon healthcare organisations, professional practice and patient perceptions in terms of the promotion of health in the primary care setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Continual quality improvement in primary care is an international priority. In the United Kingdom, the major initiative for improving quality of care is the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QoF) of the 2004 GP contract. Although the primary focus of the QoF is on clinical care, it is acknowledged that a comprehensive assessment of quality also requires valid and reliable measurement of the patient perspective, so financial incentives are included in the contract for general practices to survey patients' views. One questionnaire specified for use in the QoF is the General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ). This paper describes the development of the GPAQ (with post-consultation and postal versions) and presents a preliminary examination of the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. Methods: Description of scale development and preliminary analysis of psychometric characteristics (internal reliability, factor structure), based on a large dataset of routinely collected GPAQ surveys (n = 190,038 responses to the consultation version of GPAQ and 20,309 responses to the postal version) from practices in the United Kingdom during the 2005-6 contract year. Results: Respondents tend to report generally favourable ratings. Responses were particularly skewed on the GP communication scale, though no more so than for other questionnaires in current use in the UK for which data were available. Factor analysis identified 2 factors that clearly relate to core concepts in primary care quality ('access' and 'interpersonal care') that were common to both version of the GPAQ. The other factors related to 'enablement' in the postconsultation version and 'nursing care' in the postal version. Conclusion: This preliminary evaluation indicates that the scales of the GPAQ are internally reliable and that the items demonstrate an interpretable factor structure. Issues concerning the distributions of GPAQ responses are discussed. Potential further developments of the item content for the GPAQ are also outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the changing role of primary care both within the NHS, but also in health care in a broader sense. Introducing the reforms made by the Labour government, it also considers other mechanisms through which primary care has been broadened, including the introduction of NHS Direct, as well as the growth of complementary and alternative therapies, and considers the implications of these changes for healthcare financing. It suggests that changes in primary care have considerable potential to transform health services, and make governments rethink their health reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence based medicine has had an increasing impact on primary care over the last few years. In the UK it has influenced the development of guidelines and quality standards for clinical practice and the allocation of resources for drug treatments and other interventions. It has informed the thinking around patient involvement in decision making with the concept of evidence based patient choice. There are, however, concerns among primary care clinicians that evidence based medicine is not always relevant to primary care and that undue emphasis placed on it can lead to conflict with a clinician's duty of care and respect for patient autonomy. In this paper we consider the impact of evidence based medicine on primary care, and the ethical implications of its increasing prominence for clinicians and managers in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health services are rarely highly successful in meeting the needs of people with headache disorders, who everywhere are low in the priority queue. Taking the UK as an example within Europe, this paper briefly reviews the present organisation of headache services, and proposes change. The solution does not appear to lie in expanding specialist headache centres in secondary care to which most people with needs fail to gain access. A three-tier system with emphasis on primary care will, it is argued, deliver care more cost-effectively and more responsively to patients' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Britain over 39,000 reports were received by the National Patient Safety Agency relating to failures in documentation in 2007 and the UK Health Services Journal estimated in 2008 that over a million hospital outpatient visits each year might take place without the full record available. Despite these high numbers, the impact of missing clinical information has not been investigated for hospital outpatients in the UK. Studies in primary care in the USA have found 13.6% of patient consultations have missing clinical information, with this adversely affecting care in about half of cases, and in Australia 1.8% of medical errors were found to be due to the unavailability of clinical information. Our objectives were to assess the frequency, nature and potential impact on patient care of missing clinical information in NHS hospital outpatients and to assess the principal causes. This is the first study to present such figures for the UK and the first to look at how clinicians respond, including the associated impact on patient care. Methods: Prospective descriptive study of missing information reported by surgeons, supplemented by interviews on the causes. Data were collected by surgeons in general, gastrointestinal, colorectal and vascular surgical clinics in three teaching hospitals across the UK for over a thousand outpatient appointments. Fifteen interviews were conducted with those involved in collating clinical information for these clinics. The study had ethics approval (Hammersmith and Queen Charlotte's & Chelsea Research Ethics Committee), reference number (09/H0707/27). Participants involved in the interviews signed a consent form and were offered the opportunity to review and agree the transcript of their interview before analysis. No patients were involved in this research. Results: In 15% of outpatient consultations key items of clinical information were missing. Of these patients, 32% experienced a delay or disruption to their care and 20% had a risk of harm. In over half of cases the doctor relied on the patient for the information, making a clinical decision despite the information being missing in 20% of cases. Hospital mergers, temporary staff and non-integrated IT systems were contributing factors. Conclusions: If these findings are replicated across the NHS then almost 10 million outpatients are seen each year without key clinical information, creating over a million unnecessary appointments, and putting nearly 2 million patients at risk of harm. There is a need for a systematic, regular audit of the prevalence of missing clinical information. Only then will we know the impact on clinical decision making and patient care of new technology, service reorganisations and, crucially given the present financial climate, temporary or reduced staffing levels. Further research is needed to assess the relationship between missing clinical information and diagnostic errors; to examine the issue in primary care; and to consider the patients perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Managing multimorbidity is complex for both patients and healthcare systems. Patients with multimorbidity often use a variety of primary and secondary care services. Country-specific research exploring the healthcare utilisation and cost consequences of multimorbidity may inform future interventions and payment schemes in the UK.Aim: To assess the relationship between multimorbidity, healthcare costs, and healthcare utilisation; and to determine how this relationship varies by disease combinations and healthcare components.Design and Setting: A systematic review.Method: This systematic review followed the bidirectional citation searching to completion method. MEDLINE and grey literature were searched for UK