Search

Previous observational studies have indicated that social influences, such as arising from herding-like behaviour, can contribute to medical errors. In this study, we experimentally examined whether general practitioners (GPs) would follow incorrect prescription recommendations from fellow GP or specialists. To investigate this, we conducted an online survey with 475 GPs practicing in England that included two case vignettes. Case vignette 1 focused on sleeping tablets, and case vignette 2 was centred around antibiotics. The vignettes were presented in random order, and within each vignette, study participants were assigned to one of three experimental conditions: control condition (lacking peer recommendation), fellow GP condition (including a recommendation from a fellow GP not aligned with best practice clinical guidelines), or specialist condition (including a recommendation from a specialist not aligned with best practice clinical guidelines). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of GPs who prescribed medication that deviated from best practice clinical guidelines. We found that, in both case vignettes, the percentage of respondents prescribing such medication was highest in those assigned to the specialist condition, followed by those assigned to the control condition. It was lowest in those assigned to the fellow GP condition (case vignette 1: 73.8% vs. 55.6% vs. 36.6% and case vignette 2: 24.0% vs. 12.4% vs. 10.1%). In the case of vignette 1, the difference between the fellow GP condition and the control condition is statistically significant, suggesting that GPs are less likely to prescribe sleeping tablets when recommended by a fellow GP. This implies that GPs are more inclined to prescribe non-guideline-recommended medication when advised by specialists. This study is the first to experimentally demonstrate that physician herding behaviour can result in prescription errors. Future research could extend this inquiry to diverse contexts, including diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is common and associated with future cardiovascular events. PAD is underdiagnosed, which limits opportunities to address secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. It is unknown how closely guidelines for detection of PAD are followed in primary care. Aim: To survey GPs' attitudes to diagnosis and follow-up of patients with PAD. Design & setting: Online survey of GPs in England and the Republic of Ireland (RoI). Method: GPs’ approaches to management of PAD were assessed using likelihood ratings (scales of 0–10) and discrete questions. Findings were summarised as proportions, or median and interquartile ranges (IQR). Results: In total, 111 responses were analysed; 68 (61%) from England and 43 (39%) from the RoI. Considering a hypothetical patient at risk of PAD, likelihood of GPs enquiring about PAD symptoms (leg pains: 3/10 or erectile dysfunction: 2/10) was low. GPs in the RoI compared with GPs in England more often examined the heart (10/10 versus 7/10) or carotid vessels (5/10 versus 1/10). Lower limb pulses were palpated in response to symptoms or signs of PAD. In England 25% of practitioners, and in the RoI 55% of practitioners, reported that they do not measure ankle-brachial index (ABI). Conclusion: Currently, detection of PAD is generally triggered by 'classical' leg claudication symptoms, while known vascular risk factors appear to elicit little consideration. ABI measurement is not performed by many practitioners, suggesting that a proportion of vascular referrals must be based on history and examination findings alone. Opportunities to recognise PAD are missed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression is the second most common chronic condition affecting women of reproductive age; 23.4% of women enter pregnancy with depression and use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in pregnancy is often necessary for maternal wellbeing. However, SSRI use during pregnancy can cause congenital malformations, postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), and persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN). In UK primary care, prescribing formularies are one medium by which prescribers are provided with local medicines advice. Aim: To review all local prescribing formularies with respect to prescribing SSRIs in women of reproductive age, during pregnancy, and during breastfeeding. Design & setting: A systematic review of prescribing formularies in England and Wales. Method: A systematic keyword search of all clinical commissioning group and Integrated Care Board websites in England and Local Health Board websites in Wales was undertaken between December 2021–22 to identify prescribing formularies. Data were extracted on prescribing guidance for SSRIs. Results: Seventy-four prescribing formularies were reviewed. Of these, 14.9% (n = 11/74) provided links to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency guidance on congenital abnormalities associated with SSRIs, 28.4% (n = 21/74) provided links to guidance on PPH risk, and 1.4% (n = 1/74) provided links to guidance on PPHN. Specific local guidance was given on SSRI prescribing for women of reproductive age, during pregnancy, and during breastfeeding in 12.2% (n = 9/74), 23.0% (n = 17/74), and 21.6% (n = 16/74) of formularies, respectively. Conclusion: Our results suggest that prescribers may be poorly informed by local formularies about the risks of SSRI use around pregnancy. This could place babies at increased risk of unintentional SSRI exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Overprescribing of potentially harmful medication in UK general practice has a complex association with socioeconomic deprivation. Aim: To assess trends in general practice prescribing of five high-risk medications and their relationship with deprivation. Design & setting: An observational study was conducted using general practice data from three English regions with varied sociodemographic factors: West Yorkshire and Harrogate (WY), Black Country and West Birmingham (BC), and Surrey and East Sussex (SE). Method: Practice-level prescribing data were obtained from 2016–2021 for five drug classes: opioids, hypnotics, gabapentinoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antibacterials. Prescribing trends were demonstrated using a linear model. Results: Reduction in NSAID, opioid, hypnotic and antibacterial prescriptions, and the increase in gabapentinoid prescriptions, were significant at each financial year time period. Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) was positively associated with all drug classes except antibacterials, which showed a positive association when incorporating the interaction term between IMD and age. When adjusting for IMD and population, region was independently associated with prescribing rate. Compared with WY, IMD had a smaller association with prescribing in BC for NSAIDs (coefficient = −0.01578, P = 0.004) and antibacterials (coefficient = −0.02769, P = 0.007), whereas IMD had a greater association with prescribing in SE for NSAIDs (coefficient = 0.02443, P<0.001), opioids (coefficient = 0.08919, P<0.001), hypnotics (coefficient = 0.09038, P<0.001), gabapentinoids (coefficient = 0.1095, P<0.001), and antibacterials (coefficient = 0.01601, P = 0.19). Conclusion: The association of socioeconomic deprivation with overprescribing of high-risk medication in general practice varies by region and drug type. Geographical location is associated with overprescribing, independent of socioeconomic status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Burnout is on the rise among GPs in the UK. One approach to mitigating burnout in GPs is through informal peer support (IPS). This refers to GPs informally supporting each other on an informational (advice) and emotional (venting and reflection) basis. Aim: To explore GPs’ perceptions of how IPS manifests in the primary care setting and what factors influence effective GP engagement with IPS. Design & setting: A qualitative study utilising semi-structured interviews to develop an in-depth understanding of GPs’ perceptions of IPS, based on their experiences in practices across England. Method: Fifteen GPs were purposively sampled to include the views of locum, salaried, and trainee GPs and GP partners. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Four types of IPS were identified relating to emotional support, professional advice, sharing of workload, and mentorship, which reflect existing literature. The frequency and efficacy of IPS was found to be influenced by several factors categorised into individual traits, practice culture, and occupation. Conclusion: The results highlight where efforts should be directed to improve GP engagement with IPS. Specifically, GP leaders have an important role in shaping practice culture and fostering an environment for IPS to occur. Practices may also benefit from introducing professional development measures targeted at training GPs to better support each other based on their individual traits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social prescribing link workers are recently introduced roles in English primary care. One of their intended functions is to support patients with conditions influenced by the wider, social determinants of health. Their main purpose is to connect people to community resources to meet their nonmedical needs. However, our research reveals that link workers provide not only connections but also what we have described as "holding" for individuals with complex needs, who lack informal networks of support or who are waiting to access services. We explore the concept of holding, its meaning and significance in this context, and consider its consequences. As part of a realist evaluation, we observed seven link workers in GP practices in England during focussed ethnographies over a 3‐week period. We took field notes and interviewed 61 patients and 93 healthcare and voluntary sector professionals. Nine to twelve months later, we carried out follow‐up interviews with forty‐one patients, seven link workers, and a link worker manager. We identified four functions of holding: supporting patients waiting for services, sustaining patients as they prepare for change, reducing the emotional burden of primary healthcare professionals, and bearing witness to patients' distress. Holding appears to be a vital but often overlooked aspect of social prescribing. Patients benefit from having a reliable and consistent person to support their emotional needs. However, similar to the impact of holding on other primary care professionals, there are unintended consequences: some link workers exceed their capacity, become overburdened, experience burnout, and leave their job. Recognizing the importance of holding and understanding its role in link workers' primary care responsibilities are critical. If holding work is accepted as a role for link workers, providing training and support to them should be prioritised to ensure successful implementation and positive outcomes for patients, link workers, and primary healthcare staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People with multiple and persistent physical symptoms have impaired quality of life and poor experiences of health care. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a community-based symptom-clinic intervention in people with multiple and persistent physical symptoms, hypothesising that this symptoms clinic plus usual care would be superior to usual care only. The Multiple Symptoms Study 3 was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial conducted in 108 general practices in the UK National Health Service in four regions of England between Dec 6, 2018, and June 30, 2023. Participants were individually randomised (1:1) to the symptom-clinic intervention plus usual care or to usual care only via a computer-generated, pseudo-random list stratified by trial centre. Allocation was done by the trial statistician and concealed with a centralised, web-based randomisation system; masking participants was not possible due to the nature of the intervention. The symptom-clinic intervention was a sequence of up to four medical consultations that aimed to elicit a detailed clinical history, fully hear and validate the participant, offer rational explanations for symptoms, and assist the participant to develop ways of managing their symptoms; it was delivered by general practitioners with an extended role. The primary outcome was Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) score 52 weeks after randomisation, analysed by intention to treat. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN57050216). 354 participants were randomly assigned; 178 (50%) were assigned to receive the community-based symptoms clinic plus usual care and 176 (50%) were assigned to receive usual care only. At the primary-outcome point of 52 weeks, PHQ-15 scores were 14·1 (SD 3·7) in the group receiving usual care and 12·2 (4·5) in the group receiving the intervention. The adjusted between-group difference of –1·82 (95% CI –2·67 to –0·97) was statistically significantly in favour of the intervention group (p<0·0001). There were 39 adverse events in the group receiving usual care and 36 adverse events in the group receiving the intervention. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the proportion of participants who had non-serious adverse events (–0·03, 95% CI –0·11 to 0·05) or serious adverse events (0·02, –0·02 to 0·07). No serious adverse event was deemed to be related to the trial intervention. Our symptom-clinic intervention, which focused on explaining persistent symptoms to participants in order to support self-management, led to sustained improvement in multiple and persistent physical symptoms. UK National Institute for Health and Care Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recent evidence suggests that the first consultation with a general practitioner (GP) for symptoms of depression may be more than just a vehicle for assessment and management planning (as current guidelines imply). Objectives To identify what patients find helpful, or otherwise, in their first consultation for low mood with a GP. Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire and interview study of patients with low mood who had recently consulted their GP, in the North of England. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding the consultation, and a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), within 2 weeks. They were also invited to take part in a face–face interview with a researcher. Both sources of data were subjected to qualitative thematic analysis. Results Thirty-seven questionnaires were returned; 5 interviews took place. The majority of participants felt better after consulting a GP for the first time for low mood. The factors most commonly cited as helpful were "being listened to" and "understanding or empathy from the GP." Others included "admitting the problem," "being reassured of normality," and "being provided with optimism or hope for change." The most commonly reported difficulty was the patients' struggle to express themselves. Patients often felt that GP follow-up was inadequate. Conclusions These results suggest that the therapeutic benefit of the GP consultation is under-recognized in current guidelines. The results of our study will provide crucial information as to how such consultations can be tailored to improve patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The anticipatory prescribing of injectable controlled drugs (ICDs) by general practitioners (GPs) to care home residents is common practice and is believed to reduce emergency hospital transfers at the end-of-life. However, evidence about the process of ICD prescribing and how it affects residents' hospital transfer is limited. The study examined how care home nurses and senior carers (senior staff) describe their role in ICDs prescribing and identify that role to affect residents' hospital transfers at the end-of-life. Methods: 1,440 h of participant observation in five care homes in England between May 2019 and March 2020. Semi-structured interviews with a range of staff. Interviews (n = 25) and fieldnotes (2,761 handwritten A5 pages) were analysed thematically. Results: Senior staff request GPs to prescribe ICDs ahead of residents' expected death and review prescribed ICDs for as long as residents survive. Senior staff use this mechanism to ascertain the clinical appropriateness of withholding potentially life-extending emergency care (which usually led to hospital transfer) and demonstrate safe care provision to GPs certifying the medical cause of death. This enables senior staff to facilitate a care home death for residents experiencing uncertain dying trajectories. Conclusion: Senior staff use GPs' prescriptions and reviews of ICDs to pre-empt hospital transfers at the end-of-life. Policy should indicate a clear timeframe for ICD review to make hospital transfer avoidance less reliant on trust between senior staff and GPs. The timeframe should match the period before death allowing GPs to certify death without triggering a Coroner's referral. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Temporary doctors, known as locums, are a key component of the medical workforce in the NHS but evidence on differences in quality and safety between locum and permanent doctors is limited. We aimed to examine differences in the clinical practice, and prescribing safety for locum and permanent doctors working in primary care in England. Methods: We accessed electronic health care records (EHRs) for 3.5 million patients from the CPRD GOLD database with linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics from 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2022. We used multi-level mixed effects logistic regression to compare consultations with locum and permanent GPs for several patient outcomes including general practice revisits; prescribing of antibiotics; strong opioids; hypnotics; A&E visits; emergency hospital admissions; admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions; test ordering; referrals; and prescribing safety indicators while controlling for patient and practice characteristics. Results: Consultations with locum GPs were 22% more likely to involve a prescription for an antibiotic (OR = 1.22 (1.21 to 1.22)), 8% more likely to involve a prescription for a strong opioid (OR = 1.08 (1.06 to 1.09)), 4% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit on the same day (OR = 1.04 (1.01 to 1.08)) and 5% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit within 1 to 7 days (OR = 1.05 (1.02 to 1.08)). Consultations with a locum were 12% less likely to lead to a practice revisit within 7 days (OR = 0.88 (0.87 to 0.88)), 4% less likely to involve a prescription for a hypnotic (OR = 0.96 (0.94 to 0.98)), 15% less likely to involve a referral (OR = 0.85 (0.84 to 0.86)) and 19% less likely to involve a test (OR = 0.81 (0.80 to 0.82)). We found no evidence that emergency admissions, ACSC admissions and eight out of the eleven prescribing safety indicators were different if patients were seen by a locum or a permanent GP. Conclusions: Despite existing concerns, the clinical practice and performance of locum GPs did not appear to be systematically different from that of permanent GPs. The practice and performance of both locum and permanent GPs is likely shaped by the organisational setting and systems within which they work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite longstanding problems of access to general practice, attempts to understand and address the issues do not adequately include perspectives of the people providing or using care, nor do they use established theories of access to understand complexity. Aim: To understand problems of access to general practice from the multiple perspectives of service users and staff using an applied theory of access. Design and setting: A qualitative participatory case study in an area of northwest England. Method: A community-based participatory approach was used with qualitative interviews, focus groups, and observation to understand perspectives about accessing general practice. Data were collected between October 2015 and October 2016. Inductive and abductive analysis, informed by Levesque et al's theory of access, allowed the team to identify complexities and relationships between interrelated problems. Results: This study presents a paradox of problems in accessing general practice, in which the demand on general practice both creates and hides unmet need in the population. Data show how reactive rules to control demand have undermined important aspects of care, such as continuity. The layers of rules and decreased continuity create extra work for practice staff, clinicians, and patients. Complicated rules, combined with a lack of capacity to reach out or be flexible, leave many patients, including those with complex and/or unrecognised health needs, unable to navigate the system to access care. This relationship between demand and unmet need exacerbates existing health inequities. Conclusion: Understanding the paradox of access problems allows for different targets for change and different solutions to free up capacity in general practice to address the unmet need in the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple factors may influence women's experiences of urinary tract infection (UTI) and its clinical management. Aim: To explore how women's background, symptoms, and severity of symptoms influence UTI reporting and management. Design & setting: Internet questionnaire targeting women in England, focusing on UTI symptoms, care seeking, and management. Method: A total of 1096 women aged ≥16 years with UTI symptoms in the previous year completed the questionnaire in March and April 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was ued to estimate the odds of relevant outcomes while adjusting for background characteristics. Results: Women with children in their household, who were aged under 45 years, or who were married or cohabitating were more likely to experience UTI symptoms. The odds of antibiotic prescribing were lower if women reported dysuria (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49 to 0.85), frequency (AOR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.83), or vaginal discharge (AOR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.50 to 0.96), but higher if reporting haematuria (AOR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.79 to 4.41), confusion (AOR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.16 to 3.94), abdominal pain (AOR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.74), or systemic symptoms (AOR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.69). Those with abdominal pain or two or more of nocturia, dysuria, or cloudy urine had lower odds of receiving a delayed antibiotic, while those with incontinence, confusion, unsteadiness, or low temperature had higher odds of a delayed prescription. Increasing symptom severity was associated with greater odds of receiving antibiotics. Conclusion: Except for reduced prescribing if a woman had dysuria and frequency, antibiotic prescribing followed an expected pattern, aligning generally with national guidance. Symptom severity and the likelihood of systemic infection probably influenced care seeking and prescribing. Sexual intercourse and childbirth may be key times to target women with messages about UTI prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We present a seroprevalence survey of diphtheria in England in 2021 and compare results to 2009 estimates. • The study used residual sera from hospital laboratories and sera collected alongside routine blood tests in primary care. • There has been no overall