Search

Background: Health services are increasingly using digital tools to deliver care, and online consultations are being widely adopted in primary care settings. The intended consequences of online consultations are to increase patient access to care and increase the efficiency of care.Aim: To identify and understand the unintended consequences of online consultations in primary care.Design and Setting: Qualitative interview study in eight general practices using online consultation tools in South West and North West England between February 2019 and January 2020.Method: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 19 patients and 18 general practice staff.Results: Consequences of online consultations were identified that restricted patient access to care by making it difficult for some patients to communicate effectively with a GP and disadvantaging digitally-excluded patients. This stemmed from patient uncertainty about how their queries were dealt with, and whether practices used online consultations as their preferred method for patients to contact the practice. Consequences were identified that limited increases in practice efficiency by creating additional work, isolation, and dissatisfaction for some staff.Conclusion: Unintended consequences often present operational challenges that are foreseeable and partly preventable. However, these challenges must be recognised and solutions resourced sufficiently. Not everyone may benefit and local decisions will need to be made about trade-offs. Process changes tailored to local circumstances are critical to making effective use of online consultation tools. Unintended consequences also present clinical challenges that result from asynchronous communication. Online consultation tools favour simple, well-formulated information exchange that leads to diffuse relationships and a more transactional style of medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Diagnostic error is a global patient safety priority. Objectives To estimate the incidence, origins and avoidable harm of diagnostic errors in English general practice. Diagnostic errors were defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis based on the evidence available (missed diagnostic opportunities, MDOs). Method Retrospective medical record reviews identified MDOs in 21 general practices. In each practice, two trained general practitioner reviewers independently conducted case note reviews on 100 randomly selected adult consultations performed during 2013-2014. Consultations where either reviewer identified an MDO were jointly reviewed. Results Across 2057 unique consultations, reviewers agreed that an MDO was possible, likely or certain in 89 cases or 4.3% (95% CI 3.6% to 5.2%) of reviewed consultations. Inter-reviewer agreement was higher than most comparable studies (Fleiss' kappa=0.63). Sixty-four MDOs (72%) had two or more contributing process breakdowns. Breakdowns involved problems in the patient-practitioner encounter such as history taking, examination or ordering tests (main or secondary factor in 61 (68%) cases), performance and interpretation of diagnostic tests (31; 35%) and follow-up and tracking of diagnostic information (43; 48%). 37% of MDOs were rated as resulting in moderate to severe avoidable patient harm. Conclusions Although MDOs occurred in fewer than 5% of the investigated consultations, the high numbers of primary care contacts nationally suggest that several million patients are potentially at risk of avoidable harm from MDOs each year. Causes of MDOs were frequently multifactorial, suggesting the need for development and evaluation of multipronged interventions, along with policy changes to support them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The number of individuals with a visual impairment in the UK was estimated a few years ago to be around 1.8 million. People can be visually impaired from birth, childhood, early adulthood or later in life. Those with visual impairment are subject to health inequities and increased risk for patient safety incidents in comparison to the general population. They are also known to be at an increased risk of experiencing medication errors compared to those without visual impairment. In view of this, this review aims to understand the issues of medication safety for VI people. Methods/design: Four electronic bibliographic databases will be searched: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL. Our search strategy will include search combinations of two key blocks of terms. Studies will not be excluded based on design. Included studies will be empirical studies. They will include studies that relate to both medication safety and visual impairment. Two reviewers (SG and LR) will screen all the titles and abstracts. SG, LR, RM, SCS and PL will perform study selection and data extraction using standard forms. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or third party adjudication. Data to be collected will include study characteristics (year, objective, research method, setting, country), participant characteristics (number, age, gender, diagnoses), medication safety incident type and characteristics. Discussion: The review will summarise the literature relating to medication safety and visual impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients and carers should be actively involved in patient safety and empowered to use person‐centred approaches where they are asked to both identify safety concerns and partner in preventing them. Objectives: The aim of this study was to co‐design a patient safety guide for primary care (PSG‐PC) to support patients and carers to address key patient safety questions and identify key points where they can make their care safer. The objectives were to i) identify when and how patients and carers can be involved in primary care patient safety, and ii) identify the relevant information to include in the PSG‐PC. Design: An experience‐based co‐design approach. Setting and Participants: We conducted three workshops with patients, carers, community pharmacists and general practitioners to develop and refine the PSG‐PC. Results: Participants identified both explicit and implicit issues of primary care patient safety especially relating to technical and relational components of involving patients and carers. The importance of communication, understanding roles and responsibilities, and developing partnerships between patients and health‐care providers were considered essential for actively involving patients in patient safety. Co‐developing the PSG‐PC provided insight to improve care to