Search

As the UK population ages, dementia affects an increasing proportion of the population. There is a drive to accelerate dementia research, however access to research is not equitably distributed. We examine access to dementia research and discuss some enabling factors and barriers. High recruitment is frequently driven by a person (or people) dedicated to improving research participation. Barriers are commonly structural, rather than lack of willingness or knowledge. A recurring issue was lack of time and/or resources. Leveraging existing infrastructure, such as streamlined and efficient governance frameworks, is a clear part of the solution. Research teams need to ensure inclusion/exclusion criteria serve the target population, and that any intervention is accessible to a range of patients. An injection of resources is crucial to support the recruitment process on the ground., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement: RD has received honoraria for sitting on advisory boards from Roche and Novartis. She receives grant support from the UK MS Society, BMA Foundation, NIHR, MRC, NMSS, Horne Family Charitable Trust, Biogen, Celgene, and Merck. She has received honoraria for advisory boards and/or educational activities from Biogen, Teva, Sanofi, Merck, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche. RSW has received grant support from the BMA Foundation, Parkinson’s UK, NIHR UCLH Biomedical Centre, Rosetrees and the National Brain Appeal. She has received honoraria for educational activities from Britannia GE Healthcare and Bial, and consultancy from Therakind.

Introduction: With the growing use of remote appointments within the National Health Service, there is a need to understand potential barriers of access to care for some patients. In this observational study, we examined missed appointments rates, comparing remote and in-person appointments among different patient groups., Methods: We analysed adult outpatient appointments at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust in Northwest London in 2021. Rates of missed appointments per patient were compared between remote versus in-person appointments using negative binomial regression models. Models were stratified by appointment type (first or a follow-up)., Results: There were 874,659 outpatient appointments for 189,882 patients, 29.5% of whom missed at least one appointment. Missed rates were 12.5% for remote first appointments and 9.2% for in-person first appointments. Remote and in-person follow-up appointments were missed at similar rates (10.4% and 10.7%, respectively). For remote and in-person appointments, younger patients, residents of more deprived areas, and patients of Black, Mixed and 'other' ethnicities missed more appointments. Male patients missed more in-person appointments, particularly at younger ages, but gender differences were minimal for remote appointments. Patients with long-term conditions (LTCs) missed more first appointments, whether in-person or remote. In follow-up appointments, patients with LTCs missed more in-person appointments but fewer remote appointments., Discussion: Remote first appointments were missed more often than in-person first appointments, follow-up appointments had similar attendance rates for both modalities. Sociodemographic differences in outpatient appointment attendance were largely similar between in-person and remote appointments, indicating no widening of inequalities in attendance due to appointment modality., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: BH is an employee of eConsult Health Ltd, a provider of electronic consultations for NHS primary, secondary and urgent/emergency care. Other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

The mental health and wellbeing of children and young people is deteriorating. It is increasingly recognised that mental health is a systemic issue, with a wide range of contributing and interacting factors. However, the vast majority of attention and resources are focused on the identification and treatment of mental health disorders, with relatively scant attention on the social determinants of mental health and wellbeing and investment in preventative approaches. Furthermore, there is little attention on how the social determinants manifest or may be influenced at the local level, impeding the design of contextually nuanced preventative approaches. This paper describes a major research and design initiative called Kailo that aims to support the design and implementation of local and contextually nuanced preventative strategies to improve children's and young people's mental health and wellbeing. The Kailo Framework involves structured engagement with a wide range of local partners and stakeholders - including young people, community partners, practitioners and local system leaders - to better understand local systemic influences and support programmes of youth-centred and evidence-informed co-design, prototyping and testing. It is hypothesised that integrating different sources of knowledge, experience, insight and evidence will result in better embedded, more sustainable and more impactful strategies that address the social determinants of young people's mental health and wellbeing at the local level., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2023 Hobbs T et al.)