studies since 2004. An iterative review of references and citations was completed. Authors from all articles selected were contacted and asked to check for completeness of UK evidence. The National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool was used to assess risk of bias. Data were extracted, findings synthesised, and study heterogeneity assessed; meta-analysis was conducted when possible.Results: Seventeen studies were identified: seven predicting healthcare costs and 10 healthcare utilisation. Multimorbidity was found to be associated with increased total costs, hospital costs, care transition costs, primary care use, dental care use, emergency department use, and hospitalisations. Several studies demonstrated the high cost of depression and of hospitalisation associated with multimorbidity.Conclusion: In the UK, multimorbidity increases healthcare utilisation and costs of primary, secondary, and dental care. Future research is needed to examine whether integrated care schemes offer efficiencies in healthcare provision for multimorbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data sharing of Electronic Health Records from general practices to secondary care in Leeds occurs through the so-called Leeds Care Records, which collects a specific set of codes from primary care, known as 'Active Problems', and presents it to the user. Variability on its content is a known issue. To explore general practitioners' views on their use of 'Active Problems' and on sharing data, so lessons could be learnt on how to homogenise and improve shared data. Assessing Leeds general practitioners' views through two parallel processes (60 online surveys and 17 interviews). General practitioners feel they do not have the time nor the training required for keeping a shared approach to concise and current Problem Lists in electronic patient records. Action is needed to reduce current variability, and to improve the quality of shared information. Some types of codes currently present in Problem Lists have very little support among general practitioners who consider the focus should be on long-term conditions and probably adding current acute diagnoses and life expectancy items and not omitting sensitive information. There is a perceived need of training and time to update Problem Lists if their quality is to improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) provides a framework to understand how interventions are implemented, embedded, and integrated in healthcare settings. Previous reviews of published literature have examined the application of NPT across international healthcare and reports its benefits. However, given the distinctive clinical function, organisational arrangements and the increasing management of people with a wide variety of conditions in primary care settings in the United Kingdom, it is important to understand how and why authors utilise and reflect on NPT in such settings to inform and evaluate implementation processes. Methods: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature using NPT in primary care settings in the United Kingdom (UK) was conducted. Eight electronic databases were searched using replicable methods to identify articles published between January 2012 and April 2018. Data were analysed using a framework approach. Results: Thirty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. Researchers utilised NPT to explore the implementation of interventions, targeting a wide range of health services and conditions, within primary care settings in the UK. NPT was mostly applied qualitatively; however, a small number of researchers have moved towards mixed and quantitative methods. Some variation was observed in the use of NPT constructs and sub-constructs, and whether and how researchers undertook modification to make them more relevant to the implementation process and multiple stakeholder perspectives. Conclusion: NPT provides a flexible framework for the development and evaluation of complex healthcare interventions in UK primary care settings. This review updates the literature on NPT use and indicates that its application is well suited to these environments, particularly in supporting patients with long-term conditions and co-morbidities. We recommend future research explores the receipt of interventions by multiple stakeholders and suggest that authors reflect on justifications for using NPT in their reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasingly, collaborative participatory methods requiring open and honest interaction between a range of stakeholders are being used to improve health service delivery. To be successful these methodologies must incorporate perspectives from a range of patients and staff. Yet, if unaccounted for, the complex relationships amongst staff groups and between patients and providers can affect the veracity and applicability of co-designed solutions.Methods: Two focus groups convened to discuss suggestions for the improvement of blood testing and result communication in primary care. The groups were mixed of patients and staff in various combinations drawn from the four participating study practices. Here we present a secondary mixed-method analysis of the interaction between participants in both groups using sociogrammatic and thematic analysis.Results: Despite a similar mix of practice staff and patients the two groups produced contrasting discussions, seemingly influenced by status and social context. The sociograms provided a useful insight into the flow of conversation and highlighted the dominance of the senior staff member in the first focus group. Within the three key themes of social context, the alliances formed between participants and the fluidity of the roles assumed manifested differently between groups apparently dictated by the different profile of the participants of each.Conclusions: For primary care service improvement attention must be paid to the background of participants when convening collaborative service improvement groups as status and imported hierarchies can have significant connotations for the data produced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a model OA consultation for OA to support self-management compared with usual care. Methods. An incremental cost-utility analysis using patient responses to the three-level EuroQoL-5D (EQ- 5D) questionnaire was undertaken from a UK National Health Service perspective alongside a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial. Uncertainty was explored through the use of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. Differences in health outcomes between the model OA consultation and usual care arms were not statistically significant. On average, visits to the orthopaedic surgeon were lower in the model OA consultation arm by -0.28 (95% CI: -0.55, -0.06). The cost-utility analysis indicated that the model OA consultation was associated with a non-significant incremental cost of £-13.11 (95% CI: -81.09 to 54.85) and an incremental quality adjusted life year (QALY) of -0.003 (95% CI: -0.03 to 0.02), with a 44% chance of being cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained. The percentage of participants who took time off and the associated productivity cost were lower in the model OA consultation arm. Conclusion. Implementing National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines using a model OA consultation in primary care does not appear to lead to increased costs, but health outcomes remain very similar to usual care. Even though the intervention seems to reduce the demand for orthopaedic surgery, overall it is unlikely to be cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a calendar of events related to medical care in Great Britain from December 2005 to January 2006. Sexual Health in Primary Care -- Module 1 will be held on December 1. Palliative Care in Primary Care -- Module 1 is scheduled on December 7. MRCGP Exam Preparation Course -- Video Module is on January 21. MRCGP Exam Preparation Course -- Written Paper and MCQ Paper will be held on January 22. Clinical Update: Dermatology is on January 24.

