Search

Objectives To examine the effectiveness of shared medical appointments (SMAs) compared with one-to-one appointments in primary care for improving health outcomes and reducing demand on healthcare services by people with one or more long-term conditions (LTCs).Design A systematic review of the published literature.Data sources Six databases, including MEDLINE and Web of Science, were searched 2013–2023. Relevant pre-2013 trials identified by forward and backward citation searches of the included trials were included.Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials of SMAs delivered in a primary care setting involving adults over 18 years with one or more LTCs. Studies were excluded if the SMA did not include one-to-one patient-clinician time. All countries were eligible for inclusion.Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted and outcomes narratively synthesised, meta-analysis was undertaken where possible.Results Twenty-nine unique trials were included. SMA models varied in terms of components, mode of delivery and target population. Most trials recruited patients with a single LTC, most commonly diabetes (n=16). There was substantial heterogeneity in outcome measures. Meta-analysis showed that participants in SMA groups had lower diastolic blood pressure than those in usual care (d=−0.086, 95% CI=−0.16 to –0.02, n=10) (p=0.014). No statistically significant differences were found across other outcomes. Compared with usual care, SMAs had no significant effect on healthcare service use. For example, no difference between SMAs and usual care was found for admissions to emergency departments at follow-up (d=−0.094, 95% CI=−0.27 to 0.08, n=6, p=0.289).Conclusions There was a little difference in the effectiveness of SMAs compared with usual care in terms of health outcomes or healthcare service use in the short-term (range 12 weeks to 24 months). To strengthen the evidence base, future studies should include a wider array of LTCs, standardised outcome measures and more details on SMA components to help inform economic evaluation.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020173084.

Objectives Lung cancer continues to be the most common cause of cancer-related death and the leading cause of morbidity and burden of disease across Australia. There is an ongoing need to identify and reduce unwarranted clinical variation that may contribute to these poor outcomes for patients with lung cancer. An Australian national strategy acknowledges clinical quality outcome data as a critical component of a continuously improving healthcare system but there is a need to ensure clinical quality indicators adequately measure evidence-based contemporary care, including novel and emerging treatments. This study aimed to develop a suite of lung cancer-specific, evidence-based, clinically acceptable quality indicators to measure quality of care and outcomes, and an associated comparative feedback dashboard to provide performance data to clinicians and hospital administrators.Design A multistage modified Delphi process was undertaken with a Clinical Advisory Group of multidisciplinary lung cancer specialists, with patient representation, to update and prioritise potential indicators of lung cancer care derived from a targeted review of published literature and reports from national and international lung cancer quality registries. Quality indicators were piloted and evaluated with multidisciplinary teams in a retrospective observational cohort study using clinical audit data from the Embedding Research (and Evidence) in Cancer Healthcare Program, a prospective clinical cohort of over 2000 patients with lung cancer diagnosed from May 2016 to October 2021.Setting and participants Six tertiary specialist cancer centres in metropolitan and regional New South Wales, Australia.Results From an initial 37 potential quality indicators, a final set of 10 indicators spanning diagnostic, treatment, quality of life and survival domains was agreed.Conclusions These indicators build on and update previously available measures of lung cancer care and outcomes in use by national and international lung cancer clinical quality registries which, to our knowledge, have not been recently updated to reflect the changing lung cancer treatment paradigm.

