Search results
Found 19937 matches for
We lead multidisciplinary applied research and training to rethink the way health care is delivered in general practice and across the community.
Patient use of an online triage platform: a mixed-methods retrospective exploration in UK primary care.
BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen the introduction of online triage allowing patients to describe their problem via an online form. Subsequently, a GP telephones the patient, conducting a telephone consultation or arranging a face-to-face consultation. AIM: This study aimed to explore patterns-of-use and patients' experiences of using an online triage system. DESIGN AND SETTING: This retrospective study analysed routinely collected data (from all practices using the 'askmyGP' platform for the duration of the study period, 19 May 2017 to 31 July 2017), using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Data originated from an online triaging platform used by patients in nine general practices across the UK. METHOD: Data from 5447 patients were quantitatively analysed to describe characteristics of users, patterns-of-use, and reasons given by patients for using the platform. Free-text comments left by patients (n = 569) on their experience of use were qualitatively analysed. RESULTS: Highest levels of use were observed in females (65.5%, n = 3570) and those aged 25-34 years. Patterns of use were high between 0800 and 0959, and on Mondays and Tuesdays. Use outside of GP practice opening hours was low. Common reasons for using the platform were for medication-related enquiries, for administrative requests, and to report a specific symptom. Comments left by patients suggested advantages to using the platform, for example, convenience and the written format, but these did not extend to all users. CONCLUSION: Patterns-of-use and patient types were in line with typical contacts to GP practices. Though the age of users was broad, highest levels of use were from younger patients. The perceived advantages to using online triage, such as convenience and ease of use, are often context dependent.
Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of personalised care planning for patients with long-term health conditions, as compared to forms of care in which active involvement of patients in treatment and management decisions (at least in goal setting and action planning) is not explicitly attempted or achieved. We will address the following primary research questions: Is personalised care planning effective for improving physical health (e.g. lipid measurements)? Is personalised care planning effective for improving psychological health (e.g. anxiety and depression)? Is personalised care planning effective for improving psychosocial health (e.g. quality of life)? Is personalised care planning effective for improving patients' capabilities for self-managing their condition? We will also look for evidence to address the following secondary research questions: Is personalised care planning effective for improving patients' health-related behaviours? How does personalised care planning impact on rates of use and costs of formal health services? What is the relative effectiveness of different types of intervention used to promote personalised care planning?
Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions
Background: Personalised care planning is a collaborative process used in chronic condition management in which patients and clinicians identify and discuss problems caused by or related to the patient's condition, and develop a plan for tackling these. In essence it is a conversation, or series of conversations, in which they jointly agree goals and actions for managing the patient's condition. Objectives: To assess the effects of personalised care planning for adults with long-term health conditions compared to usual care (i.e. forms of care in which active involvement of patients in treatment and management decisions is not explicitly attempted or achieved). Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ProQuest, clinicaltrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to July 2013. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials and cluster-randomised trials involving adults with long-term conditions where the intervention included collaborative (between individual patients and clinicians) goal setting and action planning. We excluded studies where there was little or no opportunity for the patient to have meaningful influence on goal selection, choice of treatment or support package, or both. Data collection and analysis: Two of three review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes were effects on physical health, psychological health, subjective health status, and capabilities for self management. Secondary outcomes included effects on health-related behaviours, resource use and costs, and type of intervention. A patient advisory group of people with experience of living with long-term conditions advised on various aspects of the review, including the protocol, selection of outcome measures and emerging findings. Main results: We included 19 studies involving a total of 10,856 participants. Twelve of these studies focused on diabetes, three on mental health, one on heart failure, one on end-stage renal disease, one on asthma, and one on various chronic conditions. All 19 studies included components that were intended to support behaviour change among patients, involving either face-to-face or telephone support. All but three of the personalised care planning interventions took place in primary care or community settings; the remaining three were located in hospital clinics. There was some concern about risk of bias for each of the included studies in respect of one or more criteria, usually due to inadequate or unclear descriptions of research methods. Physical health Nine studies measured glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), giving a combined mean difference (MD) between intervention and control of -0.24% (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.35 to -0.14), a small positive effect in favour of personalised care planning compared to usual care (moderate quality evidence). Six studies measured systolic blood pressure, a combined mean difference of -2.64 mm/Hg (95% CI -4.47 to -0.82) favouring personalised care (moderate quality evidence). The pooled results from four studies showed no significant effect on diastolic blood pressure, MD -0.71 mm/Hg (95% CI -2.26 to 0.84). We found no evidence of an effect on cholesterol (LDL-C), standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.01 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.11) (five studies) or body mass index, MD -0.11 (95% CI -0.35 to 0.13) (four studies). A single study of people with asthma reported that personalised care planning led to improvements in lung function and asthma control. Psychological health Six studies measured depression. We were able to pool results from five of these, giving an SMD of -0.36 (95% CI -0.52 to -0.20), a small effect in favour of personalised care (moderate quality evidence). The remaining study found greater improvement in the control group than the intervention group. Four other studies used a variety of psychological measures that were conceptually different so could not be pooled. Of these, three found greater improvement for the personalised care group than the usual care group and one was too small to detect differences in outcomes. Subjective health status Ten studies used various patient-reported measures of health status (or health-related quality of life), including both generic health status measures and condition-specific ones. We were able to pool data from three studies that used the SF-36 or SF-12, but found no effect on the physical component summary score SMD 0.16 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.38) or the mental component summary score SMD 0.07 (95% CI -0.15 to 0.28) (moderate quality evidence). Of the three other studies that measured generic health status, two found improvements related to personalised care and one did not. Four studies measured condition-specific health status. The combined results showed no difference between the intervention and control groups, SMD -0.01 (95% CI -0.11 to 0.10) (moderate quality evidence). Self-management capabilities Nine studies looked at the effect of personalised care on self-management capabilities using a variety of outcome measures, but they focused primarily on self efficacy. We were able to pool results from five studies that measured self efficacy, giving a small positive result in favour of personalised care planning: SMD 0.25 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.43) (moderate quality evidence). A further five studies measured other attributes that contribute to self-management capabilities. The results from these were mixed: two studies found evidence of an effect on patient activation, one found an effect on empowerment, and one found improvements in perceived interpersonal support. Other outcomes Pooled data from five studies on exercise levels showed no effect due to personalised care planning, but there was a positive effect on people's self-reported ability to carry out self-care activities: SMD 0.35 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.52). We found no evidence of adverse effects due to personalised care planning. The effects of personalised care planning were greater when more stages of the care planning cycle were completed, when contacts between patients and health professionals were more frequent, and when the patient's usual clinician was involved in the process. Authors' conclusions: Personalised care planning leads to improvements in certain indicators of physical and psychological health status, and people's capability to self-manage their condition when compared to usual care. The effects are not large, but they appear greater when the intervention is more comprehensive, more intensive, and better integrated into routine care.
Pandemic narratives in stories about hospice palliative care: The impact of Covid-19 upon ideals of timely, holistic care and quality of life
Background: Hospice palliative care aims to provide timely interventions and holistic care that focusses on quality of life for people who are terminally ill. In the first two years of the Covid-19 pandemic the national political and healthcare contexts changed significantly. Throughout this time hospices had to repeatedly adjust their approach to supporting terminally ill people, many of whom were especially vulnerable to Covid-19. Aim: The aim of this paper was to explore hospice patients, carers, staff and senior managers stories to identify how changing pandemic narratives affected their understanding of hospice palliative care as timely, holistic and supporting quality of life. Methods: Narrative analysis of in-depth interviews with patients, carers, staff and senior managers (n = 70) recruited from hospices across the West-Midlands, UK, in 2020–22. Findings: We identified four ‘pandemic narratives’ (reaction; revision; resilience; (re)normalisation) in the participants' accounts of hospice palliative care support in the first two years of the pandemic. In each narrative we explore how Covid-19 and the associated pandemic guidance affected what quality of life was understood to be; how what was considered to be timely care could change during the palliative care journey; and, how different ideas of holistic care were emphasised as the hospice and wider healthcare context changed. Conclusion: This is the first-time stories about the first two-years of the Covid-19 pandemic from hospice patients, carers, staff and senior managers have been analysed together. We identified how the pandemic brought an existential challenge to ideas of what hospice palliative care is and could be. Our findings suggest that ‘living with covid’ will continue to affect hospice palliative care's ideals of timeliness of care, holistic support, and quality of life left.
Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Hospices (ICoH): Staff Cohort Report
This report describes the diversity of experiences of hospice staff who worked in operational roles in hospices in the West Midlands during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is one of four cohort reports – the others focus on patients, carers, and senior managers respectively – that form the evidence base for a Policy Report into the impact of Covid-19 on hospices. In these reports we address the nine key themes that were identified as potentially important in our previous collaborative knowledge synthesis (MacArtney et al., 2021) and seek to address some of the policy gaps we identified in our review of recommendations for hospice practice and policy (van Langen-Datta et al., 2022). Together these outputs are the result of an Economic and Social Research Council funded study (grant number: ES/W001837/1). This is one of the first studies to contribute an in-depth exploration of hospice-based experiences of the pandemic to the growing body of knowledge about the effectiveness and effects of changes to hospice services, at regional and national levels in response to Covid-19. The aim of this report is therefore to explore the effects the Covid-19 pandemic had on the experiences of hospice staff as they sought to provide care and support to people with life-limiting conditions and those that cared for them so that we can identify recommendations for clinical practice and healthcare policy. Drawing on these findings, this report offers recommendations for hospices and clinicians who continue to provide care and support for people with life limiting conditions and those that care them during the ongoing pandemic. These recommendations will also be of interest to local commissioners who will need to work with hospices in their region to ensure informal carers receive the support they need, and national policymakers who will need to ensure the necessary resources and guidance are available.
Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Hospices (ICoH): Senior Management Cohort and Grey Evidence Report
This report describes the diversity of experiences of people with life-limiting illnesses who were supported by hospices in the West Midlands during the pandemic. It is one of four cohort reports – the others focus on patients, carers, and frontline hospice staff respectively – that form the evidence base for a Policy Report into the impact of Covid-19 on hospices. In these reports we address the nine key themes that were identified as potentially important in our previous collaborative knowledge synthesis (MacArtney et al., 2021) and seek to address some of the policy gaps we identified in our review of recommendations for hospice practice and policy (van Langen-Datta et al., 2022). Together these outputs are the result of an Economic and Social Research Council funded study (grant number: ES/W001837/1) that is one of the first studies to contribute an in-depth exploration of hospice-based experiences of the pandemic to the growing body of knowledge about the effectiveness and effects of changes to hospice services, at regional and national levels, in response to Covid-19. As the key decision makers during the Covid-19 pandemic, this part of the ICoH study aimed to explore senior managers’ experiences and to understand how they responded to the challenges imposed on them whilst still delivering a high-quality palliative care service. Coupled with hospice grey evidence in the form of, for example, senior management emails to staff, policy and guideline documents, we can start to understand the pressures and context in which decisions were made, including what worked well and what did not. The aim of this report is therefore to explore experiences of senior managers during the Covid-19 pandemic to identify recommendations for clinical practice and healthcare policy. Drawing on these findings, this report offers recommendations for hospices managers and clinicians who continue to provide care and support for people with life limiting conditions during the ongoing pandemic. These recommendations will also be of interest to local commissioners who will need to work with hospices in their region to ensure people with life-limiting conditions receive the support they need, and national policymakers who will need to ensure the necessary resources and guidance are available.
Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Hospices (ICoH): Carer Cohort Report
This report describes the diversity of experiences informal carers for people with life-limiting illnesses who were supported by hospices in the West Midlands during the pandemic. It is one of four cohort reports – the others focus on patients, frontline hospice staff, and senior managers respectively – that form the evidence base for a Policy Report into the impact of Covid-19 on hospices. In these reports we address the nine key themes that were identified as potentially important in our previous collaborative knowledge synthesis (MacArtney et al., 2021) and seek to address some of the policy gaps we identified in our review of recommendations for hospice practice and policy (Langen-Datta et al., 2022). Together these outputs are the result of an Economic and Social Research Council funded study (grant number: ES/W001837/1). This is one of the first studies to contribute an in-depth exploration of hospice-based experiences of the pandemic to the growing body of knowledge about the effectiveness and effects of changes to hospice services, at regional and national levels in response to Covid-19. The aim of this report is therefore to explore experiences of those informal carers of people with life-limiting conditions and the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the care and support they experienced, to identify recommendations for clinical practice and healthcare policy. Drawing on these findings, this report offers recommendations for hospices and clinicians who continue to provide care and support for people with life limiting conditions and those that care them during the ongoing pandemic. These recommendations will also be of interest to local commissioners who will need to work with hospices in their region to ensure informal carers receive the support they need, and national policymakers who will need to ensure the necessary resources and guidance are available.
Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Hospices (ICoH): Patient Cohort Report
This report describes the diversity of experiences of people with life-limiting illnesses who were supported by hospices in the West Midlands during the pandemic. It is one of four cohort reports – the others focus on carers, frontline hospice staff, and senior managers respectively – that form the evidence base for a Policy Report into the impact of Covid-19 on hospices. In these reports we address the nine key themes that were identified as potentially important in our previous collaborative knowledge synthesis (MacArtney et al., 2021) and seek to address some of the policy gaps we identified in our review of recommendations for hospice practice and policy (Langen-Datta et al., 2022). Together these outputs are the result of an Economic and Social Research Council funded study (grant number: ES/W001837/1) that is one of the first studies to contribute an in-depth exploration of hospice-based experiences of the pandemic to the growing body of knowledge about the effectiveness and effects of changes to hospice services, at regional and national levels in response to Covid-19. The aim of this report is therefore to explore experiences of those with life-limiting conditions the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the care and support to identify recommendations for clinical practice and healthcare policy. Drawing on these findings, this report offers recommendations for hospices and clinicians who continue to provide care and support for people with life limiting conditions during the ongoing pandemic. These recommendations will also be of interest to local commissioners who will need to work with hospices in their region to ensure people with life-limiting conditions receive the support they need, and national policymakers who will need to ensure the necessary resources and guidance are available.
Pharmaceutical Company Targets and Strategies to Address Climate Change: Content Analysis of Public Reports from 20 Pharmaceutical Companies
The pharmaceutical industry produces a large proportion of health system greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, contributing to climate change. This urgently needs to be addressed. We aimed to examine pharmaceutical company climate change targets, GHG emissions, and strategies to reduce them. We performed content analysis of the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies' publicly available 2020/2021 reports, focusing on extracting information on their reported climate change targets, GHG emissions (and whether companies had demonstrated any reduction in emissions over their reporting period), and strategies being implemented to reduce company emissions and meet their targets. Nineteen companies have committed to reducing GHG emissions, ten to carbon neutrality and eight to net zero emissions between 2025 and 2050. Companies showed largely favorable reductions in scope 1 (in-house) and scope 2 (purchased energy), with variable results in scope 3 (supply chain) emissions. Strategies to reduce emissions included optimizing manufacturing and distribution, and responsible sourcing of energy, water, and raw materials. Pharmaceutical companies are setting climate change targets and reporting reduced emissions via a range of strategies. This varies, with scope to track actions and accountability to targets, improve consistency of reporting, especially of scope 3 emissions, and collaborate on novel solutions. There is need for further mixed methods research on progress with achieving reported climate change targets, as well as implementation of strategies to reduce emissions within the pharmaceutical industry.
The effectiveness of mobile app usage in facilitating weight loss: An observational study
Aim: With increasing rates of global obesity and associated health issues, there is an ever-increasing need for weight management solutions to be more accessible. Mobile applications offer accessible support systems and have the potential to offer a viable and effective weight management solution as an alternative to traditional healthcare models. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the SIMPLE mobile application for time-restricted eating in achieving weight loss (WL). Methods: User data were analyzed between January 2021 and January 2023. In-app activity was calculated as the proportion of active days over 12, 26 and 52 weeks. A day is considered active if it contains at least one in-app action (e.g., logging weight, food, fasting, or physical activity). Users were categorized into four in-app activity levels: inactive (in-app activity <33%), medium activity (33%–66%), high activity (66%–99%), and maximal activity (100%). Weight change among in-app activity groups was assessed at 12, 26, and 52 weeks. Results: Out of 53,482 users, a positive association was found between the use of the SIMPLE app and WL. Active app users lost more weight than their less active counterparts. Active users had a median WL of 4.20%, 5.04%, and 3.86% at 12, 26, and 52 weeks, respectively. A larger percentage of active users—up to 50.26%—achieved clinically significant WL (≥5%) when compared to inactive users. A dose-response relationship between WL and app usage was found after adjusting for gender, age, and initial Body Mass Index; a 10% increase in app activity correlated with increased WL by 0.43, 0.66 and 0.69 kg at 12, 26, and 52 weeks, respectively. Conclusions: The study demonstrates that the SIMPLE app enables effective WL directly associated with the level of app engagement. Mobile health applications offer an accessible and effective weight management solution and should be considered when supporting adults to lose weight.