An introduction for the periodical "London Journal of Primary Care" is presented in which editor discuses several issues presented within the article including improvement in mental health, organic system, and attitude of general practitioners.

Background: Reducing medication-related harm is a global priority; however, impetus for improvement is impeded as routine medication safety data are seldom available. Therefore, the Medication Safety Thermometer was developed within England’s National Health Service. This study aimed to explore the implementation of the tool into routine practice from users’ perspectives. Method: Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with purposely sampled National Health Service staff from primary and secondary care settings. Interview data were analysed using an initial thematic analysis, and subsequent analysis using Normalisation Process Theory. Results: Secondary care staff understood that the Medication Safety Thermometer’s purpose was to measure medication safety and improvement. However, other uses were reported, such as pinpointing poor practice. Confusion about its purpose existed in primary care, despite further training, suggesting unsuitability of the tool. Decreased engagement was displayed by staff less involved with medication use, who displayed less ownership. Nonetheless, these advocates often lacked support from management and frontline levels, leading to an overall lack of engagement. Many participants reported efforts to drive scale-up of the use of the tool, for example, by securing funding, despite uncertainty around how to use data. Successful improvement was often at ward-level and went unrecognised within the wider organisation. There was mixed feedback regarding the value of the tool, often due to a perceived lack of “capacity”. However, participants demonstrated interest in learning how to use their data and unexpected applications of data were reported. Conclusion: Routine medication safety data collection is complex, but achievable and facilitates improvements. However, collected data must be analysed, understood and used for further work to achieve improvement, which often does not happen. The national roll-out of the tool has accelerated shared learning; however, a number of difficulties still exist, particularly in primary care settings, where a different approach is likely to be required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients' smoking status is routinely collected by General Practitioners (GP) in UK primary health care. There is an abundance of Read codes pertaining to smoking, including those relating to smoking cessation therapy, prescription, and administration codes, in addition to the more regularly employed smoking status codes. Large databases of primary care data are increasingly used for epidemiological analysis; smoking status is an important covariate in many such analyses. However, the variable definition is rarely documented in the literature.Methods: The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank is a repository for a national collection of person-based anonymised health and socio-economic administrative data in Wales, UK. An exploration of GP smoking status data from the SAIL databank was carried out to explore the range of codes available and how they could be used in the identification of different categories of smokers, ex-smokers and never smokers. An algorithm was developed which addresses inconsistencies and changes in smoking status recording across the life course and compared with recorded smoking status as recorded in the Welsh Health Survey (WHS), 2013 and 2014 at individual level. However, the WHS could not be regarded as a "gold standard" for validation.Results: There were 6836 individuals in the linked dataset. Missing data were more common in GP records (6%) than in WHS (1.1%). Our algorithm assigns ex-smoker status to 34% of never-smokers, and detects 30% more smokers than are declared in the WHS data. When distinguishing between current smokers and non-smokers, the similarity between the WHS and GP data using the nearest date of comparison was κ = 0.78. When temporal conflicts had been accounted for, the similarity was κ = 0.64, showing the importance of addressing conflicts.Conclusions: We present an algorithm for the identification of a patient's smoking status using GP self-reported data. We have included sufficient details to allow others to replicate this work, thus increasing the standards of documentation within this research area and assessment of smoking status in routine data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Contraceptive advice and supply (CAS) and sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing are increasingly provided in primary care. Most risk assessment tools are based on sexual risk behaviours and socio-demographics, for use online or in specialist services. Combining socio-demographic and psychosocial questions (e.g. religious belief and formative experience) may generate an acceptable tool for targeting women in primary care who would benefit from intervention. We aimed to identify psychosocial and socio-demographic factors associated with reporting key sexual risk behaviours among women in the British general population.Methods: We undertook complex survey analysis of data from 4911 hetero-sexually active women aged 16-44 years, who participated in Britain's third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3), a national probability sample survey undertaken 2010-2012. We used multivariable regression to examine associations between the available psychosocial and socio-demographic variables in Natsal-3 and reports of three key sexual behaviours: a) 2+ partners in the last year (2PP); b) non-use of condoms with 2+ partners in the last year (2PPNC); c) non-use of condoms at first sex with most recent sexual partner (FSNC). We adjusted for key socio-demographic factors: age, ethnicity and socio-economic status (measured by housing tenure).Results: Weekly binge drinking (6+ units on one occasion), and first sex before age 16 were each positively associated with all three sexual behaviours after adjustment. Current relationship status, reporting drug use (ever), younger age and living in rented accommodation were also associated with 2+ partners and 2 + partners without condoms after adjustment. Currently being a smoker, older age and respondent ethnicity were associated with FSNC after adjustment for all other variables. Current smoking status, treatment for depression (last year), and living at home with both parents until the age of 14 were each associated with one or more of the behaviours.Conclusions: Reported weekly binge drinking, early sexual debut, and age group may help target STI testing and/or CAS among women. Further research is needed to examine the proportion of sexual risk explained by these factors, the acceptability of these questions to women in primary care and the need to customise them for community and other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The