develop the PSG‐PC. Discussion: The PSG‐PC is the first guide to be developed for primary care, co‐designed with patients, carers, general practitioners and pharmacists. The PSG‐PC will support patients and carers to partner with health‐care professionals to improve patient safety addressing international and national priorities to continuously improve patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plain English summary: There is evidence in the literature showing that involving patients and the public in health research can have a positive influence on quality, relevance and impact of research. However, patients and the public are not always involved in all stages of the research. There is often no explanation as to why they were only involved in some stages of the research and not others. Additionally, there is often no description of researchers' or PPI contributor's experiences of involvement. This also raises another issue which is a lack of recording of impact such involvement can have on the research process and the people involved in the research. In this paper, we present what PPI in a doctoral research should look like by providing a detailed description of how involvement occurred from pre-funding to dissemination stages of the research process. We provide some practical examples of how this was done and how involving patients made a difference to the research project. Finally, we present reflections from the patient and public contributors and the researcher on involvement in this project along with some recommendations for future doctoral and postdoctoral researchers considering involving public/patient contributors in their research. Background Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) has received considerable attention in the last two decades and working in partnership and co-design have now become a prerequisite in health services research in the UK. However, there is a lack of evidence and consistency in recording PPI and related activities. Researchers and PPI contributors are encouraged to record and reflect on the impact of PPI on research. There is significant variation in the way PPI contributors are involved, and it is often limited to some stages of the research cycle than others, without any reflections on the decision-making process for such involvement or any transferable learning. This has resulted in failure to provide a narrative of the research journey including researchers' and PPI contributors' personal reflections of involvement. Therefore, this paper provides an exemplar of what PPI in a doctoral research context should look like by providing a detailed account of how PPI was embedded in a doctoral research project, the PPI contributors and researcher's reflections and key recommendations for involving people specifically in doctoral research. Methods A reflective approach was taken using data from PPI contributor and researcher notes, e-mail correspondence, meeting notes. Data is presented narratively to reflect on the experiences of involvement throughout the research cycle. Results Undertaking PPI enhanced the quality and relevance of the doctoral research, contributed to the recruitment of study participants, data analysis and dissemination. Building trust and relationships with PPI contributors was key to continued involvement throughout the life of the project and beyond. There is a need to adopt flexible approaches rather than a one-size-fits-all model when working with PPI contributors. Reflections by PPI contributors and the researcher emphasises that involvement was a rewarding experience. Conclusions This paper contributes to the wider literature by providing an exemplar of how PPI can be embedded in doctoral research and demonstrates the value of PPI to the research process and the individuals involved. We also present recommendations on how PPI can be incorporated by doctoral and postdoctoral researchers when planning PPI in their research project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In October 2015 the Department for Education (DfE) permitted a grammar school in Tonbridge, Kent, to open up an annexe in Sevenoaks, 10 miles away. Amidst claims that the annexe was essentially a new grammar school, the decision reignited an old debate about the value of academically-selective “grammar” schools in England. The intensity of feeling is perhaps surprising given that all but a small number of grammar schools have long been replaced by mixed-ability “comprehensive” schools. Yet, the matter taps into longstanding debates around standards, social mobility, opportunity and accessibility. A resurgence of these discussions is now playing out in a changed political and educational landscape characterised by school autonomy, diversity of provision and school choice. This article describes the key shifts that have taken place in English school organisation and policy thinking since the establishment of the tripartite system and the recent emergence of new roles and opportunities for grammar schools. This is followed by a review of the evidence on the effectiveness and wider social impact of selective education. The article concludes by reframing the grammar school debate in light of the evidence and the current system, arguing that issues around system performance and social segregation need to be examined more broadly and that the most fruitful debates to be had are around admissions and accountability mechanisms rather than structures and school types. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Whilst there has been a focus on the importance of social support for managing long‐term conditions, there has been little specific focus on the characteristics of social networks that shape self‐management. Policy emphasis is placed on individual responsibility for self‐care, and this influences commissioning of health‐care services. Assumptions are often made by policymakers about accessibility and preference for support and the influence of the social context on chronic illness management. Objective: To examine the social networks of individuals with long‐term conditions and identify how the characteristics of their composition influences support needs. Design, setting and participants: Thirty participants completed initial face‐to‐face in‐depth interviews, telephone follow‐ups and final face‐to‐face interviews in the north‐west of England. A longitudinal qualitative design was used to elicit the subtle changes in relationships over a year. Findings: The findings suggest that the relationships which constitute a social network influence perceived support needs