Search

Background Quality improvement (QI) initiatives are increasingly used to improve the quality of care and reduce prescribing errors. The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) QI initiative uses routinely collected electronic primary care data to provide bespoke practice-level reports on prescribing safety. The aim of this study was to explore how the QI reports were used, barriers and facilitators to use, long-term culture change and perceived impact on patient care and practices systems as a result of receiving the reports. Methods A qualitative study using purposive sampling of practices contributing to the CPRD, semi-structured interviews and inductive thematic analysis. We interviewed general practitioners, pharmacists, practice managers and research nurses. Results We conducted 18 interviews, and organised themes summarising the use of QI reports in practice: receiving the report, facilitators and barriers to acting upon the reports, acting upon the report, and how the reports contribute to a quality culture. Effective dissemination of reports, and a positive attitude to audit and the perceived relevance of the clinical topic facilitated use. Lack of time and failure to see or act upon the reports meant they were not used. Factors influencing use of the reports included the structure of the report, ease of identifying cases, and perceptions about coding accuracy. GPs and pharmacists used the reports to conduct case reviews and directly contact patients to discuss unsafe prescribing and patient medication preferences. Finally, the reports contributed to the development of a quality culture within practices through promoting audit activity and acting as a reminder of good prescribing behaviours, promoting future patient safety initiatives, contributing to continuing professional development and improving local networks. Conclusions This study found the reports facilitated individual case review leading to an enhanced sense of quality culture in practices where they were utilised. Our findings demonstrate that the reports were generally considered useful and have been used to support patient safety and clinical practice in specific cases.

BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) is a priority for general practice, and GPs are expected to participate in and provide evidence of QI activity. There is growing interest in harnessing the potential of electronic health records (EHR) to improve patient care by supporting practices to find cases that could benefit from a medicines review.AimTo develop scalable and reproducible prescribing safety reports using patient-level EHR data.Design and settingUK general practices that contribute de-identified patient data to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).MethodA scoping phase used stakeholder consultations to identify primary care QI needs and potential indicators. QI reports containing real data were sent to 12 pilot practices that used Vision GP software and had expressed interest. The scale-up phase involved automating production and distribution of reports to all contributing practices that used both Vision and EMIS software systems. Benchmarking reports with patient-level case review lists for two prescribing safety indicators were sent to 457 practices in December 2017 following the initial scale-up (Figure 2).ResultsTwo indicators were selected from the Royal College of General Practitioners Patient Safety Toolkit following stakeholder consultations for the pilot phase involving 12 GP practices. Pilot phase interviews showed that reports were used to review individual patient care, implement wider QI actions in the practice, and for appraisal and revalidation.ConclusionElectronic health record data can be used to provide standardised, reproducible reports that can be delivered at scale with minimal resource requirements. These can be used in a national QI initiative that impacts directly on patient care.

Summary Background In 2013, a herpes zoster vaccination programme was introduced in England for adults aged 70 years with a phased catch-up programme for those aged 71–79 years. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the first 3 years of the vaccination programme on incidence of herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia in this population. Methods In this population-based study, we extracted data from the Royal College of General Practitioners sentinel primary care network on consultations with patients aged 60–89 years for herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia occurring between Oct 1, 2005, and Sept 30, 2016, obtaining data from 164 practices. We identified individual data on herpes zoster vaccinations administered and consultations for herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia, and aggregated these data to estimate vaccine coverage and incidence of herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia consultations. We defined age cohorts to identify participants targeted in each year of the programme, and as part of the routine or catch-up programme. We modelled incidence according to age, region, gender, time period, and vaccine eligibility using multivariable Poisson regression with an offset for person-years. Findings Our analysis included 3·36 million person-years of data, corresponding to an average of 310 001 patients aged 60–89 years who were registered at an RCGP practice each year. By Aug 31, 2016, uptake of the vaccine varied between 58% for the recently targeted cohorts and 72% for the first routine cohort. Across the first 3 years of vaccination for the three routine cohorts, incidence of herpes zoster fell by 35% (incidence rate ratio 0·65 [95% 0·60–0·72]) and of postherpetic neuralgia fell by 50% (0·50 [0·38–0·67]). The equivalent reduction for the four catch-up cohorts was 33% for herpes zoster (incidence rate ratio 0·67 [0·61–0·74]) and 38% for postherpetic neuralgia (0·62 [0·50–0·79]). These reductions are consistent with a vaccine effectiveness of about 62% against herpes zoster and 70–88% against postherpetic neuralgia. Interpretation The herpes zoster vaccination programme in England has had a population impact equivalent to about 17 000 fewer episodes of herpes zoster and 3300 fewer episodes of postherpetic neuralgia among 5·5 million eligible individuals in the first 3 years of the programme. Communication of the public health impact of this programme will be important to reverse the recent trend of declining vaccine coverage. Funding Public Health England.

BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) is a priority for general practice, and GPs are expected to participate and provide evidence of QI activity. Pressures on the primary care workforce require approaches to QI to prioritise efficiency and effectiveness.AimThis project aimed generate and scale up bespoke QI reports for GP practices contributing data to CPRD.MethodCPRD is a UK government research service facilitating public health research using anonymised primary care data. A pilot report was designed with stakeholders and covered two indicators from the RCGP Patient Safety Toolkit. The reports enabled GPs to identify patients needing case review and to benchmark data on practice-level prescribing. Reports for 12 practices, containing real patient data, were sent to GPs and feedback was obtained via interviews. The report was scaled up to 457 practices and a survey sent out to request feedback.ResultsGPs used the reports to review the care of individual patients, and to implement QI actions such as adding flags to patients notes. One participant used the report as evidence for their annual appraisal. Survey response was limited (n = 31.7%) but overwhelmingly positive. Responders highlighted the importance of clinical input when developing indicators and ensuring the tone of the reports is supportive.ConclusionThe collaborative RCGP/CPRD QI reports are unique in their ability to provide benchmarking and case-finding on a national scale. The indicators selected must lead to actionable reports. Clinical input is required to ensure code lists are appropriate and that reports are clinically relevant. CPRD aims to send out two reports annually.

In 2015/16, the influenza season in the United Kingdom was dominated by influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 circulation. Virus characterisation indicated the emergence of genetic clusters, with the majority antigenically similar to the current influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine strain. Mid-season vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates show an adjusted VE of 41.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.0–64.7) against influenza-confirmed primary care consultations and of 49.1% (95% CI: 9.3–71.5) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09. These estimates show levels of protection similar to the 2010/11 season, when this strain was first used in the seasonal vaccine.

INTRODUCTION: Falls are the leading cause of injury in older people. Reducing falls could reduce financial pressures on health services. We carried out this research to develop a falls risk model, using routine primary care and hospital data to identify those at risk of falls, and apply a cost analysis to enable commissioners of health services to identify those in whom savings can be made through referral to a falls prevention service. METHODS: Multilevel logistical regression was performed on routinely collected general practice and hospital data from 74751 over 65's, to produce a risk model for falls. Validation measures were carried out. A cost-analysis was performed to identify at which level of risk it would be cost-effective to refer patients to a falls prevention service. 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a Monte Carlo Model (MCM), allowing us to adjust for uncertainty in the estimates of these variables. RESULTS: A risk model for falls was produced with an area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.87. The risk cut-off with the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity was at p = 0.07 (sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 78%). The risk cut-off at which savings outweigh costs was p = 0.27 and the risk cut-off with the maximum savings was p = 0.53, which would result in referral of 1.8% and 0.45% of the over 65's population respectively. Above a risk cut-off of p = 0.27, costs do not exceed savings. CONCLUSIONS: This model is the best performing falls predictive tool developed to date; it has been developed on a large UK city population; can be readily run from routine data; and can be implemented in a way that optimises the use of health service resources. Commissioners of health services should use this model to flag and refer patients at risk to their falls service and save resources. Language: en