length of consultations is an important factor affecting the quality of care in general practice. It is however difficult to study as many factors are simultaneously involved. Much that is known is about patient factors as so far, doctor factors have been neglected.Objective: To investigate multiple factors affecting consultation length, how they interact and the association between consultation length and patient-centredness.Methods: Previously collected observational data from 38 National Health Service NHS GPs in England stratified according to doctor's gender, experience and degree of emotional exhaustion were used. Multiple regression analyses were applied to 822 audio-recorded and timed consultations. Each consultation was analysed for the doctor's gender, patient's gender, experience, level of emotional exhaustion and patient-centredness.Results: We previously reported that 261/564 (46%) of GPs in Essex England were emotionally exhausted. Here, we found that male and female doctors respond differently to both experience and emotional exhaustion, which are associated with differences in their consultation length. The effect of experience on consultation length is only observed in male doctors: the more experienced, the shorter their consultation. Emotional exhaustion affected consultation length in opposite ways for females and male GPs: exhausted female GPs had shorter consultations, while exhausted male doctors had longer ones. Longer consultations were significantly more patient-centred and were associated with female patients.Conclusions: We found five factors affecting consultation length significantly. Moreover, these factors can predict the consultation length. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clustered randomised controlled trials (CRCTs) are increasingly common in primary care. Outcomes within the same cluster tend to be correlated with one another. In sample size calculations, estimates of the intra-cluster correlation coefficient (ICC) are needed to allow for this nonindependence. In studies with observations over more than one time period, estimates of the inter-period correlation (IPC) and the within-period correlation (WPC) are also needed.Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of all patients aged 18 or over with a diagnosis of type-2 diabetes, from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, between 1 October 2007 and 31 March 2010. We report estimates of the ICC, IPC, and WPC for typical outcomes using unadjusted and adjusted generalised linear mixed models with cluster and cluster by period random effects. For binary outcomes we report on the proportions scale, which is the appropriate scale for trial design. Estimated ICCs were compared to those reported from a systematic search of CRCTs undertaken in primary care in the UK in type-2 diabetes.Results: Data from 430 general practices, with a median [IQR] number of diabetics per practice of 241 [150-351], were analysed. The ICC for HbA1c was 0.032 (95 % CI 0.026-0.038). For a two-period (each of 12 months) design, the WPC for HbA1c was 0.035 (95 % CI 0.030-0.040) and the IPC was 0.019 (95 % CI 0.014-0.026). The difference between the WPC and the IPC indicates a decay of correlation over time. Following dichotomisation at 7.5 %, the ICC for HbA1c was 0.026 (95 % CI 0.022-0.030). ICCs for other clinical measurements and clinical outcomes are presented. A systematic search of ICCs used in the design of CRCTs involving type-2 diabetes with HbA1c (undichotomised) as the outcome found that published trials tended to use more conservative ICC values (median 0.047, IQR 0.047-0.050) than those reported here.Conclusions: These estimates of ICCs, IPCs, and WPCs for a variety of outcomes commonly used in diabetes trials can be useful for the design of CRCTs. In studies with observations taken at different time-points, the correlation of observations may decay over time, as reflected in lower values for the IPC than for the ICC. The IPC and WPC estimates are the first reported for UK primary care data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Significant challenges exist within primary care services in the United Kingdom (UK). These include meeting current demand, financial pressures, an aging population and an increase in multi-morbidity. Psychological services also struggle to meet waiting time targets and to ensure increased access to psychological therapies. Innovative ways of delivering effective primary care and psychological services are needed to improve health outcomes. Summary: In this article we argue that integrated care models that incorporate behavioural health care are part of the solution, which has seldom been argued in relation to UK primary care. Integrated care involves structural and systemic changes to the delivery of services, including the co-location of multi-disciplinary primary care teams. Evidence from models of integrated primary care in the United States of America (USA) and other higher-income countries suggest that embedding continuity of care and collaborative practice within integrated care teams can be effective in improving health outcomes. The Behavioural Health Consultant (BHC) role is integral to this, working psychologically to support the team to improve collaborative working, and supporting patients to make changes to improve their health across management of long-term conditions, prevention and mental wellbeing. Patients' needs for higher-intensity interventions to enable changes in behaviour and self-management are, therefore, more fully met within primary care. The role also increases accessibility of psychological services, delivers earlier interventions and reduces stigma, since psychological staff are seen as part of the core primary care service. Although the UK has trialled a range of approaches to integrated care, these fall short of the highest level of integration. A single short pilot of integrated care in the UK showed positive results. Larger pilots with robust evaluation, as well as research trials are required. There are clearly challenges in adopting such an approach, especially for staff who must adapt to working more collaboratively with each other and patients. Strong leadership is needed to assist in this, particularly to support organisations to adopt the shift in values and attitudes towards collaborative working. Conclusions: Integrated primary care services that embed behavioural health as part of a multi-disciplinary team may be part of the solution to significant modern day health challenges. However, developing this model is unlikely to be straight-forward given current primary care structures and ways of working. The discussion, developed in this article, adds to our understanding of what the BHC role might consist off and how integrated care may be supported by such behavioural health expertise. Further work is needed to develop this model in the UK, and to evaluate its impact on health outcomes and health care utilisation, and test robustly through research trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nine out of 10 patients undergoing urgent cancer investigations receive an 'all-clear' diagnosis.Aim: A qualitative approach was used to evaluate the impact of investigations that did not result in cancer diagnosis on subsequent symptom attribution and help seeking for recurrent or new possible cancer symptoms.Design and Setting: A survey of symptoms, help seeking, and past investigations was sent to 4913 individuals aged ≥50 years from four UK general practices. Of 2042 responders, 62 participants were recruited still reporting at least one cancer 'alarm' symptom in a 3-month follow-up survey for a nested in-depth interview study (ensuring variation in sociodemographic characteristics).Method: Framework analysis was used to examine the in-depth semi-structured interviews and identify themes related to previous health investigations.Results: Interviewees were on average 65 years old, and 90% reported investigations within the previous 2 years. Most often they reported gastrointestinal, urinary, and respiratory symptoms, and 42% had waited ≥3 months before help seeking. Reassurance from a previous non-cancer diagnosis explained delays in help seeking even if symptoms persisted or new symptoms developed months or years later. Others were worried about appearing hypochondriacal or that they would not be taken seriously if they returned to the doctor.Conclusion: An all-clear diagnosis can influence help seeking for months or even years in case of new or recurrent alarm symptoms. Considering the increasing number of people undergoing investigations and receiving an all-clear, it is paramount to limit unintended consequences by providing appropriate information and support. Specific issues are identified that could be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite widespread adoption of patient feedback surveys in international health‐care systems, including the English NHS, evidence of a demonstrable impact of surveys on service improvement is sparse. Objective: To explore the views of primary care practice staff regarding the utility of patient experience surveys. Design: Qualitative focus groups. Setting and participants: Staff from 14 English general practices. Results: Whilst participants engaged with feedback from patient experience surveys, they routinely questioned its validity and reliability. Participants identified surveys as having a number of useful functions: for patients, as a potentially therapeutic way of getting their voice heard; for practice staff, as a way of identifying areas of improvement; and for GPs, as a source of evidence for professional development and appraisal. Areas of potential change stimulated by survey feedback included redesigning front‐line services, managing patient expectations and managing the performance of GPs. Despite this, practice staff struggled to identify and action changes based on survey feedback alone. Discussion: Whilst surveys may be used to endorse existing high‐quality service delivery, their use in informing changes in service delivery is more challenging for practice staff. Drawing on the Utility Index framework, we identified concerns relating to reliability and validity, cost and feasibility acceptability and educational impact, which combine to limit the utility of patient survey feedback. Conclusions: Feedback from patient experience surveys has great potential. However, without a specific and renewed focus on how to translate feedback into action, this potential will remain incompletely realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A limitation of service delivery in primary care in the United Kingdom is that services are often organised to manage discrete long-term conditions, using guidelines related to single conditions, and managed in clinics organised around single conditions. However, many older patients have more than one condition (so called multimorbidity). Qualitative research suggests that these patients experience 'hassles' in their care, including multiple appointments, poor co-ordination, and conflicting recommendations. However, there is limited quantitative evidence on the 'hassles' that patients with multimorbidity experience, or factors predicting 'hassles' in patients with multimorbidity. Methods: We conducted a cross sectional study, mailing questionnaires to 1460 patients with multimorbidity identified from the disease registers of four general practices in the UK. Patients were asked to complete a range of self-report measures including measures of multimorbidity, measures of their experience of multimorbidity and service delivery. Data were analysed using regression modelling to assess the factors predicting 'hassles' in patients with multimorbidity. Results: In total 33 % (n=486) of patients responded to the baseline survey. The 'hassles' most often reported by patients related to lack of information about conditions and treatment options, poor communication among health professionals, and poor access to specialist care. There was a significant relationship between numbers of conditions, and reports of 'hassles'. In multivariate analysis, 5 variables predicted more 'hassles': more long-term conditions, symptoms of anxiety and depression, younger age, being in paid employment, and not having a discussion with their GP in the last 12 months. Conclusion: Hassles are frequently reported by patients with multimorbidity in primary care. A priority for future research should be on the development of new models of care that better cater for these patients. This research highlights core hassles that need to be addressed, and the patient groups that are most at risk, which may aid in the design of these new models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Historically, primary medical care in the UK has been delivered by general practitioners who are independent contractors, operating under a contract, which until 2004 was subject to little performance management. In keeping with the wider political impetus to introduce markets and competition into the NHS, reforms were introduced to allow new providers to bid for contracts to provide primary care services in England. These contracts known as 'Alternative Provider Medical Services', were encouraged by two centrally-driven rounds of procurement (2007/8 and 2008/9). This research investigated the commissioning and operation of such Alternative Providers of Primary Care (APPCs). Methods: Two qualitative case studies were undertaken in purposively sampled English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and their associated APPCs over 14 months (2009-10). We observed 65 hours of meetings, conducted 23 interviews with PCT and practice staff, and gathered relevant associated documentation. Results and conclusions: We found that the procurement and contracting process was costly and timeconsuming. Extensive local consultation was undertaken, and there was considerable opposition in some areas. Many APPCs struggled to build up their patient