change in proportions protected against diphtheria between 2009 and 2021. • There has been an increase in diphtheria immunity in teenagers and working age adults. • There is consistent waning immunity in older age groups. Diphtheria is rare in England because of an effective national immunisation schedule that includes 5 doses of a diphtheria-containing vaccine at 2, 3, 4 months, preschool and adolescent boosters. However, in recent years there has been a notable increase in cases due to Corynebacterium ulcerans among older adults and evidence of endemic transmission of C. diphtheriae (normally associated with travel to endemic countries). We aimed to update 2009 estimates of diphtheria immunity considering the evolving epidemiology. Residual sera collected from diagnostic laboratories and general practitioners in England in 2021 were randomly selected and tested for diphtheria antibody, to estimate proportions protected per age group. Diphtheria antibody levels were defined as susceptible (<0.01 IU/mL), basic protection (0.01–0.099 IU/mL) and full protection (≥0.1 IU/mL). Immunity estimates were standardised to the England population and compared to 2009. Based on 3,745 residual sera tested, 89% (95%CI: 87%–90%) of the 2021 England population had at least basic diphtheria protection (vs. 90% [88%–92%] in 2009) and 50% (48%–52%) full protection (vs. 41% [38%–44%]). Higher antibody levels were observed in those aged 1 and under, 10–11, 12–15, 25–34 and 35–44 years compared to 2009. The largest proportion susceptible were observed in those aged 70+, 26% (21%–31%) vs 12% (7%–18%) in 2009. Basic diphtheria protection is comparable between 2021 and 2009. The increase in immunity in working age adults is likely due to the school leaver booster introduced in 1994. The current vaccination schedule is maintaining sufficient population immunity. However, we recommend clinicians remain vigilant to severe diphtheria outcomes in older adults, because of their observed susceptibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the relative productivity of primary medical services in England and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity levels. Setting: Primary medical services for 59 million patients (98% of the population in England), in 101 clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), across two time periods: period 1, pre-pandemic, April to December 2019 and period 2, pandemic, April to December 2020. Methods: We use data envelopment analysis (DEA) to assess relative productivity with four input measures (the number of full-time equivalent general practitioners, nurses, other direct patient contact staff and administrators), and five output measures (face-to-face appointments, remote consultations, home visits, referrals to secondary care and prescriptions). Our units of analysis were CCGs. DEA assigns an efficiency score to a CCG, taking a value between 0 and 100%, by benchmarking it against the most productive CCGs. We use Tobit regression to examine the association between productivity and other factors. Results: The mean bias-corrected efficiency score of primary medical services in CCGs was 92.9% (interquartile range 92.0% to 95.7%) in period 1, falling to 90.6% (interquartile range 86.8% to 95.2%) in period 2. In period 1, CCGs with a higher proportion of registered patients aged over 65 years, higher levels of deprivation, lower levels of disease prevalence, higher nurse to GP ratios and higher GP to other direct patient contact staff ratios, achieved statistically significantly higher general practice efficiency scores (p < 0.05). In period 2, only the ratio of GP to other direct patient contact staff was associated with efficiency scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Our analysis indicates only modest geographic variation in productivity of primary medical services when measured at the level of clinical commissioning groups and a small reduction in productivity during the pandemic. Further work to establish relative productivity of individual GP practices is warranted once sufficient data on appointment rates by GP practice is available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To report the NHS Digital (NHSD) data for patients diagnosed with kidney cancer (KC) in England. We explore the incidence, route to diagnosis (RTD), treatment, and survival patterns from 2013 to 2019. Materials and Methods: Data was extracted from the Cancer Data NHSD portal for International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition coded KC; this included Cancer Registry data, Hospital Episode Statistics, and cancer waiting times data. Results: Registrations included 66 696 individuals with KC. Incidence of new KC diagnoses increased (8998 in 2013, to 10 232 in 2019), but the age‐standardised rates were stable (18.7–19.4/100 000 population). Almost half of patients (30 340 [45.5%]) were aged 0–70 years and the cohort were most frequently diagnosed with Stage 1–2 KC (n = 26 297 [39.4%]). Most patients were diagnosed through non‐urgent general practitioner referrals (n = 16 814 [30.4%]), followed by 2‐week‐wait (n = 15 472 [28.0%]) and emergency routes (n = 11 796 [21.3%]), with older patients (aged ≥70 years), Stage 4 KCs, and patients with non‐specified renal cell carcinoma being significantly more likely to present through the emergency route (all P < 0.001). Invasive treatment (surgery or ablation), radiotherapy, or systemic anti‐cancer therapy use varied with disease stage, patient factors, and treatment network (Cancer Alliance). Survival outcomes differed by Stage, histological subtype, and social deprivation class (P < 0.001). Age‐standardised mortality rates did not change over the study duration, although immunotherapy usage is likely not captured in this study timeline. Conclusion: The NHSD resource provides useful insight about the incidence, diagnostic pathways, treatment, and survival of patients with KC in England and a useful benchmark for the upcoming commissioned National Kidney Cancer Audit. The RTD data may be limited by incidental diagnoses, which could confound the high proportion of 'emergency' diagnoses. Importantly, survival outcomes remained relatively unchanged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chickenpox is a common childhood disease caused by varicella-zoster virus (VZV). VZV vaccination is not part of the UK childhood immunisation programme, but its potential inclusion is regularly assessed. It is therefore important to understand the ongoing burden of VZV in the community to inform vaccine policy decisions. General practitioner (GP) chickenpox consultations were studied from 1 September 2016 to 9 December 2022. Over the study period, the mean weekly chickenpox consultation rate per 100,000 population in England was 3.4, with a regular peak occurring between weeks 13 and 15. Overall, rates decreased over time, from a mean weekly rate of 5.5 in 2017 to 4.2 in 2019. The highest mean weekly rates were among children aged 1–4 years. There was no typical epidemic peak during the COVID-19 pandemic, but in 2022, rates were proportionally higher among children aged < 1 year old compared to pre-pandemic years. Chickenpox GP consultation rates decreased in England, continuing a longer-term decline in the community. The COVID-19 pandemic impacted rates, likely caused by the introduction of non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The lasting impact of the interruption of typical disease transmission remains to be seen, but it is important to monitor the chickenpox burden to inform decisions on vaccine programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practice is an important place for patients experiencing or perpetrating domestic violence and abuse (DVA), and for their children to seek and receive help. While the incidence of DVA may have increased during the COVID- 19 pandemic, there has been a reduction in DVA identifications and referrals to specialist services from general practice. Concurrently there has been the imposition of lockdown measures and a shift to remote care in general practices in the UK. Aim: To understand the patient perspective of seeking and receiving help for DVA in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was then compared with experiences of general practice healthcare professionals. Design and setting: A qualitative interview study in seven urban general practices in England and Wales, as part of a feasibility study of IRIS+, an integrated primary care DVA system-level training and support intervention. Method: Semi-structured interviews with 21 patients affected by DVA and 13 general practice healthcare professionals who had received IRIS+ training. Analysis involved a Framework approach. Results: Patients recounted positive experiences of seeking help for DVA in general practice during the pandemic. However, there have been perceived problems with the availability of general practice and a strong preference for face-to-face consultations, over remote consultations, for the opportunities of non- verbal communication. There were also concerns from healthcare professionals regarding the invisibility of children affected by DVA. Conclusion: Perspectives of patients and their families affected by DVA should be prioritised in general practice service planning, including during periods of transition and change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A consultation for the Women's Health Strategy for England in 2022 highlighted a need to understand and develop how general practice can support women's health needs. Aim: To understand the perspectives and experiences of primary care practitioners (PCPs) about supporting women's healthcare needs. Design and setting: Interpretive qualitative research set in general practice in England. Method: PCPs working in general practice settings were recruited through research and professional networks. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone or Microsoft Teams, audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed through reflexive thematic analysis. Results: In total, 46 PCPs were interviewed. Participants had a range of roles and worked in a variety of primary care settings. Results are presented within six themes: 1) being alongside a person from cradle to grave; 2) maintaining the balance between general and specialist skills; 3) generalists and specialists combined make more than the sum of their parts; 4) striving for equity in a collapsing system; 5) firefighting with limited resources; and 6) the GP is being cast as the villain. Conclusion: The findings show that relationships and advocacy are valued as fundamental for women's health in general practice, and highlight the adverse impact of threats to these on staff and services. Developing specialist roles and bespoke services can foster staff wellbeing and could support retention. However, care is needed to ensure that service configuration changes do not result in clinician deskilling or rendering services inaccessible. Care is needed when services evolve to ensure that core aspects of general practice are not diminished or devalued. GP teams are well placed to advocate for their patients, including commitment to seeking equitable care, and these skills and specialist knowledge should be actively recognised, valued, and nurtured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adults living with overweight/obesity are eligible for publicly funded weight management (WM) programmes according to national guidance. People with the most severe and complex obesity are eligible for bariatric surgery. Primary care plays a key role in identifying overweight/obesity and referring to WM interventions. This study aimed to (1) describe the primary care population in England who (a) are referred for WM interventions and (b) undergo bariatric surgery and (2) determine the patient and GP practice characteristics associated with both. Methods and findings: An observational cohort study was undertaken using routinely collected primary care data in England from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked with Hospital Episode Statistics. During the study period (January 2007 to June 2020), 1,811,587 adults met the inclusion criteria of a recording of overweight/obesity in primary care, of which 54.62% were female and 20.10% aged 45 to 54. Only 56,783 (3.13%) were referred to WM, and 3,701 (1.09% of those with severe and complex obesity) underwent bariatric surgery. Multivariable Poisson regression examined the associations of demographic, clinical, and regional characteristics on the likelihood of WM referral and bariatric surgery. Higher body mass index (BMI) and practice region had the strongest associations with both outcomes. People with BMI ≥40 kg/m2 were more than 6 times as likely to be referred for WM (10.05% of individuals) than BMI 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m2 (1.34%) (rate ratio (RR) 6.