Search

Background: Description of safety problems and harm in general practices has previously relied on information from health professionals, with scarce attention paid to experiences of patients., Aim: To examine patient-reported experiences and outcomes of patient safety in primary care., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study in 45 general practices across five regions in the north, centre, and south of England., Method: A version of the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 6736 patients. Main outcome measures included 'practice activation' (what a practice does to create a safe environment); 'patient activation' (how proactive are patients in ensuring safe healthcare delivery); 'experiences of safety events' (safety errors); 'outcomes of safety' (harm); and 'overall perception of safety' (how safe patients rate their practice)., Results: Questionnaires were returned by 1244 patients (18.4%). Scores were high for 'practice activation' (mean [standard error] = 80.4 out of 100 [2.0]) and low for 'patient activation' (26.3 out of 100 [2.6]). Of the patients, 45% reported experiencing at least one safety problem in the previous 12 months, mostly related to appointments (33%), diagnosis (17%), patient provider communication (15%), and coordination between providers (14%). Twenty-three per cent of the responders reported some degree of harm in the previous 12 months. The overall assessment of level of safety of practices was generally high (86.0 out of 100 [16.8])., Conclusion: Priority areas for patient safety improvement in general practices in England include appointments, diagnosis, communication, coordination, and patient activation., (© British Journal of General Practice 2017.)

Background: The incidence of peripartum hysterectomy (PH) shows fifty-fold variation worldwide (0.2-10.5/1000 deliveries) and risk factors include advancing maternal age and parity, previous caesarean section (CS) and abnormal placentation., Objectives: In this first national study of PH in Ireland, our objectives were threefold: to describe the national trend in PH incidence over 15 years since 1999; to assess risk of PH associated with morbidly adherent placenta (MAP), placenta praevia and postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) during 2005-2013; and to describe the causes, interventions and outcomes of PH cases during 2011-2013., Study Design: For the 15-year time-trend analysis, PH cases and denominator data were extracted from Ireland's Hospital In-Patient Enquiry database. Multivariate Poisson regression analysis assessed risk of PH associated with MAP, placenta praevia and PPH. In collaboration with the 20 Irish maternity units we carried out a three-year national clinical audit of severe maternity morbidity. PH was a notifiable morbidity and the audit included detailed review of MOH cases., Results: In 1999-2013 there were 298 PH cases, a rate of 0.32/1000 deliveries. During the period 2005-2013, the PH rate was 50 times higher in deliveries involving PPH, 100 times higher with placenta praevia and 1000 times higher with MAP. During the clinical audit (2011-2013) there were 65 PH cases, a rate of 0.33/1000 deliveries, increasing with advancing age and parity. The reporting of abnormal placentation, primarily the co-occurrence of placenta praevia and MAP, was linked with previous CS. Fifty-six of the 65 cases suffered MOH, most commonly associated with placenta praevia, MAP and uterine atony. Prophylactic and therapeutic uterotonic agents were appropriately used in the majority of cases., Conclusions: The incidence of PH in Ireland has been consistently low over 15 years, averaging one case every 3000 deliveries. The recognised risk factors of MAP, placenta praevia and PPH were independently associated with PH, with MAP being by far the strongest predictor. The vast majority of PH cases in our clinical audit were associated with MOH. Some deficiencies were noted in antenatal care, in certain elements of treatment and clinical governance protocols but adherence to guidelines was generally high., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Multiplex tests for respiratory tract infections include up to 20 targets for common pathogens, predominantly viruses. A specific therapeutic intervention is available for individuals testing positive for influenza viruses (oseltamivir), and it is potentially beneficial to identify non-influenza viruses to avoid unnecessary antibiotic use. We evaluated antimicrobial prescriptions following respiratory pathogen testing among outpatients at a large Veterans Administration (VA) medical center. Results of the FilmArray respiratory panel (BioFire, Salt Lake City, UT) from 15 December 2014 to 15 April 2015 were evaluated among 408 outpatients, and patient medical records were reviewed. Differences in antibiotic and oseltamivir prescription rates were analyzed. Among 408 patients tested in outpatient centers (emergency departments, urgent care clinics, and outpatient clinics), 295 (72.3%) were managed as outpatients. Among these 295 outpatients, 105 (35.6%) tested positive for influenza virus, 109 (36.9%) tested positive for a non-influenza virus pathogen, and 81 (27.5%) had no respiratory pathogen detected. Rates of oseltamivir and antibiotic prescriptions were significantly different among the three test groups (chi-squared values of 167.6 [P < 0.0001] and 10.48 [P = 0.005], respectively), but there was no significant difference in antibiotic prescription rates between the non-influenza virus pathogen group and those who tested negative (chi-square value, 0; P = 1.0). Among adult outpatients, testing positive for influenza virus was associated with receiving fewer antibiotic prescriptions, but no such effect was seen for those who tested positive for a non-influenza virus. These data suggest that testing for influenza viruses alone may be sufficient and more cost-effective than multiplex pathogen testing for outpatients., (Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)