list sizes, whilst over-performing on walk-in contracts. Contracting for APPCs was 'transactional', in marked contrast to the 'relational' contracting usually found in the NHS, with APPCs subject to tight performance management. These complicated and costly processes contrast to those experienced by traditionally owned GP partnerships. However, managers reported that the perception of competition had led existing practices to improve their services. The Coalition Government elected in 2010 is committed to 'Any Qualified Provider' of secondary care, and some commentators argue that this should also be applied to primary care. Our research suggests that, if this is to happen, a debate is needed about the operation of a market in primary care provision, including the trade-offs between transparent processes, fair procurement, performance assurance and cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Compared to existing literature on childhood attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), little published adult data are available, particularly outside of the United States. Using General Practitioner (GP) questionnaires from the United Kingdom, this study aimed to examine a number of issues related to ADHD in adults, across three cohorts of patients, adults who received ADHD drug treatment in childhood/adolescence but stopped prior to adulthood; adults who received ADHD drug treatment in childhood/adolescence and continued treatment into adulthood and adults who started ADHD drug treatment in adulthood. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of ADHD and prescribed methylphenidate, dexamfetamine or atomoxetine were identified using data from The Health Improvement Network (THIN). Dates when these drugs started and stopped were used to classify patients into the three cohorts. From each cohort, 50 patients were randomly selected and questionnaires were sent via THIN to their GPs. GPs returned completed questionnaires to THIN who forwarded anonymised copies to the researchers. Datasets were analysed using descriptive statistics. Results: Overall response rate was 89% (133/150). GPs stated that in 19 cases, the patient did not meet the criteria of that group; the number of valid questionnaires returned was 114 (76%). The following broad trends were observed: 1) GPs were not aware of the reason for treatment cessation in 43% of cases, 2) patient choice was the most common reason for discontinuation (56%), 3) 7% of patients who stopped pharmacological treatment subsequently reported experiencing ADHD symptoms, 4) 58% of patients who started pharmacological treatment for ADHD in adulthood received pharmacological treatment for other mental health conditions prior to the ADHD being diagnosed. Conclusion: This study presents some key findings relating to ADHD; GPs were often not aware of the reason for patients stopping ADHD treatment in childhood or adolescence. Patient choice was identified as the most common reason for treatment cessation. For patients who started pharmacological treatment in adulthood, many patients received pharmacological treatment for comorbidities before a diagnosis of ADHD was made [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Annual recording of the Royal College of Physicians three questions (RCP3Q) morbidity score is rewarded within the UK 'pay-for-performance' Quality and Outcomes Framework. AIMS: To investigate the performance of the RCP3Qs for assessing control in real-life practice compared with the validated Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) administered by self-completed questionnaire. METHODS: We compared the RCP3Q score extracted from a patient's computerised medical record with the ACQ self-completed after the consultation. The anonymous data were paired by practice, age, sex, and dates of completion. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the RCP3Q scale compared with the threshold for good/poor asthma control (ACQ >1). RESULTS: Of 291 ACQ questionnaires returned from 12 participating practices, 129 could be paired with complete RCP3Q data. Twentyfive of 27 patients who scored zero on the RCP3Q were well controlled (ACQ <1). An RCP3Q score >1 predicted inadequate control (ACQ >1) with a sensitivity of 0.96 and specificity of 0.34. Comparable values for RCP3Q≥2 were sensitivity 0.50 and specificity 0.94. The intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.13 indicated substantial variability between practices. Exacerbations and use of reliever inhalers were moderately correlated with ACQ (Spearman's rho 0.3 and 0.35) and may reflect different aspects of control. CONCLUSIONS: In routine practice, an RCP3Q score of zero indicates good asthma control and a score of 2 or 3 indicates poor control. An RCP3Q score of 1 has good sensitivity but poor specificity for suboptimal control and should provoke further enquiry and consideration of other aspects of control such as exacerbations and use of reliever inhalers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Exercise referral schemes are one of the most popular forms of physical activity intervention in primary care in the UK and present an opportunity to better understand the factors related to exercise adherence. But standard schemes tend to be delivered over a short period and so provide information about the factors associated with short-term adherence. This retrospective register-based study of a longer-duration scheme allowed investigation of longer-term adherence. Methods: Social, physiological and anthropometric data were extracted from records of a cohort of ERS participants who had enrolled between 01 January and 31 December 2007 (n = 701). Characteristics of adherers and non-adherers were compared and potential predictors of longer-term adherence examined using binomial logistic regression. Results: Significant adjusted odds ratios predicting longer-term adherence were found for age and medical condition. For every 10 year increase in age, the odds of people continuing exercise increased by 21.8% (OR = 1.02; CI = 1.00 to 1.04; p = 0.03). Participants referred with orthopaedic (OR = 0.25; CI = 0.07-0.94; p = 0.04), cardiovascular (OR = 0.18; CI = 0.05-0.70; p = 0.01) and other (OR = 0.20; CI = 0.04-0.93; p = 0.04) problems had significantly lower odds of adhering than those with metabolic conditions. Conclusion: Improved understanding of the factors that influence adherence to exercise referral schemes will enable providers develop better referral guidance and tailor schemes to better meet participants' needs. Longer-term schemes offer the opportunity to understand participants' likelihood of maintaining adherence to exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the findings of a cross-sectional analysis conducted on examining whether incentive payments are not related to expected health gain in the pay for performance scheme for primary care in Great Britain. It discusses the methodology of the research. It concludes that financial incentives were not aligned to maximise health gain.