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) [5.99,6.40], p < 0.001). They were more than 5 times as likely to undergo bariatric surgery (3.98%) than BMI 35.0 to 40.0 kg/m2 with a comorbidity (0.53%) (RR 5.52, 95% CI [5.07,6.02], p < 0.001). Patients from practices in the West Midlands were the most likely to have a WM referral (5.40%) (RR 2.17, 95% CI [2.10,2.24], p < 0.001, compared with the North West, 2.89%), and practices from the East of England least likely (1.04%) (RR 0.43, 95% CI [0.41,0.46], p < 0.001, compared with North West). Patients from practices in London were the most likely to undergo bariatric surgery (2.15%), and practices in the North West the least likely (0.68%) (RR 3.29, 95% CI [2.88,3.76], p < 0.001, London compared with North West). Longer duration since diagnosis with severe and complex obesity (e.g., 1.67% of individuals diagnosed in 2007 versus 0.34% in 2015, RR 0.20, 95% CI [0.12,0.32], p < 0.001), and increasing comorbidities (e.g., 2.26% of individuals with 6+ comorbidities versus 1.39% with none (RR 8.79, 95% CI [7.16,10.79], p < 0.001) were also strongly associated with bariatric surgery. The main limitation is the reliance on overweight/obesity being recorded within primary care records to identify the study population. Conclusions: Between 2007 and 2020, a very small percentage of the primary care population eligible for WM referral or bariatric surgery according to national guidance received either. Higher BMI and GP practice region had the strongest associations with both. Regional inequalities may reflect differences in commissioning and provision of WM services across the country. Multi-stakeholder qualitative research is ongoing to understand the barriers to accessing WM services and potential solutions. Together with population-wide prevention strategies, improved access to WM interventions is needed to reduce obesity levels. Using routinely collected primary and secondary care data, Karen D Coulman and colleagues investigate how access to weight management services varies across England. Author summary: Why was this study done?: Nearly two-thirds of adults in England live with overweight or obesity, which can affect physical, mental, and social health and well-being. According to national guidance, these individuals should be able to access publicly funded weight management (WM) programmes, including bariatric surgery for those where weight is having a serious impact on their health (severe and complex obesity). However, researchers have previously uncovered concerns that a very low percentage of people were accessing these services, and it is unknown whether this has improved in line with the growing number of people who might benefit from them. What did the researchers do and find?: The researchers used routinely collected health data to identify 1,811,587 adults who had overweight or obesity documented in their primary care record during 2007 to 2020. Only 3% of these adults had a WM referral recorded during the study period. Only 1% of the 436,501 adults with severe and complex obesity underwent bariatric surgery. Higher body mass index and region of GP practice were the factors that were most strongly associated with receiving a WM referral and undergoing bariatric surgery. What do these findings mean?: This study suggests that access to WM interventions in England has not improved over the last 10 years, despite obesity rates continuing to rise. The regional differences in access to WM programmes including bariatric surgery are important and require national attention. Not everyone with overweight and obesity have their weight recorded in their primary care record, and so, the true percentage receiving a WM referral may be even lower. We did not, however, identify individuals who may receive WM advice through other disease programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Triple therapy is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who remain symptomatic despite dual therapy. The optimal timing of triple therapy following an exacerbation of COPD is unknown. The outcomes of prompt (≤ 30 days) vs. delayed (31–180 days) initiation of single-inhaler triple therapy with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) following an exacerbation of COPD were examined. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of linked English primary (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and secondary (Hospital Episode Statistics) care data. Patients aged ≥ 35 years with COPD were indexed on the first and/or earliest date of exacerbation between November 15, 2017 and March 31, 2019 with subsequent FF/UMEC/VI initiation within 180 days. Patients were required to be continuously registered with a general practitioner for ≥ 12 months prior to and following index. Subsequent exacerbations, direct medical costs, and hospital readmissions were compared between prompt and delayed initiators. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for measured confounders between cohorts. Results: Overall, 1599 patients were included (prompt: 393, delayed: 1206). After weighting, prompt initiators had numerically lower moderate/severe exacerbations compared with delayed initiators (rate ratio: 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76–1.01, p = 0.0587). Both all-cause and COPD-related 30-day hospital readmissions were significantly lower among patients with prompt initiation compared with delayed initiators (all-cause: 23.6% vs. 34.6%, odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.36–0.95], p = 0.0293; COPD-related: 20.3% vs. 30.6%, odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.35–0.96], p = 0.0347). Prompt initiators also had numerically lower all-cause total costs and significantly lower COPD-related costs per-person-per year compared with delayed initiators (COPD-related: £742 vs. £801, p = 0.0016). Conclusion: Prompt initiation of FF/UMEC/VI following a moderate/severe exacerbation was associated with fewer subsequent exacerbations, fewer hospital readmissions, and lower COPD-related medical costs compared with delayed initiation. Plain language summary: Triple therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who still experience symptoms while taking dual therapy (LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA). Triple therapy can be taken using single or multiple inhalers. The best time to start triple therapy for patients who may benefit from it following a short-term worsening (flare-up) of their COPD symptoms is unknown. This study assesses the effect of starting treatment with triple therapy sooner compared with later in patients with COPD. Patients who experienced a flare-up of their COPD symptoms were split into two groups – those who started taking triple therapy (via a single inhaler) within 30 days of their symptom flare-up and those who started taking triple therapy 31–180 days following their symptom flare-up. Over the 12 months following the initial flare-up, patients who started triple therapy earlier (within 30 days) had fewer subsequent symptom flare-ups, fewer hospital admissions, and lower healthcare costs compared with patients who started triple therapy later (31–180 days). These findings suggest that doctors should consider prescribing triple therapy (via a single inhaler) to their patients with COPD straight away if they experience a flare-up of their symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bespoke self-report resource-use measures (RUMs) are commonly developed or adapted for each new randomised controlled trial. Consequently, RUMs lack standardisation and validation is rarely conducted. A new generic RUM, ModRUM, has been developed using a rigorous process, including consultation with health economists and patients. ModRUM includes a concise core healthcare module, designed to be included in all trials, and depth-adding questions, which can replace or be added to core questions as needed. Modules covering other sectors are under development. The aim of this study was to test the acceptability, feasibility, and criterion and construct validity of the healthcare module of ModRUM. Methods: Patients who had a recent appointment at their GP practice were invited to complete ModRUM (core module or core module with depth questions), a characteristics form and the EQ-5D-5L. Acceptability was assessed via response rates and questionnaire completion time. Feasibility was assessed by reviewing issues observed in participants' responses and question completion rates. Construct validity was tested via hypothesis testing and known-group analyses, using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskal–Wallis tests, and a generalised linear model. Criterion validity was tested by comparing ModRUM results with primary care medical records. Sensitivity, specificity, and agreement using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (pc) were estimated. Results: One hundred patients participated from five GP practices in the South-West of England. Acceptability was higher for the core module (20% versus 10% response rate). Question completion rates were high across both versions (> 90%). Some support was observed for construct validity, with results suggesting that healthcare costs differ dependent on the number of long-term conditions (p < 0.05) and are negatively associated with health-related quality of life (p < 0.01). Sensitivity was high for all questions (> 0.83), while specificity varied (0.33–0.88). There was a good level of agreement for GP contacts and costs, and prescribed medication costs (pc > 0.6). Conclusion: This study provided preliminary evidence of the acceptability, feasibility, and criterion and construct validity of ModRUM. Further testing is required within trials and with groups that were less well represented in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) use and/or inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) underuse are common and are associated with poor asthma outcomes. This study explored patients' and healthcare practitioners' (HCPs') perspectives to contextualize asthma treatment patterns observed in real-world studies.Methods: Data were collected using online surveys from HCPs and people with asthma (≥ 18 years old with a confirmed asthma diagnosis of any severity) who had consented to research participation through the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.Results: In total, 76 HCPs and 63 patients were invited to take part. Of 48 valid HCP responders, 54.2% (n=26) reported scheduling an annual asthma treatment review with their patients and 83.3% of general practitioners (n=40) had prescribed repeated inhalers at the patient's request. Of 47 valid patient responders, 57.4% (n=27) reported using their reliever (SABA) inhaler daily and 55.3% of patients (n=26) reported being prescribed a preventer inhaler. Of the total patient responders, 31.9% (n=15) reported that they never used