Introduction: Statins are recommended first-line treatment for hyperlipidemia, with published studies suggesting limited differences between them. However, there are reports of under-dosing. South Africa has introduced measures to enhance generic utilization. Part one documents prescribed doses of statins in 2011. Part two determines the extent of generics versus originator and single-sourced statins in 2011 and their costs., Results: Underdosing of simvastatin in 2011 with average prescribed dose of 23.7 mg; however, not for atorvastatin (20.91 mg) or rosuvastatin (15.02 mg). High utilization of generics versus originators at 93-99% for atorvastatin and simvastatin, with limited utilization of single-sourced statins (22% of total statins - defined daily dose basis), mirroring Netherlands, Sweden and UK. Generics priced 33-51% below originator prices., Discussion: Opportunity to increase simvastatin dosing through education, prescribing targets and incentives. Opportunity to lower generic prices with generic simvastatin 96-98% below single-sourced prices in some European countries.

Background: Cardiovascular prevention can be provided to patients at different risk levels. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of cardiovascular prevention provided in European primary care between patients with diagnosed coronary heart disease (CHD) and individuals at high risk due to known risk factors but not labelled with a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Additionally, we aimed to identify individual and practice factors to predict risk factor control., Methods: An international cross-sectional study was conducted in 10 European countries. Clinical record data were abstracted for quality indicators for 8928 patients in 10 countries and patient questionnaires were completed by 7846 patients in nine countries. Information about 320 general practices was assessed using practice questionnaires and interviews. Hierarchical multilevel modelling was used for analyses., Results: Recording of risk factors and advice was higher in the CHD than in the high-risk group. Risk factor control was better in the CHD group: uncontrolled levels of blood pressure (34.2 vs. 49.3%; p < 0.001), cholesterol (32.4 vs. 64.5%; p < 0.001). Predictors of risk factor control were medication adherence (RR 0.97; p = 0.007) and health-related quality of life (RR 0.86; p = 0.005). Being at high risk (RR 1.42; p < 0.001), being single (RR 1.12; p < 0.001), and having lower educational level (RR 1.09; p < 0.001) were associated with poorer risk factor control. Practice factors were not associated with outcomes., Conclusions: Strategies to improve guidelines adherence in cardiovascular prevention may be stronger focused on individuals at risk before CVD is diagnosed and require organizational and political support to reinforce general practices.

Background: The French National Health Insurance and the Ministry of Health have introduced multiple reforms in recent years to increase prescribing efficiency. These include guidelines, academic detailing, financial incentives for the prescribing and dispensing of generics drugs as well as a voluntary pay-for-performance programme. However, the quality and efficiency of prescribing could be enhanced potentially if there was better understanding of the dynamics of prescribing behaviour in France., Objective: To analyse the patient and general practitioner characteristics that influence patented versus multiple-sourced statin prescribing in France., Methodology: Statistical analysis was performed on the statin prescribing habits from 341 general practitioners (GPs) that were included in the IMS-Health Permanent Survey on Medical Prescription in France, which was conducted between 2009 and 2010 and involved 14,360 patients. Patient characteristics included their age and gender as well as five medical profiles that were constructed from the diagnoses obtained during consultations. These were (1) disorders of lipoprotein metabolism, (2) heart disease, (3) diabetes, (4) complex profiles and (5) profiles based on other diagnoses. Physician characteristics included their age, gender, solo or group practice, weekly workload and payment scheme., Results: Patient age had a statistically significant impact on statin prescribing for patients in profile 1 (disorders of lipoprotein metabolism) and profile 3 (complex profiles) with a greater number of patented statins being prescribed for the youngest patients. For instance, patients older than 76 years with a complex profile were prescribed fewer patented statins than patients aged 68-76 years old with the same medical profile (coefficient: -0.225; p = 0.0008). By contrast, regardless of the patient's age, the medical profile did not affect the probability of prescribing a patented statin except in young patients with heart diseases who were prescribed a greater number of patented statins (coefficient: 0.3992; p = 0.0007). Prescribing was also statistically influenced by physician features, e.g., older male physicians were more likely to prescribe patented statins (coefficient: 0.245; p = 0.0417) and GPs practicing in groups were more likely to prescribe multiple sourced statins (coefficient: -0.178; p = 0.0338), which is an important finding of the study. GPs with a lower workload prescribed a greater number of patented statins., Conclusion: There is significant variability in the prescribing of different statins among patient and physician profiles as well as between solo and group practices. Consequently, there are opportunities to target demand-side measures to enhance the prescribing of multiple-sourced statins. Further studies are warranted, in particular in other therapeutic classes, to provide a counter-balance to the considerable marketing activities of pharmaceutical companies.