Background: Complex care management is seen as an approach to face the challenges of an ageing society with increasing numbers of patients with complex care needs. The Medical Research Council in the United Kingdom has proposed a framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions that will be used to develop and evaluate a primary care-based complex care management program for chronically ill patients at high risk for future hospitalization in Germany.Methods and Design: We present a multi-method procedure to develop a complex care management program to implement interventions aimed at reducing potentially avoidable hospitalizations for primary care patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or chronic heart failure and a high likelihood of hospitalization. The procedure will start with reflection about underlying precipitating factors of hospitalizations and how they may be targeted by the planned intervention (pre-clinical phase). An intervention model will then be developed (phase I) based on theory, literature, and exploratory studies (phase II). Exploratory studies are planned that entail the recruitment of 200 patients from 10 general practices. Eligible patients will be identified using two ways of 'case finding': software based predictive modelling and physicians' proposal of patients based on clinical experience. The resulting subpopulations will be compared regarding healthcare utilization, care needs and resources using insurance claims data, a patient survey, and chart review. Qualitative studies with healthcare professionals and patients will be undertaken to identify potential barriers and enablers for optimal performance of the complex care management program.Discussion: This multi-method procedure will support the development of a primary care-based care management program enabling the implementation of interventions that will potentially reduce avoidable hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines outcome-based commissioning in primary care in Great Britain as of March 2016. The 2014 study by nongovernmental organization Commonwealth Fund is discussed which revealed that Great Britain has the best primary care system among several developed countries. Also tackled are the key elements of primary care that made it outstanding which include person-focused care, coordination of care, and first-contact care.

Background: The United Kingdom has poorer cancer outcomes than many other countries due partly to delays in diagnosing symptomatic cancer, leading to more advanced stage at diagnosis. Delays can occur at the level of patients, primary care, systems and secondary care. There is considerable potential for interventions to minimise delays and lead to earlier-stage diagnosis.Methods: Scoping review of the published studies, with a focus on methodological issues.Results: Trial data in this area are lacking and observational studies often show no association or negative ones. This review offers methodological explanations for these counter-intuitive findings.Conclusion: While diagnostic delays do matter, their importance is uncertain and must be determined through more sophisticated methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) has contributed to modest improvements in chronic illness care in the UK. US policymakers have proposed similar pay-for-performance (P4P) approaches to improve care. Since previous studies have not compared chronic illness care quality in US and UK primary care practices prior to the QOF, the relative preparedness of practices to respond to P4P incentives is unknown. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background. Recruitment to health research is known to be problematic. However, evidence concerning ways of improving recruitment is sparse. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective Current government policies simultaneously pursue the development of ‘patient-led’ and ‘evidence-based’ approaches to healthcare. The objective of this study was to explore how primary care clinicians and Primary Care Trust (PCT) managers balance these potentially competing tensions when considering popular, controversial treatments, like complementary therapies, in consultations (clinicians) or funding decisions (PCT managers). Setting and participants We selected two case sites where complementary therapies were offered on NHS premises in England. We interviewed 18 PCT managers and clinicians, conducted an observation of a PCT meeting on complementary therapies and collected documentary data from referral databases and service funding bids. All interviews were taped, transcribed and analysed thematically. Interview, observation and documentary data were used to compare reported beliefs and behaviour to observed and documented behaviour. Results The majority of clinicians and PCT managers claimed that research evidence guided their decisions; those who did not felt increasingly marginalized. However, discrepancies between reported and observed behaviour suggest that perceptions of research evidence, rather than fact based knowledge, predominated when considering complementary therapies. Conclusion In the case of NHS complementary therapy service provision, patient preference may be largely insignificant in clinician and PCT managerial decisions, with decisions based mainly on ‘evidence rhetoric’ devised from collectively agreed, unchallenged, tacit perceptions of research literature. If a patient-led NHS is to become a reality, NHS professionals need to cede the power that they wield with evidence rhetoric and acknowledge the legitimacy of patient preferences, views and alternative sources of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debate on how resource-rich countries and their health care professionals should help the plight of sub-Saharan Africa appears locked in a mind-set dominated by gloomy statistics and one-way monetary aid. Having established a project to link primary care clinics based on two-way sharing of education rather than one-way aid, our United Kingdom colleagues often ask us: "But what can we learn from Malawi?" A recent fact-finding visit to Malawi helped us clarify some aspects of health care that may be of relevance to health care professionals in the developed world, including the United Kingdom. This commentary article is focused on encouraging debate and discussion as to how we might wish to re-think our relationship with colleagues in other health care environments and consider how we can work together on a theme of two-way shared learning rather than oneway aid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although anaemia is recognised as a feature of colorectal cancer, the precise risk is unknown. We performed a case-control study using electronic primary care records from the Health Improvement Network database, UK. A total of 6442 patients had a diagnosis of colorectal cancer, and were matched to 45 066 controls on age, sex, and practice. We calculated likelihood ratios and positive predictive values for colorectal cancer in both sexes across 1 g dl(-1) haemoglobin and 10-year age bands, and examined the features of iron deficiency. In men, 178 (5.2%) of 3421 cases and 47 (0.2%) of 23,928 controls had a haemoglobin <9.0 g dl(-1), giving a likelihood ratio (95% confidence interval) of 27 (19, 36). In women, the corresponding figures were 227 (7.5%) of 3021 cases and 58 (0.3%) of 21,138 controls, a likelihood ratio of 41 (30, 61). Positive predictive values increased with age and for each 1 g dl(-1) reduction in haemoglobin. The risk of cancer for current referral guidance was quantified. For men over 60 years with a haemoglobin <11 g dl(-1) and features of iron deficiency, the