their preventer inhaler. Consistent annual adherence with preventer inhalers was reported by 44.7% of all valid responders (n=21), while other patients admitted to using preventers intermittently.Conclusion: SABA and ICS prescription patterns are driven by a combination of HCP and patient factors. Opportunities exist to improve asthma control and behaviours around inhaler use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are inequalities in the geographical distribution of the primary care workforce in England. Primary care networks (PCNs), and the associated Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS) funding, have stimulated employment of new healthcare roles. However, it is not clear whether this will impact inequalities. Aim: To examine whether the ARRS impacted inequality in the distribution of the primary care workforce. Design and setting: A retrospective before-and-after study of English PCNs in 2019 and 2022. Method: The study combined workforce, population, and deprivation data at network level for March 2019 and March 2022. The change was estimated between 2019 and 2022 in the slope index of inequality (SII) across deprivation of full-time equivalent (FTE) GPs (total doctors, qualified GPs, and doctors-in-training), nurses, direct patient care, administrative, ARRS and non- ARRS, and total staff per 10 000 patients. Results: A total of 1255 networks were included. Nurses and qualified GPs decreased in number while all other staff roles increased, with ARRS staff having the greatest increase. There was a pro- rich change in the SII for administrative staff (−0.482, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.841 to −0.122, P<0.01) and a pro- poor change for doctors-in-training (0.161, 95% CI = 0.049 to 0.274, P<0.01). Changes in distribution of all other staff types were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Between 2019 and 2022 the distribution of administrative staff became less pro-poor, and doctors-in-training became pro-poor. The changes in inequality in all other staff groups were mixed. The introduction of PCNs has not substantially changed the longstanding inequalities in the geographical distribution of the primary care workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The recent publication of data on appointment volumes for all general practices in England has enabled representative analysis of factors affecting appointment activity rates for the first time. Aim: To identify population, workforce, and organisational predictors of practice variations in appointment volume. Design and setting: A multivariable cross-sectional regression analysis of 6284 general practices in England was undertaken using data from August–October 2022. Method: Multivariable regression analyses was conducted. It related population age and deprivation, numbers of GPs, nurses, and other care professionals, and organisation characteristics to numbers of appointments by staff type and to proportions of appointments on the same or next day after booking. Results: Appointment levels were higher at practices serving rural areas. Practices serving more deprived populations had more appointments with other care professionals but not GPs. One additional full-time equivalent (FTE) GP was associated with an extra 175 appointments over 3 months. Additional FTEs of other staff types were associated with larger differences in appointment rates (367 appointments per additional nurse and 218 appointments per additional other care professional over 3 months). There was evidence of substitution between staff types in appointment provision. Levels of staffing were not associated with proportions of same-or next-day appointments. Conclusion: Higher staffing levels are associated with more appointment provision, but not speed of appointment availability. New information on activity levels has shown evidence of substitution between GPs and other care professionals in appointment provision and demonstrated additional workload for practices serving deprived and rural areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article NHS England and NHS Education for Scotland describe practical ways we are tackling differences in the attainment of people training as general practitioners (GPs). Trainees from minority ethnic groups and international medical graduates are less likely than others to qualify as GPs. It is difficult to change systemic inequalities, but over the past five years we have made practical changes to GP speciality training. Educators recognise there is an issue and are trying to tackle it. For example, people who had not successfully qualified had an opportunity to return to GP training. When we provided individualised targeted support, the proportion who completed training significantly increased (76%). This was a catalyst for reviewing unconscious bias in GP training. We implemented a national programme to tackle differential attainment and system-level bias. Educators now work with all GP trainees to identify their individual needs. Supervisors are trained to recognise bias and provide targeted support. There is mental health support and regular reviews to see whether trainees are ready to sit exams. Trainee representatives are championing the learner voice in national committees. Exams are being altered to reduce unconscious bias. We are monitoring attainment over time. The key message is that differential attainment should not be in the 'too hard basket'. The narrative is changing from 'can't do' to 'must do', supported by appropriate leadership, promotion and resourcing. There is much more to do, but we are making changes, evaluating and applying our learning. We have moved from talking to taking action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: An estimated 15 million patients in England have at least 1 long-term condition, with the prevalence of chronic kidney disease rising. Understanding educational support can help navigate between health sectors. Methodology: This research used Qualitative Methodology, and an Inductive Content Analysis (ICA) approach which is particularly effective in linking theory, or framework. Two workshops took place in May and June (2019) wherein topic tagging activities were co-developed between the Renal Patient Support Group (RPSG) and the Kidney Disease and Renal Support Groups (KDARs) for Kids platforms. 19 participants between 4 cohorts, that included 6 General Practitioner (GPs), 4 Healthcare Scientists (HS), 3 Nephrologists/ Clinicians (N/Cs), and 6 CKD Patients (CKDPs) were recruited and participated in telephone interviews. Topic guides were developed for participant cohorts with several themes to collect data through one-to-one telephone interviews. NViVo-12 software provided opportunity to code and glean insight to develop overall conclusions Results: Nine main themes and several sub-themes were identified when coding for health professionals, and 9 main themes and several sub-themes identified when coding qualitative data for chronic kidney disease patients. Conclusion: There needs to be a coordinated effort between patients and professionals, to understand how chronic kidney disease education should be more integrated at point of care, and in line with public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Identifying and responding to patients affected by domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is vital in primary care. There may have been a rise in the reporting of DVA cases during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown measures. Concurrently general practice adopted remote working that extended to training and education. IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety) is an example of an evidence-based UK healthcare training support and referral programme, focusing on DVA. IRIS transitioned to remote delivery during the pandemic. Aim: To understand the adaptations and impact of remote DVA training in IRIS-trained general practices by exploring perspectives of those delivering and receiving training. Design and setting: Qualitative interviews and observation of remote training of general practice teams in England were undertaken. Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants (three practice managers, three reception and administrative staff, eight general practice clinicians, and seven specialist DVA staff), alongside observation of eight remote training sessions. Analysis was conducted using a framework approach. Results: Remote DVA training in UK general practice widened access to learners. However, it may have reduced learner engagement compared with face-to-face training and may challenge safeguarding of remote learners who are domestic abuse survivors. DVA training is integral to the partnership between general practice and specialist DVA services, and reduced engagement risks weakening this partnership. Conclusion: The authors recommend a hybrid DVA training model for general practice, including remote information delivery alongside a structured face-to-face element. This has broader relevance for other specialist services providing training and education in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the original synthetic control (OSC) method with alternative approaches (Generalized [GSC], Micro [MSC], and Bayesian [BSC] synthetic control methods) and re‐evaluate the impact of a significant restructuring of urgent and emergency care in Northeast England, which included the opening of the UK's first purpose‐built specialist emergency care hospital. Data Sources: Simulations and data from Secondary Uses Service data, a single comprehensive repository for patient‐level health care data in England. Study Design: Hospital use of individuals exposed and unexposed to the restructuring is compared. We estimate the impact using OSC, MSC, BSC, and GSC applied at the general practice level. We contrast the estimation methods' performance in a Monte Carlo simulation study. Data Collection/Extraction Methods: Hospital activity data from Secondary Uses Service for patients aged over 18 years registered at a general practice in England from April 2011 to March 2019. Principal Findings: None of the methods dominated all simulation scenarios. GSC was generally preferred. In contrast to an earlier evaluation that used OSC, GSC reported a smaller impact of the opening of the hospital on Accident and Emergency (A&E) department (also known as emergency department or casualty) visits and no evidence for any impact on the proportion of A&E patients seen within 4 h. Conclusions: The simulation study highlights cases where the considered methods may lead to biased estimates in health policy evaluations. GSC was found to be the most reliable method of those considered. Considering more disaggregated data over a longer time span and applying GSC indicates that the specialist emergency care hospitals in Northumbria had less impact on A&E visits and waiting times than suggested by the original evaluation which applied OSC to more aggregated data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pertussis, a highly infectious respiratory disease caused by Bordetella pertussis, affects people of all ages. Older adults are particularly susceptible to its severe outcomes and complications. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the incidence rate of pertussis among individuals aged ≥ 50 years was assessed during 2009–2018 using Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics databases, United Kingdom. Health care resource utilisation (HCRU) and direct medical costs (DMCs) were compared between patients with a pertussis diagnosis and propensity score-matched controls (matched on demographic and clinical variables). Results: Among 5,222,860 individuals, 1638 had a pertussis diagnosis (incidence rate: 5.8 per 100,000 person-years; 95% confidence interval 5.5–6.0). Baseline (– 18 to – 6 months) HCRU and DMC were similar among 1480 pertussis patients and 1480 matched controls. However, there were increases in HCRU in the pertussis vs. matched cohort around the pertussis diagnosis (from months – 6 to – 1 to 5–11). The most notable increases (pertussis vs. controls) were in the rates of general practitioner (GP)/nurse visits (4.7-fold), clinical assessments (4.1-fold), and accident and emergency visits (3.0-fold) during the month before diagnosis and GP/nurse visits during the 2 months after diagnosis (2.5-fold) (all p < 0.001). DMCs were significantly higher in the pertussis cohort (p < 0.001). Total excess DMC in the pertussis cohort during months – 1 to + 11 was £318 per patient. Conclusion: A pertussis diagnosis among adults aged ≥ 50 years resulted in significant increases in HCRU and DMC across several months around diagnosis. These results highlight the need for increased awareness of pertussis infection among adults aged ≥ 50 years and suggest that pertussis booster doses among this population should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Studies show that the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected people with diabetes and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. During the first 6 months of the UK lockdown, > 6.6 M glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) tests were missed. We now report variability in the recovery of HbA1c testing, and its association with diabetes control and demographic characteristics. Methods: In a service evaluation, we examined HbA1c testing across ten UK sites (representing 9.9% of England's population) from January 2019 to December 2021. We compared monthly requests from April 2020 to those in the equivalent 2019 months. We examined effects of (i) HbA1c level, (ii) between-practice variability, and (iii) practice demographics. Results: In April 2020, monthly requests dropped to 7.9–18.1% of 2019 volumes. By July 2020, testing had recovered to 61.7–86.9% of 2019 levels. During April–June 2020, we observed a 5.1-fold variation in the reduction of HbA1c testing between general practices (12.4–63.8% of 2019 levels). There was evidence of limited prioritization of testing for patients with HbA1c > 86 mmol/mol during April–June 2020 (4.6% of total tests vs. 2.6% during 2019). Testing in areas with the highest social disadvantage was lower during the first lockdown (April–June 2020; trend test p < 0.001) and two subsequent periods (July–September and October–December 2020; both p < 0.001). By February 2021, testing in the highest deprivation group had a cumulative fall in testing of 34.9% of 2019 levels versus 24.6% in those in the lowest group. Conclusion: Our findings highlight that the pandemic response had a major impact on diabetes monitoring and screening. Despite limited test prioritization in the > 86 mmol/mol group, this failed to acknowledge that those in the 59–86 mmol/mol group require consistent monitoring to achieve the best outcomes. Our findings provide additional evidence that those from poorer backgrounds were disproportionately disadvantaged. Healthcare services should redress this health inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: GPs and patients value continuity of care. Ethnic differences in continuity could contribute to inequalities in experience and outcomes. Aim: To describe relational continuity of care in general practice by ethnicity and long-term conditions. Design and setting: In total, 381 474 patients in England were included from a random sample from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (January 2016 to December 2019). Method: Face-to-face, telephone, and online consultations with a GP were included. Continuity, measured by the Usual Provider of Care and Bice–Boxerman indices, was calculated for patients with ≥3 consultations. Ethnicity was taken from the GP record or linked Hospital Episode Statistics data, and long-term conditions were counted at baseline. Multilevel regression models were used to describe continuity by ethnicity sequentially adjusted for: a) the number of consultations, follow-up time, age, sex, and practice-level random intercept; b) socioeconomic deprivation in the patient's residential area; and c) long-term conditions. Results: On full adjustment, 5 of 10 ethnic minority groups (Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Black African, Black Caribbean, and any other Black background) had lower continuity of care compared with White patients. Continuity was lower for patients in more deprived areas and younger patients but this did not account for ethnic differences in continuity. Differences by ethnicity were also seen in patients with ≥2 long-term conditions. Conclusion: Ethnic minority identity and socioeconomic deprivation have additive associations with lower continuity of care. Structural factors affecting demand for, and supply of, GPs should be assessed for their contribution to ethnic inequalities in relational continuity and other care quality domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Seasonal vaccination against influenza and in-pandemic COVID-19 vaccination are top public health priorities; vaccines are the primary means of reducing infections and also controlling pressures on health systems. During the 2018–2019 influenza season, we conducted a study of the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours of 159 general practitioners (GPs) and 189 patients aged ≥65 years in England using a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches to document beliefs about seasonal influenza and seasonal influenza vaccine. GPs were surveyed before and after a continuing medical education (CME) module on influenza disease and vaccination with an adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) designed for patients aged ≥65 years, and patients were surveyed before and after a routine visit with a GP who participated in the CME portion of the study. The CME course was associated with significantly increased GP confidence in their ability to address patients' questions and concerns about influenza disease and vaccination (p < 0.001). Patients reported significantly increased confidence in the effectiveness and safety of aTIV after meeting their GP. Overall, 82.2% of the study population were vaccinated against influenza (including 137 patients vaccinated during the GP visit and 15 patients who had been previously vaccinated), a rate higher than the English national average vaccine uptake of 72.0% that season. These findings support the value of GP-patient interactions to foster vaccine acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: This paper aims to improve understanding of factors that contribute to persistent ethnic disparities in patient satisfaction in England. The specific objectives are to (i) examine ethnic differences in patient satisfaction with their primary care in England; and (ii) establish factors that contribute to ethnic differences in patient satisfaction. Data and methods: The study is based on secondary analysis of recent General Practitioner Patient Survey (GPPS) datasets of 2019, 2020 and 2021. Descriptive bivariate analysis was used to examine ethnic differences in patient satisfaction across the three years. This was followed with multilevel linear regression, with General Practice (GP) at level-1 and Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) at level-2 to identify factors contributing to ethnic differences in patient satisfaction. Results: The findings show consistent negative correlations between the proportion of patients reporting good (very or fairly good) overall experience and each of the ethnic minority groups. Further examination of the distribution of patient satisfaction by ethnicity, based on combined ethnic minority groups, depicted a clear negative association between ethnic minority group and patient satisfaction at both GP and CCG levels. Multilevel regression analysis identified several service-related factors (especially ease of using GP website and being treated with care and concern) that largely explained the ethnic differences in patient satisfaction. Of all factors relating to patient characteristics considered in the analysis, none was significant after controlling for GP service-related factors. Conclusions: Ethnic minority patients in England continue to consistently report lower satisfaction with their primary health care in recent years. This is largely attributable to supply (service related) rather than demand (patient characteristics) factors. These findings have important implications for health care system policy and practice at both GP and CCG levels in England. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practices in primary care across England are increasingly employing clinical pharmacists to help tackle the workforce crisis and alleviate pressure. Clinical pharmacists can provide administrative and clinical duties, including non-medical prescribing, advice on polypharmacy and medicines optimisation. The aim of this study was to investigate the distribution of clinical pharmacists in general practice across England, and explore the relationship between the distribution and regional demography. Methods: This study used publicly available government database from various sources pertaining to primary care general practice workforce and population demographics of England. The number and distribution of pharmacists working within general practices in England were analysed and compared across practices considering general practitioner (GP), nurse and patient population in the practices, patients age ≥ 65 years and over and the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) scores. Results: Twenty two percentage (1469 of 6674) of practices in England were found to have access to a clinical pharmacist, equating to 1358 full-time equivalent (FTE) pharmacists and a mean pharmacist FTE of 10.07 (95% CI 8.40, 11.75, SD = 9.84) per Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). A significant relationship between pharmacist FTE and the number of patients 65 years and older [r (132) = 0.75, P < 0.001)] was observed; however, the distribution was not related to population deprivation scores. Conclusions: Approximately one in five general practices in England have access to a clinical pharmacist. Further research is needed to ensure wider and equitable distribution based on workforce needs and practice population demography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognition that social factors, such as income and housing, influence health outcomes has led healthcare systems to invest in improving people's social conditions. Acceptability of screening to patients and caregivers Social risk screening can only be widely adopted if patients and caregivers find it acceptable. But there is some evidence to suggest that provider concerns about social risk screening reduce after training and education about screening or after participation in a screening programme. [Extracted from the article]