BACKGROUND Antimicrobial use in acute care is widely reported to be suboptimal. Inappropriate use of antimicrobials is a major contributing factor to the emergence of multidrug resistance and health care-associated infection. Addressing prescribing behavior is a key component of antimicrobial stewardship. METHODS We performed a novel systematic review of both qualitative and quantitative literature on antimicrobial prescribing behavior in acute care. We assessed the extent to which behavioral sciences and social marketing were used and whether this could be related to the effectiveness of reported outcomes. MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), Business Source Complete, The Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) were searched for studies undertaken during the period January 1999-April 2011 and published in English. RESULTS Five qualitative and 5 quantitative studies met the quality criteria. Qualitative studies highlight the predominant influence of social norms, attitudes, and beliefs on antimicrobial prescribing behavior. Quantitative studies reporting interventions to optimize antimicrobial prescribing behavior do not use theoretical science or primary research to inform the design and choice of the interventions deployed. CONCLUSIONS Despite qualitative evidence demonstrating the impact of behavioral determinants and social norms on prescribing, these influences are not given due consideration in the design and evaluation of interventions. To ensure a better understanding of prescribing behaviors and to improve the quality of interventions and research in this area, the incorporation and application of behavioral sciences supported by appropriate multidisciplinary collaboration is recommended.

The 2014/15 influenza season was the second season of roll-out of a live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) programme for healthy children in England. During this season, besides offering LAIV to all two to four year olds, several areas piloted vaccination of primary (4–11 years) and secondary (11–13 years) age children. Influenza A(H3N2) circulated, with strains genetically and antigenically distinct from the 2014/15 A(H3N2) vaccine strain, followed by a drifted B strain. We assessed the overall and indirect impact of vaccinating school age children, comparing cumulative disease incidence in targeted and non-targeted age groups in vaccine pilot to non-pilot areas. Uptake levels were 56.8% and 49.8% in primary and secondary school pilot areas respectively. In primary school age pilot areas, cumulative primary care influenza-like consultation, emergency department respiratory attendance, respiratory swab positivity, hospitalisation and excess respiratory mortality were consistently lower in targeted and non-targeted age groups, though less for adults and more severe end-points, compared with non-pilot areas. There was no significant reduction for excess all-cause mortality. Little impact was seen in secondary school age pilot only areas compared with non-pilot areas. Vaccination of healthy primary school age children resulted in population-level impact despite circulation of drifted A and B influenza strains.

The 2014/15 influenza season in the United Kingdom (UK) was characterised by circulation of predominantly antigenically and genetically drifted influenza A(H3N2) and B viruses. A universal paediatric influenza vaccination programme using a quadrivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has recently been introduced in the UK. This study aims to measure the end-of-season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE), including for LAIV, using the test negative case–control design. The overall adjusted VE against all influenza was 34.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 17.8 to 47.5); for A(H3N2) 29.3% (95% CI: 8.6 to 45.3) and for B 46.3% (95% CI: 13.9 to 66.5). For those aged under 18 years, influenza A(H3N2) LAIV VE was 35% (95% CI: −29.9 to 67.5), whereas for influenza B the LAIV VE was 100% (95% CI:17.0 to 100.0). Although the VE against influenza A(H3N2) infection was low, there was still evidence of significant protection, together with moderate, significant protection against drifted circulating influenza B viruses. LAIV provided non-significant positive protection against influenza A, with significant protection against B. Further work to assess the population impact of the vaccine programme across the UK is underway.

Despite significant investment in infection prevention and control (IPC), there has been little consideration of the effectiveness of behaviour change interventions or the application of behavioural theory (BT) or social marketing (SM) to influence healthcare workers' (HCWs) behaviour and to reduce healthcare associated infection.