The effect of workload on primary care doctors on referral rates and prescription patterns: evidence from English NHS.
This paper investigates the impact of workload pressure on primary care outcomes using a unique dataset from English general practices. Leveraging the absence of General Practitioner (GP) colleagues as an instrumental variable, we find that increased workload leads to an increase in prescription rates of antibiotics as well as in the share of assessment referrals. On the other hand, the quantity and frequency of psychotropics decreases. When there is an absence, workload is intensified mostly on GP partners, and the mode of consultation shifts toward remote interactions as a response to higher workload pressure. The effects are more pronounced for patients above 65 years-old and those in Short-staffed practices. Our study sheds light on the intricate relationship between workload pressure and patient care decisions in primary care settings.
A registered report testing the effect of sleep on Deese-Roediger-McDermott false memory: greater lure and veridical recall but fewer intrusions after sleep
Human memory is known to be supported by sleep. However, less is known about the effect of sleep on false memory, where people incorrectly remember events that never occurred. In the laboratory, false memories are often induced via the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm where participants are presented with wordlists comprising semantically related words such as nurse , hospital and sick (studied words). Subsequently, participants are likely to falsely remember that a related lure word such as doctor was presented. Multiple studies have examined whether these false memories are influenced by sleep, with contradictory results. A recent meta-analysis suggests that sleep may increase DRM false memory when short lists are used. We tested this in a registered report ( N = 488) with a 2 (Interval: Immediate versus 12 h delay) × 2 (Test Time: 9:00 versus 21:00) between-participant DRM experiment, using short DRM lists ( N = 8 words/list) and free recall as the memory test. We found an unexpected time-of-day effect such that completing free recall in the evening led to more intrusions (neither studied nor lure words). Above and beyond this time-of-day effect, the Sleep participants produced fewer intrusions than their Wake counterparts. When this was statistically controlled for, the Sleep participants falsely produced more critical lures. They also correctly recalled more studied words (regardless of intrusions). Exploratory analysis showed that these findings cannot be attributed to differences in output bias, as indexed by the number of total responses. Our overall results cannot be fully captured by existing sleep-specific theories of false memory, but help to define the role of sleep in two more general theories (Fuzzy-Trace and Activation/Monitoring theories) and suggest that sleep may benefit gist abstraction/spreading activation on one hand and memory suppression/source monitoring on the other.
Communicating treatment options to older patients with advanced kidney disease: a conversation analysis study
Background: Choosing to have dialysis or conservative kidney management is often challenging for older people with advanced kidney disease. While we know that clinical communication has a major impact on patients’ treatment decision-making, little is known about how this occurs in practice. The OSCAR study (Optimising Staff-Patient Communication in Advanced Renal disease) aimed to identify how clinicians present kidney failure treatment options in consultations with older patients and the implications of this for patient engagement. Methods: An observational, multi-method study design was adopted. Outpatient consultations at four UK renal units were video-recorded, and patients completed a post-consultation measure of shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9). Units were sampled according to variable rates of conservative management. Eligible patients were ≥ 65 years old with an eGFR of ≤ 20 mls/min/1.73m2 within the last 6 months. Video-recordings were screened to identify instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. These instances were transcribed in fine-grained detail and recurrent practices identified using conversation-analytic methods, an empirical, observational approach to studying language and social interaction. Results: 110 outpatient consultations were recorded (105 video, 5 audio only), involving 38 clinicians (doctors and nurses) and 94 patients: mean age 77 (65–97); 61 males/33 females; mean eGFR 15 (range 4–23). There were 21 instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. Two main practices were identified: (1) Conservative management and dialysis both presented as the main treatment options; (2) Conservative management presented as a subordinate option to dialysis. The first practice was less commonly used (6 vs. 15 cases), but associated with more opportunities in the conversation for patients to ask questions and share their perspective, through which they tended to evaluate conservative management as an option that was potentially personally relevant. This practice was also associated with significantly higher post-consultation ratings of shared decision-making among patients (SDM-Q-9 median total score 24 vs. 37, p = 0.041). Conclusions: Presenting conservative management and dialysis as on an equal footing enables patient to take a more active role in decision-making. Findings should inform clinical communication skills training and education. Clinical trial number: No trial number as this is not a clinical trial.