Objective To assess the immediate impact of the introduction of minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland on alcohol consumption and whether the impact differed by sex, level of alcohol consumption, age, social grade and level of residential deprivation of respondents.Design Primary controlled interrupted time series analysis and secondary before-and-after analysis of the impact of introducing MUP in Scotland using alcohol consumption data for England as control.Setting Data from Kantar Worldpanel’s Alcovision survey, a continuous retrospective online timeline follow-back diary survey of the previous week’s alcohol consumption.Participants 53 347 women and 53 143 men.Interventions Introduction of a minimum price of 50 pence per UK unit (6.25 pence/g) for the sale of alcohol in Scotland on 1 May 2018.Main outcome measures Number of grams of alcohol consumed per week, in total, in off-trade (eg, at home) and in on-trade (eg, in pubs, restaurants).Results Primary interrupted time series analyses found that the introduction of MUP was associated with a drop in reported weekly total alcohol consumption of 5.94 g (95% CI 1.29 to 10.60), a drop in off-trade consumption of 3.27 g (95% CI −0.01 to 6.56) and a drop in on-trade consumption of 2.67 g (95% CI −1.48 to 6.82). Associated reductions were larger for women than for men and were greater among heavier drinkers than for lighter drinkers, except for the 5% of heaviest drinking men for whom an associated increase in consumption was found. Secondary before-and-after analyses found that reductions in consumption were greater among older respondents and those living in less deprived areas. The introduction of MUP was not associated with a reduction in consumption among younger men and men living in more deprived areas.Conclusions Greater policy attention needs to be addressed to the heaviest drinking men, to younger men and to men who live in more deprived areas.

Objective To synthesise the published literature on practitioner, patient and carer views and experiences of shared medical appointments (SMAs) for the management of long-term conditions in primary care.Design Systematic review of qualitative primary studies.Methods A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) and Scopus (SciVerse) from database starting dates to June 2019. Practitioner, patient and carer perspectives were coded separately. Deductive coding using a framework approach was followed by thematic analysis and narrative synthesis. Quality assessment was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for qualitative studies.Results We identified 18 unique studies that reported practitioner (n=11), patient (n=14) and/or carer perspectivs(n=3). Practitioners reported benefits of SMAs including scope for comprehensive patient-led care, peer support, less repetition and improved efficiency compared with 1:1 care. Barriers included administrative challenges and resistance from patients and colleagues, largely due to uncertainties and unclear expectations. Skilled facilitators, tailoring of SMAs to patient groups, leadership support and teamwork were reported to be important for successful delivery. Patients’ reported experiences were largely positive with the SMAs considered a supportive environment in which to share and learn about self-care, though the need for good facilitation was recognised. Reports of carer experience were limited but included improved communication between carer and patient.Conclusion There is insufficient evidence to indicate whether views and experiences vary between staff, medical condition and/or patient characteristics. Participant experiences may be subject to reporting bias. Policies and guidance regarding best practice need to be developed with consideration given to resource requirements. Further research is needed to capture views about wider and co-occurring conditions, to hear from those without SMA experience and to understand which groups of patients and practitioners should be brought together in an SMA for best effect.PROSPERO registration number CRD42019141893.

Objective To explore the perceived reasons underlying high mortality rates among people with multiple and complex needs.Design Qualitative study using peer research.Setting North East of England.Participants Three focus group discussions were held involving (1) people with lived experience of multiple and complex needs (n=5); (2) front-line staff from health, social care and voluntary organisations that support multiple and complex needs groups (n=7); and (3) managers and commissioners of these organisations (n=9).Results Findings from this study provide valuable perspectives of people with multiple complex needs and those that provide them with support on what may be perceived factors underlying premature mortality. Mental ill health and substance misuse (often co-occurring dual diagnosis) were perceived as influencing premature mortality among multiple and complex needs groups. Perceptions of opportunities to identify people at risk included critical life events (eg, bereavement, relationship breakdown) and transitions (eg, release from prison, completion of drug treatment). Early prevention, particularly supporting young people experiencing adverse childhood experiences, was also highlighted as a priority.Conclusion High mortality in multiple and complex needs groups may be reduced by addressing dual diagnosis, providing more support at critical life events and investing in early prevention efforts. Future interventions could take into consideration the intricate nature of multiple and complex needs and improve service access and navigation.