The global coronavirus disease (COVID) -19 pandemic has led to a rapid transformation in the ways in which outpatient care is delivered. The need to minimise the risk of viral infection and transmission through social distancing resulted in the widespread adoption of remote consultations, traditional face-to-face appointments ceasing almost overnight in many specialties. The transition to remote consultations had taken place far faster than anticipated and under crisis conditions. As we work towards the "new normal", remote consultations have become an integral part of outpatient provision in secondary care. Adapting to this change in clinical practice requires a judicious approach to ongoing service development to ensure safe, effective, and equitable care for all patients. Medical societies have provided some initial guidance around effective delivery. In this article we discuss the potential benefits, limitations, types of remote consultations, and factors that require consideration when deciding on patient suitability for remote consultation in a hospital setting. We use cardiology as a specialty exemplar, although many of the principles will be equally applicable to other medical specialties., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many Intensive Care Unit (ICU) survivors suffer from a multi- system disability, termed the post-intensive care syndrome. There is no current national coordination of either rehabilitation pathways or related data collection for them. In the last year, the need for tools to systematically identify the multidisciplinary rehabilitation needs of severely affected COVID-19 survivors has become clear. Such tools offer the opportunity to improve rehabilitation for all critical illness survivors through provision of a personalised Rehabilitation Prescription (RP). The initial development and secondary refinement of such an assessment and data tools is described in the linked paper. We report here the clinical and workforce data that was generated as a result., Methods: Prospective service evaluation of 26 acute hospitals in England using the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS) tool and the RP. The PICUPS tool comprised items in domains of a) Medical and essential care, b) Breathing and nutrition; c) Physical movement and d) Communication, cognition and behaviour., Results: No difference was seen in total PICUPS scores between patients with or without COVID-19 (77 (IQR 60-92) vs. 84 (IQR 68-97); Mann-Whitney z = -1.46, p = 0.144. A network analysis demonstrated that requirements for physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, dietetics and clinical psychology were closely related and unaffected by COVID-19 infection status. A greater proportion of COVID-19 patients were referred for inpatient rehabilitation (13% vs. 7%) and community-based rehabilitation (36% vs.15%). The RP informed by the PICUPS tool generally specified a greater need for multi-professional input when compared to rehabilitation plans instituted., Conclusions: The PICUPS tool is feasible to implement as a screening mechanism for post-intensive care syndrome. No differences are seen in the rehabilitation needs of patients with and without COVID-19 infection. The RP could be the vehicle that drives the professional interventions across the transitions from acute to community care. No single discipline dominates the rehabilitation requirements of these patients, reinforcing the need for a personalised RP for critical illness survivors., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: LTS is a full time NHS employee but, as part of her NHS activities, she directs the UK Rehabilitation Outcomes Collaborative (UKROC), She has a specific research interest in outcomes evaluation and, together with colleagues (including author RJS) she has published extensively on the development and use of standardised measures, and neither LTS or RJS has any personal financial interest in any of the material mentioned in this article. Several of the authors have clinical academic posts, and research/development publications of this kind may be used by their employing NHS or University organisation to contribute to departmental returns in evaluations such as the NHS R&D reports or the Research Excellence Framework. ZP has received honoraria for consultancy from GlaxoSmithKline, Lyric Pharmaceuticals, Faraday Pharmaceuticals and Fresenius-Kabi, and speaker fees from Orion, Baxter, Nutricia and Nestle., (© The Intensive Care Society 2021.)

The Intensive Care Society held a webinar on 3 April 2020 at which representatives from 11 of the most COVID-19 experienced hospital trusts in England and Wales shared learning around five specific topic areas in an open forum. This paper summarises the emerging learning and practice shared by those frontline clinicians., (© The Intensive Care Society 2020.)

Aims: Cardiovascular disease caused by smoking is related to the pathophysiological burden placed on the vascular endothelium. We studied the effect of chronic cigarette smoking on arterial wave reflection (study 1) and smoking cessation on pulse wave analysis (study 2)., Methods: Fifty smokers and 50 age- and sex-matched nonsmokers participated in study 1. Study 2 recruited 20 volunteers from the stop smoking clinic at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Systemic augmentation index (AIx) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) were measured using the SphygmoCor system. Brachial blood pressure (BP) (Omron 705-CP-E), AIx and PWV were recorded at a single visit in study 1. Study 2 measured these variables on 'quit day' and 4 weeks later., Results: In study 1, AIx was significantly higher in smokers than in nonsmokers (median 17.25 vs. 11.75%, P = 0.004). Multiple regression analysis showed a significant correlation between AIx and age, diastolic BP, smoking status (P < 0.001), blood glucose (P = 0.045) and weight (P = 0.049). In study 2, AIx significantly reduced after 4 weeks of abstinence in successful quitters (n = 10) compared with relapsed smokers (n = 4) (median 5.0 vs.- 9.5; P = 0.013). PWV did not reach significance in either study., Conclusions: Chronic tobacco smoking is associated with endothelial dysfunction and increased AIx in subjects of a wide age range free from additional cardiovascular risk factors, which is partially reversible after 4 weeks of smoking cessation.