positive predictive value was 13.3% (9.7, 18) and for women with a haemoglobin <10 g dl(-1) and iron deficiency, the positive predictive value was 7.7% (5.7, 11). Current guidance for urgent investigation of anaemia misses some patients with a moderate risk of cancer, particularly men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The UK has a universal health care system that is free at the point of access. Over the past decade, the UK government has implemented an ambitious agenda of quality improvement initiatives in chronic disease management.Objective: To assess the quality of diabetes care and intermediate clinical outcomes within a multiethnic population after a sustained period of investment in quality improvement.Design: Population based cross-sectional survey, using electronic general practice records, carried out between November 2005 and January 2006.Patients: Seven thousand six hundred five adults (>or=18 years) with diabetes registered with 32 primary care practices.Measurements: Percentage achievement by ethnic group (black, south Asian, or white) of the quality indicators for diabetes in a new pay-for performance contract.Results: There were only modest variations in recording of process measures of care between ethnic groups, with no significant differences in recent measurement of blood pressure, HbA1c, cholesterol, micro-albuminuria, creatinine, or retinopathy screening attendance. Blacks and south Asians were significantly less likely to meet all three national treatment targets for diabetes (HbA1c Conclusions: Our findings suggest that substantial investment in quality improvement initiatives in the UK may have led to more systematic and equitable processes of care for diabetes but have not addressed ethnic disparities in intermediate clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study design:Cross-sectional; survey.Objectives:To describe the utilization, accessibility and satisfaction of primary and preventive health-care services to individuals with long-term spinal cord injuries, and compare results among three countries: the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom.Setting:The Canadian sample was obtained from the Canadian Paraplegic Association – Ontario and Manitoba Divisions. The British sample was recruited from the Northwest Regional Spinal Injuries Centre in Southport and National Spinal Injuries Centre at Stoke Mandeville Hospital in Aylesbury. The American sample was recruited through Craig Hospital in Englewood, CO, USA.Method:A total sample of 373 individuals aging with a spinal cord injury participated in a mailed survey. The Health Care Questionnaire was used to measure utilization, access and satisfaction with primary care and preventive services.Results:In total, 93% of individuals reported having a family doctor, 63% had a spinal injuries specialist and 56% had both a family doctor and spinal injuries specialist. Considerable duplication of services occurred for general medical and preventive services, although lifestyle and emotional issues were not addressed for over 75% of the participants. Significant differences were found in utilization among Canada, US and UK, with Canadians most likely to receive health care from family physicians and Americans most likely to receive care from specialists. Access to and satisfaction with health services was not significantly different among countries.Conclusion:People with long-standing spinal cord injuries develop complex maps by which they seek out appropriate primary health-care and preventive services. Given the differences among countries, it is clear that the health delivery model plays an important role in how and where individuals receive health services.Spinal Cord (2007) 45, 25–36. doi:10.1038/sj.sc.3101933; published online 30 May 2006 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In April 2004, an incentive based contract was introduced to UK primary care. An important element of the new contract is the ability to exclude individuals from quality indicators for a variety of reasons (known as 'exception reporting'). Exception of patients with stroke or TIA from the recording and achievement of quality indicators may have important consequences in terms of stroke recurrence and mortality. Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis of anonymised patient data was performed using 312 Scottish primary care practices. Results: Patients recorded as unsuitable for inclusion in the contract were more likely to be female (odds ratio (OR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36—1.68), older (>75 years:OR 3.15, 95%CI 2.69—3.69), and have dementia (OR 4.40, 95%CI 3.57—5.43) when compared to those patients without such a code. Patients were less likely to be older (>75 years:OR 0.70, 95%CI 0.56—0.87) and were more likely to be from the most deprived are as of Scotland (Quintile 5: OR 2.02, 95%CI 1.50—2.70) if they refused to attend for review or did not reply to letters asking for attendance at primary care clinics. Patients with multiple co-morbidities were more likely to have exclusions for achieving diagnostic clinical targets such as cholesterol control (3 or more co-morbidities: OR 3.37, 95%CI 2.50—4.50). Conclusion: Scottish practices have appeared to use exception reporting appropriately by excluding patients who are older or have dementia. However, younger or more socio-economically deprived patients were more likely to be recorded as having refused to attend for review or not replying to letters asking for attendance at primary care clinics. It is important for primary care practices to identify and monitor these individuals so that all patients fully benefit from the implementation of an incentive based contract and receive appropriate clinical care to prevent stroke recurrence, further disability and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prevalence of childhood obesity is rising and the UK Government have stated a commitment to addressing obesity in general. One method has been to include indicators relating to obesity within the GP pay-for-performance Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) contract. This study aimed to explore general practitioners' and practice nurses' views in relation to their role in treating childhood obesity. Methods: We interviewed eighteen practitioners (twelve GPs and six nurses) who worked in general practices contracting with Rotherham Primary Care Trust. Interviews were face to face and semi structured. The transcribed data were analysed using framework analysis. Results: GPs and practice nurses felt that their role was to raise the issue of a child's weight, but that ultimately obesity was a social and family problem. Time constraint, lack of training and lack of resources were identified as important barriers to addressing childhood obesity. There was concern that the clinician-patient relationship could be adversely affected by discussing what was often seen as a sensitive topic. GPs and practice nurses felt ill-equipped to tackle childhood obesity given the lack of evidence for effective interventions, and were sceptical that providing diet and exercise advice would have any impact upon a child's weight. Conclusion: GPs and practice nurses felt that their role in obesity management was centred upon raising the issue of a child's weight, and providing basic diet and exercise advice. Clinicians may find it difficult to make a significant impact on childhood obesity while the evidence base for effective management remains poor. Until the lack of effective interventions is addressed, implementing additional targets (for example through the QOF) may not be effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]