Objective To assess the impact of new low and no alcohol beers and reformulated beers in Great Britain on household purchases of grams of alcohol.Design Interrupted time series analysis.Setting Purchase data from Kantar Worldpanel’s household shopping panel for 2015–2018.Participants 64 286 British households.Interventions Introduction of new no and low alcohol beers during 2017–2018 and reformulation of existing beers to contain less alcohol during 2018.Main outcome measures Average alcoholic strength of beer and number of grams of alcohol purchased by households.Results As assessed by British household purchase data, 46 new low and no alcohol beer products were introduced during 2015–2018, with a step-jump in volume purchased occurring at the beginning of March 2017 (event 1). During 2015–2018, 33 beer products were reformulated to contain less alcohol, with a step-jump in volume purchased occurring during mid-March 2018 (event 2). Interrupted time series analyses found a combined associated impact of both events with relative reductions of alcohol by volume of beer between 1.2% and 2.3%; purchases of grams of alcohol within beer between 7.1% and 10.2%; and purchases of grams of alcohol as a whole between 2.6% and 3.9%. The reductions were greater for reformulation than for the introduction of new low and no alcohol products. Reductions were independently higher for younger age groups of shoppers and for households that bought the most alcohol.Conclusions Even though the events were associated with significant beneficial changes, the volume of purchases of new low and no alcohol beer products (2.6% of the volume of all beers purchased during 2018) and of new reformulated beer products (6.9% of the volume of all beers purchased during 2018) was very small. This indicates that there are future opportunities to increase the volume of such products so as to reduce the harm done by alcohol.

Introduction Excessive drinking and depression are frequently comorbid and make a substantial contribution to the global non-communicable disease burden. A range of effective interventions and treatments exist for either excessive drinking or depression alone, including a positive emerging evidence base for the use of digital interventions. Computerised and/or smartphone delivered advice could provide flexible, coordinated support for patients with comorbid excessive drinking and depression. However, to date, no systematic review of the evidence has been conducted focused on the effectiveness of digital interventions for this specific comorbid population. This systematic review will identify and evaluate the effectiveness of digital interventions for reducing comorbid excessive drinking and depression in community-dwelling populations.Methods and analysis We will search MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC and SCI from inception to end of July 2019 for randomised controlled trials that evaluate any personalised digital intervention for comorbid excessive drinking and depression and published in any language. Primary outcomes will be changes in quantity of alcohol consumed and depressive symptoms. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Meta-analytic methods will be used to synthesise the data collected relating to the primary outcomes of interest.Ethics and dissemination As a systematic review, ethical approval is not needed. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.Trial registration number CRD42019130134.

Introduction Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) including amphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine/‘ecstasy’, methamphetamine, synthetic cathinones and ‘Ritalin’ are the second most commonly used illicit drugs globally. Yet, there is little evidence on which factors are associated with the development of different patterns of ATS use over the life course. This study aims to examine which individual, social and environmental factors shape different pathways and trajectories of ATS consumption. The study will be conducted in five European countries: Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Czech Republic and the UK.Methods and analysis We will use a sequential mixed-methods study design to investigate the multiple factors (familial, social and occupational situation, critical life events, general risk behaviour, mental and physical health, satisfaction with life) that shape individual ATS use pathways. A systematic literature review will be performed to provide an overview of the current academic literature on the topic. In module 1, qualitative semistructured interviews (n=ATS users and non-users) will be conducted to explore individual experiences of, and perspectives on, dynamics of change in stimulant consumption patterns. In module 2, structured questionnaires (n=2000 ATS users and non-users) will be administered via tablet computers to validate and enhance the generalisability of the interview findings. Data integration will take place at two key points. First, during the study, where the findings from the first qualitative interviews will inform the design of the structured questionnaire. Second, at the end of the study, where mixed methods data will be brought together to generate an in-depth, contextualised understanding of the research topic.Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the respective responsible ethics committee in each participating country. Data will be treated confidentially to ensure participants’ anonymity. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed scientific journals, national and international conferences, and in briefings for policy and practice.