Background: In the UK, a process of revalidation is being introduced to allow doctors to demonstrate that they meet current professional standards, are up-to-date, and fit to practise. Given the serious risks to patients from hazardous use of medicines it will be appropriate, as part of the revalidation process, to assess the safety of prescribing by GPs., Aim: To identify a set of potential prescribing-safety indicators for the purposes of revalidation of individual GPs in the UK., Design and Setting: The RAND Appropriateness Method was used to identify, develop, and obtain agreement on the indicators in UK general practice., Method: Twelve GPs from across the UK with a wide variety of characteristics assessed indicators for appropriateness of use in revalidation., Results: Forty-seven safety indicators were considered appropriate for assessing the prescribing safety of individual GPs for the purposes of revalidation (appropriateness was defined as an overall panel median score of ≥ 7 (on a 1-9 scale), with no more than three panel members rating the indicator outside the 3-point distribution around the median]. After removing indicators that were variations on the same theme, a final set of 34 indicators was obtained; these cover hazardous prescribing across a range of therapeutic areas, hazardous drug-drug combinations, prescribing with a history of allergy, and inadequate laboratory-test monitoring., Conclusion: This study identified a set of 34 indicators that were considered, by a panel of 12 GPs, to be appropriate for use in assessing the safety of GP prescribing for the purposes of revalidation. Violation of any of the 34 indicators indicates a potential patient-safety problem.

Even though the tradition of osteopathic medicine is based in primary care, more osteopathic graduates than in the past are pursuing subspecialties within medicine. Some claim that medical specialties, such as dermatology, compromise osteopathic principles and philosophy. However, the authors contend that dermatology exemplifies the ideals expressed by Andrew Taylor Still, MD, DO, and explain how osteopathic manipulative treatment and the principles of osteopathic medicine can be applied to dermatologic disease and patient care.

An empirical puzzle has emerged over the last several decades of research on variation in clinical decision making involving mixed effects of physician experience. There is some evidence that physicians with greater experience may provide poorer quality care than their less experienced counterparts, as captured by various quality assurance measures. Physician experience is traditionally narrowly defined as years in practice or age, and there is a need for investigation into precisely what happens to physicians as they gain experience, including the reasoning and clinical skills acquired over time and the ways in which physicians consciously implement those skills into their work. In this study, we are concerned with 1) how physicians conceptualize and describe the meaning of their clinical experience, and 2) how they use their experience in clinical practice. To address these questions, we analyzed qualitative data drawn from in-depth interviews with physicians from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany as a part of a larger factorial experiment of medical decision making for diabetes. Our results show that common measures of physician experience do not fully capture the skills physicians acquire over time or how they implement those skills in their clinical work. We found that what physicians actually gain over time is complex social, behavioral and intuitive wisdom as well as the ability to compare the present day patient against similar past patients. These active cognitive reasoning processes are essential components of a forward-looking research agenda in the area of physician experience and decision making. Guideline-based outcome measures, accompanied by underdeveloped age- and years-based definitions of experience, may prematurely conclude that more experienced physicians are providing deficient care while overlooking the ways in which they are providing more and better care than their less experienced counterparts., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Variations in medical practice have been widely documented and are a linchpin in explanations of health disparities. Evidence shows that clinical decision making varies according to patient, provider and health system characteristics. However, less is known about the processes underlying these aggregate associations and how physicians interpret various patient attributes. Verbal protocol analysis (otherwise known as 'think-aloud') techniques were used to analyze open-ended data from 244 physicians to examine which patient characteristics physicians identify as relevant for their decision making. Data are from a vignette-based factorial experiment measuring the effects of: (a) patient attributes (age, gender, race and socioeconomic status); (b) physician characteristics (gender and years of clinical experience); and (c) features of the healthcare system in two countries (USA, United Kingdom) on clinical decision making for diabetes. We find that physicians used patients' demographic characteristics only as a starting point in their assessments, and proceeded to make detailed assessments about cognitive ability, motivation, social support and other factors they consider predictive of adherence with medical recommendations and therefore relevant to treatment decisions. These non-medical characteristics of patients were mentioned with much greater consistency than traditional biophysiologic markers of risk such as race, gender, and age. Types of explanations identified varied somewhat according to patient characteristics and to the country in which the interview took place. Results show that basic demographic characteristics are inadequate to the task of capturing information physicians draw from doctor-patient encounters, and that in order to fully understand differential clinical decision making there is a need to move beyond documentation of aggregate associations and further explore the mental and social processes at work.

Objectives: To identify prescribing indicators based on prescribing analysis and cost (PACT) data that have face validity for measuring quality or cost minimisation., Design: Modified two round Delphi questionnaire requiring quantitative and qualitative answers., Setting: Health authorities in England., Participants: All health authority medical and pharmaceutical advisers in the first round and lead prescribing advisers for each health authority in the second round., Main Outcome Measures: Face validity (median rating of 7-9 on a nine point scale without disagreement) and reliability (rating 8 or 9) of indicators for assessing quality and cost minimisation., Results: Completed second round questionnaires were received from 79 respondents out of 99. The median rating was 7 for cost minimisation and 6 for quality, and in all except four cases individual respondents rated indicators significantly higher for cost than for quality. Of the 41 indicators tested, only seven were rated valid and reliable for cost minimisation and five for quality., Conclusion: The 12 indicators rated as valid by leading prescribing advisers had a narrow focus and would allow only a limited examination of prescribing at a general practice, primary care group, or health authority level.