Background: There is a marked increase in unscheduled care visits in school-aged children with asthma after returning to school in September. This is potentially associated with children not taking their asthma preventer medication during the school summer holidays. A cluster randomised controlled trial (PLEASANT) was undertaken with 1279 school-age children in 141 general practices (71 on intervention and 70 on control) in England and Wales. It found that a simple letter sent from the family doctor during the school holidays to a parent with a child with asthma, informing them of the importance of taking asthma preventer medication during the summer relatively increased prescriptions by 30% in August and reduced medical contacts in the period September to December. Also, it is estimated there was a cost-saving of £36.07 per patient over the year. We aim to conduct a randomised trial to assess if informing GP practices of an evidence-based intervention improves the implementation of that intervention.Methods/design: The TRAINS study-TRial to Assess Implementation of New research in a primary care Setting-is a pragmatic cluster randomised implementation trial using routine data. A total of 1389 general practitioner (GP) practices in England will be included into the trial; 694 GP practices will be randomised to the intervention group and 695 control group of usual care. The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) will send the intervention and obtain all data for the study, including prescription and primary care contacts data. The intervention will be sent in June 2021 by postal and email to the asthma lead and/or practice manager. The intervention is a letter to GPs informing them of the PLEASANT study findings with recommendations. It will come with an information leaflet about PLEASANT and a suggested reminder letter and SMS text template.Discussion: The trial will assess if informing GP practices of the PLEASANT trial results will increase prescription uptake before the start of the school year. The hope is that the intervention will increase the implementation of PLEASANT work and then increase prescription uptake during the summer holiday prior to the start of school.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05226091. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the UK, the General Medical Council (GMC) and Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) require doctors to consider spiritual health in their consultations. There are documented barriers to discussion of spiritual health, and suggested tools to help overcome them. Aim: To investigate how comfortable general practitioners (GPs) feel about discussing spiritual health in the consultation, and whether a structured tool (the HOPE tool) would be helpful. Design and setting: A mixed-methods online survey completed by GPs in England. Method: A mixed methods online survey of practicing GPs in England asked about current comfort with the topic of spiritual health and use of spiritual history-taking tools. The acceptability of the HOPE tool was investigated using patient vignettes drawn from clinical practice. Results: 177 GPs responded. 88 (49.71%) reported that they were comfortable asking patients about spiritual health. GPs felt most comfortable raising the topic after a patient cue (mean difference between pre and post cue 26%). The HOPE tool was viewed as acceptable to use with patients by 65% of participants, although its limitations were acknowledged. Qualitative data showed concerns about regulator (the GMC) and peer disapproval were major barriers to discussions, especially in the case of discordance between patient and doctor background. Conclusion: Only half of GPs are comfortable discussing spiritual health. Dedicated training, using a structured approach, with regulatory approval, may help overcome barriers to GPs discussing spiritual health. Further research into the benefits, and risks, of discussion of spiritual health in the GP consultation is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Beta-blockers Or Placebo for Primary Prophylaxis of oesophageal varices (BOPPP) trial is a 3-year phase IV, multi-centre clinical trial of investigational medicinal product (CTIMP) that aims to determine the effectiveness of carvedilol in the prevention of variceal bleeding for small oesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis. Early engagement of General Practitioners (GPs) in conversations about delivery of a potentially effective secondary care-initiated treatment in primary care provides insights for future implementation. The aim of this study was to understand the implementation of trial findings by exploring i) GP perspectives on factors that influence implementation beyond the context of the trial and ii) how dose titration and ongoing treatment with carvedilol is best delivered in primary care. Methods: This qualitative study was embedded within the BOPPP trial and was conducted alongside site opening. GP participants were purposively sampled and recruited from ten Clinical Commissioning Groups in England and three Health Boards across Wales. Semi-structured telephone individual interviews were conducted with GPs (n = 23) working in England and Wales. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings: Five overarching themes were identified: i) primary care is best placed for oversight, ii) a shared approach led by secondary care, iii) empower the patient to take responsibility, iv) the need to go above and beyond and v) develop practice guidance. The focus on prevention, attention to holistic care, and existing and often long-standing relationships with patients provides an impetus for GP oversight. GPs spoke about the value of partnership working with secondary care and of prioritising patient-centred care and involving patients in taking responsibility for their own health. An agreed pathway of care, clear communication, and specific, accessible guidance on how to implement the proposed treatment strategy safely and effectively are important determinants in the success of implementation. Conclusions: Our findings for implementing secondary care-initiated treatment in primary care are important to the specifics of the BOPPP trial but can also go some way in informing wider learning for other trials where work is shared across the primary-secondary care interface, and where findings will impact the primary care workload. We propose a systems research perspective for addressing implementation of CTIMP findings at the outset of research. The value of early stakeholder involvement is highlighted, and the need to consider complexity in terms of the interaction between the intervention and the context in which it is implemented is acknowledged. Trial registration: ISRCTN10324656. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Medication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) intervention was shown to reduce medication errors when tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial and when implemented across one region of England. Now that it has been rolled out nationally, and to enhance findings from evaluations with staff and stakeholders, this paper is the first to report patients' perceived acceptability on the use of PINCER in primary care and proposes suggestions on how delivery of PINCER related care could be delivered in a way that is acceptable and not unnecessarily burdensome. Methods: A total of 46 participants living with long-term health conditions who had experience of medication reviews and/or monitoring were recruited through patient participant groups and social media. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted face-to-face or via telephone. A thematic analysis was conducted and findings mapped to the constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Results: Two themes were identified and interpreted within the most relevant TFA construct: Perceptions on the purpose and components of PINCER (Affective Attitude and Intervention Coherence) and Perceived patient implications (Burden and Self-efficacy). Overall perceptions on PINCER were positive with participants showing good understanding of the components. Access to medication reviews, which PINCER related care can involve, was reported to be limited and a lack of consistency in practitioners delivering reviews was considered challenging, as was lack of communication between primary care and other health-care providers. Patients thought it would be helpful if medication reviews and prescription renewal times were synchronised. Remote medication review consultations were more convenient for some but viewed as a barrier to communication by others. It was acknowledged that some patients may be more resistant to change and more willing to accept changes initiated by general practitioners. Conclusions: Participants found the concept of PINCER acceptable; however, acceptability could be improved if awareness on the role of primary care pharmacists is raised and patient-pharmacist relationships enhanced. Being transparent with communication and delivering streamlined and consistent but flexible PINCER related care is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In some countries, such as the Netherlands and Norway, point-of-care testing (POCT) is more widely implemented in general practice compared to countries such as England and Australia. To comprehend what is necessary to realize the benefits of POCT, regarding its integration in primary care, it would be beneficial to have an overview of the structure of healthcare operations and the transactions between stakeholders (also referred to as value networks). The aim of this paper is to identify the current value networks in place applying to POCT implementation at general practices in England, Australia, Norway and the Netherlands and to compare these networks in terms of seven previously published factors that support the successful implementation, sustainability and scale-up of innovations. Methods: The value networks were described based on formal guidelines and standards published by the respective governments, organizational bodies and affiliates. The value network of each country was validated by at least two relevant stakeholders from the respective country. Results: The analysis revealed that the biggest challenge for countries with low POCT uptake was the lack of effective communication between the several organizations involved with POCT as well as the high workload for general practitioners (GPs) aiming to implement POCT. It is observed that countries with a single national authority responsible for POCT have a better uptake as they can govern the task of POCT roll-out and management and reduce the workload for GPs by assisting with set-up, quality control, training and support. Conclusion: Setting up a single national authority may be an effective step towards realizing the full benefits of POCT. Although it is possible for day-to-day operations to fall under the responsibility of the GP, this is only feasible if support and guidance are readily available to ensure that the workload associated with POCT is limited and as low as possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Around 43% of emergency department (ED) attendances can be managed in general practice. Strategies to address this include directing appropriate patients to GPs working in or alongside EDs (GPED). Views of GPs choosing to work in GPED roles may inform planning and implementation of GPED services as well as wider general practice provision. Aim: To explore the experiences and motivations of GPs choosing to work in GPED services in England, and to identify factors that may support or hinder GPs working in GPED roles. Design and setting: Thematic analysis of 42 semi-structured interviews of GPs working in 10 GPED case sites across England. Method: Qualitative GP interviews from a mixed-methods study of GPs in GPED roles were thematically analysed in relation to research aims. Results: Four themes were generated: the 'pull' of a portfolio career; the 'push' of disillusionment with general practice; professional reciprocity; sustainability of GPED services and core general practice. Flexible, favourable working conditions, collaboration, and professional development made GPED an attractive workplace, often as part of a portfolio career or after retiring from core general practice. Working in GPED services was largely driven by disillusionment with core general practice. Both GPED and core general practice were thought to benefit from GPED GPs' skills. There were concerns about GPED sustainability and destabilisation of core general practice. Conclusion: GPED may extend the clinical careers of experienced GPs and support recruitment and retention of more recently qualified GPs. Despite some benefits, GPED may destabilise core general practice and increase