and attitudes to self‐management. The amalgamation of relationships was characterized into three network typologies (family focused, friend focused or health‐care professional focused) according to which types of relationships were dominant. In the absence of support, accounts highlighted a small number of substitutes who could provide support at times of critical need. Discussion: This study challenges the notion of ‘self’‐management as an individual construct as many of the practices of illness management involved the support and/or negotiation of roles with others. By examining the nuances of relationships, this study has highlighted the tacit boundaries of practical and emotional support provision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Voluntary and community organisations ( VCOs) have health benefits for those who attend and are viewed as having the potential to support long-term condition management. However, existing community-level understandings of participation do not explain the involvement with VCOs at an individual level, or the nature of support, which may elicit health benefits. Framing active participation as 'doing and experiencing', the aim of this qualitative study was to explore why people with long-term vascular conditions join VCOs, maintain their membership and what prevents participation. Twenty participants, self-diagnosed as having diabetes, chronic heart disease or chronic kidney disease, were purposefully sampled and recruited from a range of VCOs in the North West of England identified from a mapping of local organisations. In semi-structured interviews, we explored the nature of their participation. Analysis was thematic and iterative involving a continual reflection on the data. People gave various reasons for joining groups. These included health and well-being, the need for social contact and pursuing a particular hobby. Barriers to participation included temporal and spatial barriers and those associated with group dynamics. Members maintained their membership on the basis of an identity and sense of belonging to the group, developing close relationships within it and the availability of support and trust. Participants joined community groups often in response to a health-related event. Our findings demonstrate the ways in which the social contact associated with continued participation in VCOs is seen as helping with long-term condition management. Interventions designed at improving chronic illness management might usefully consider the role of VCOs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The inadequate provision of language interpretation for people with limited English proficiency (LEP) is a determinant of poor health, yet interpreters are underused. This research explores the experiences of National Health Service (NHS) staff providing primary care for people seeking asylum, housed in contingency accommodation during COVID-19. This group often have LEP and face multiple additional barriers to healthcare access. Language discrimination is used as a theoretical framework. The potential utility of this concept is explored as a way of understanding and addressing inequities in care., Design: Qualitative research using semistructured interviews and inductive thematic analysis., Setting: An NHS primary care service for people seeking asylum based in contingency accommodation during COVID-19 housing superdiverse residents speaking a wide spectrum of languages., Participants: Ten staff including doctors, nurses, mental health practitioners, healthcare assistants and students participated in semistructured online interviews. Some staff were redeployed to this work due to the pandemic., Results: All interviewees described patients' LEP as significant. Inadequate provision of interpretation services impacted the staff's ability to provide care and compromised patient safety. Discrimination, such as that based on migration status, was recognised and challenged by staff. However, inequity based on language was not articulated as discrimination. Instead, insufficient and substandard interpretation was accepted as the status quo and workarounds used, such as gesticulating or translation phone apps. The theoretical lens of language discrimination shows how this propagates existing social hierarchies and further disadvantages those with LEP., Conclusions: This research provides empirical evidence of how the inadequate provision of interpreters forces the hand of healthcare staff to use shortcuts. Although this innovative 'tinkering' allows staff to get the job done, it risks normalising structural gaps in care provision for people with LEP. Policy-makers must rethink their approach to interpretation provision which prioritises costs over quality. We assert that the concept of language discrimination is a valuable framework for clinicians to better identify and articulate unfair treatment on the grounds of LEP., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The reporting of outcomes in surgical trials for gastric cancer is inconsistent. The GASTROS study ( GA stric Cancer S urgery TR ials R eported O utcome S tandardisation) aims to address this by developing a core outcome set (COS) for use in all future trials within this field. A COS should reflect the views of all stakeholders, including patients. We undertook a series of interviews to identify outcomes important to patients which would be considered for inclusion in a COS., Setting: All interviews took place within the UK. Interviews were carried out face-to-face at hospitals and cancer support centres or via the telephone., Participants: Twenty participants at varying stages of recovery following surgery for gastric cancer with curative intent., Design: Qualitative design using semistructured interviews, supported by an interview guide which was iteratively modified; thematic analysis was used to explore patient priorities., Results: Six themes enveloping 38 outcomes were identified; surviving and controlling cancer, technical aspects of surgery, adverse events from surgery, recovering from surgery, long-term problems following surgery and long-term life impact of surgery. The 'most important' patient priority was to be 'cured of cancer'., Conclusion: Surgical trials for gastric cancer should consider broader priorities of patients when choosing which outcomes to report. This study highlighted the importance of longer-term outcomes such as cancer survival. Outcomes identified in this study will be used to inform an international Delphi survey to develop a COS in this field., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)