pressure on both environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rates of blood testing in primary care are rising. Communicating blood test results generates significant workload for patients, GPs, and practice staff. Aim: To explore GPs' and patients' experience of systems of blood test communication. Design and setting: Qualitative interviews with patients and GPs in UK primary care in both urban and rural practices in the West of England. Method: A total of 28 patients and 19 GPs from six practices were recruited, with a range of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Patients were interviewed at two time points: a) at or soon after their blood test and b) after they had received their test results. The GPs who requested the tests were also interviewed (they could complete a maximum of two interviews about different patients). Eighty qualitative interviews were undertaken; 54 patient interviews and 26 GP interviews. Results: Methods of test result communication varied between doctors and were based on habits, unwritten heuristics, and personal preferences rather than protocols. Doctors expected patients to know how to access their test results. In contrast, patients were often uncertain and used guesswork to decide when and how to access their tests. Patients and doctors generally assumed that the other party would make contact, with potential implications for patient safety. Text messaging and online methods of communication have benefits, but were perceived by some patients as 'flippant' or 'confusing'. Delays and difficulties obtaining and interpreting test results can lead to anxiety and frustration for patients. Conclusion: Current systems of test result communication are complex and confusing, and mostly based on habits and routines rather than clear protocols. This has important implications for patient-centred care and patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity (PA) contributes to the prevention and management of many health conditions. Primary care practitioners have an important role to play in supporting people to be physically active. Aim: This study had the following three aims: 1) to explore GPs' awareness and knowledge of the PA guidelines; 2) to assess GPs' confidence in promoting PA; and 3) to explore factors that influence PA promotion among GPs. Design & setting: Cross-sectional survey, using secondary analysis. Method: UK-based GPs were invited to take part in an online survey in January 2021. Demographic questions were followed by nine multiple choice questions. Categorical data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and open-ended data were analysed using content analysis and inductive coding. Results: In total, 839 GPs based in England completed the survey. Most GP responders (98.9%) believed that PA was important, yet only 35.7% reported being at least 'somewhat familiar' with current PA guidance. Despite this, 74.1% of GPs reported feeling confident raising the topic of PA with their patients. Barriers included lack of time, perceptions of patient attitude and risk, language issues, and COVID-19. Key facilitators were identified and 'Couch to 5k' and the 'parkrun practice' initiatives were the most widely used support tools. Conclusion: GPs value PA yet well-known barriers exist to embedding promotion into primary care. As primary care reconfigures, there is an opportunity to embed PA into systems, services, and processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internationally, the quality of death certification is poor although there are multiple efforts underway to improve the process. In England, a new medical certification system has been proposed to improve the quality of data. We surveyed general practitioners (n = 95) across the West Yorkshire area of England to appraise their views regarding whether further possible changes to the death certification system could promote their quality., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder, for which there are effective pharmacological treatments that improve symptoms and reduce complications. Guidelines published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend that primary care practitioners prescribe medication for adult ADHD under shared-care agreements with Adult Mental Health Services (AMHS). However, provision remains uneven, with some practitioners reporting a lack of support., Aim: This study aimed to describe elements of support, and their availability/use, in primary care prescribing for adult ADHD medication in England to improve access for this underserved population and inform service improvement., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional surveys were used to elicit data from commissioners, health professionals (HPs), and people with lived experience of ADHD (LE) across England about elements supporting pharmacological treatment of ADHD in primary care., Method: Three interlinked cross-sectional surveys were used to ask every integrated care board in England (commissioners), along with convenience samples of HPs and LEs, about prescribing rates, AMHS availability, wait times, and shared-care agreement protocols/policies for the pharmacological treatment of ADHD in primary care. Descriptive analyses, percentages, and confidence intervals were used to summarise responses by stakeholder group. Variations in reported provision and practice were explored and displayed visually using mapping software., Results: Data from 782 responders (42 commissioners, 331 HPs, 409 LEs) revealed differences in reported provision by stakeholder group, including for prescribing (95% of HPs versus 64% of LEs). In all, >40% of responders reported extended AMHS wait times of ≥2 years. There was some variability by NHS region - for example, London had the lowest reported extended wait time (25%), while East of England had the highest (55%)., Conclusion: Elements supporting appropriate shared-care prescribing of ADHD medication via primary care are not universally available in England. Coordinated approaches are needed to address these gaps., (© The Authors.)

Background: Incident benzodiazepine prescriptions in primary care for anxiety decreased between 2003 and 2018. However, from 2008, incident prescribing of benzodiazepines for anxiety increased among those aged 18-34 years. There are increasing concerns around prescribing of benzodiazepines. Further, although guidelines state benzodiazepines should only be prescribed short term, in 2017, 44% of incident prescriptions were prescribed for longer than the recommended duration of 2-4 weeks., Aim: To understand when and why GPs prescribe benzodiazepines for anxiety in young adults., Design and Setting: A qualitative study was undertaken using in-depth interviews with 17 GPs from 10 general practices in South West England., Method: Interviews were conducted by telephone or videocall. A topic guide was used to ensure consistency across interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and data analysed using reflexive thematic analysis., Results: GPs described caution in prescribing benzodiazepines for anxiety in young adults, but thought they had an important role in acute situations. GPs described caution in prescribing duration, but some thought longer-term prescriptions could be appropriate. In light of these views, some GPs questioned whether primary care needs to revisit how clinicians are using benzodiazepines. GPs perceived that some young adults requested benzodiazepines and suggested this might be because they wanted quick symptom relief. GPs noted that refusing to prescribe felt uncomfortable and that the number of young adults presenting to general practice, already dependent on benzodiazepines, had increased., Conclusion: Patient-driven factors for prescribing benzodiazepines suggest there are current unmet treatment needs among young adults with anxiety. Given increases in prescribing in this age group, it may be timely to revisit the role of benzodiazepines in the management of people with anxiety in primary care., (© The Authors.)

Background: General practitioners (GPs) are key to the frontline assessment and treatment of young people after self-harm. Young people value GP-led self-harm care, but little is known about how GPs manage young people after self-harm., Aim: This study aimed to understand the approaches of GPs to self-harm in young people and explore their perspectives on ways they might help young people avoid repeat self-harm., Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with GPs from the National Health Service in England in 2021. GPs were recruited from four geographically spread clinical research networks and a professional special interest group. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The study's patient and public involvement and community of practice groups supported participant recruitment and data analysis., Results: Fifteen interviews were undertaken with a mean age of participants being 41 years and a breadth of experience in practice ranging from 1 to 22 years. Four themes were generated: GPs' understanding of self-harm; approaches to managing self-harm; impact of COVID-19 on consultations about self-harm; and ways to avoid future self-harm., Conclusion: Negative attitudes towards self-harm within clinical settings are well documented, but GPs said they took self-harm seriously, listened to young people, sought specialist support when concerned and described appropriate ways to help young people avoid self-harm. GPs felt that relationship-based care is an important element of self-harm care but feared remote consultations for self-harm may impede on this. There is a need for brief GP-led interventions to reduce repeat self-harm in young people., Patient and Public Contribution: A study advisory group consisting of young people aged 16-25 years with personal experience of self-harm and parents and carers of young people who have self-harmed designed the recruitment poster of this study, informed its topic guide and contributed to its findings., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In this paper, we explore the ways in which patients invoke third parties to gain decision-making influence in clinical consultations. The patients' role in decision-making processes is often overlooked, and this interactional practice has rarely been systematically studied. Through a contextual narrative exploration of 42 naturally occurring consultations between patients (aged 22-84) and general practitioners (GPs) in England, we seek to fill this gap. By exploring how and why patients invoke third parties during discussions about medical treatments, who they refer to, what kind of knowledge their referents possess, and how GPs respond, our main aim is to capture the functions and implications of this interactional practice in relation to decision-making processes. Patients refer to third parties during decision-making processes in most of the consultations, usually to argue for and against certain treatment options, and the GPs recognise these utterances as pro-and-contra arguments. This enables patients to counter the GPs' professional knowledge through various knowledge-sources and encourage the GPs to target their specific concerns. By attributing arguments to third parties, patients claim decision-making influence without threatening the GPs' authority and expertise, which their disadvantaged epistemic position demands. Thereby, patients become able to negotiate their role and their epistemic position, to influence the agenda-setting, and to take part in the decision-making process, without being directly confrontational. Invoking third parties is a non-confrontational way of proposing and opposing treatment options that might facilitate successful patient participation in decision-making processes, and so limit the risk of patients being wronged in their capacity as knowers., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.