Search

Background: Sore throat is a common presentation in primary care. Approximately 15 % of sore throat in adults are caused by Group A Streptococcus (GAS). Clinical guidelines for sore throat recommend prescribing antibiotics only when there is a high probability that the condition has been caused by GAS. Most guidelines incorporate clinical prediction rules (CPRs) such as the Centor Score. Objectives: To present the prevalence and management of sore throat in young adults, with a particular focus on sore throat caused by GAS, including antibiotic prescribing and the retrospective application of the Centor Score. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study included 348 young adults with sore throat presenting in student health centres between 2017 and 2019. A descriptive overview of symptoms in participants with and without GAS is presented, and potential associations between participant characteristics and symptoms and antibiotic prescription were explored using regression analysis. The Centor Score was retrospectively calculated and explored. Results: 23 % (80) of participants had a positive throat swab for GAS. 65 % (225/345) of all participants were prescribed immediate and 12 % (43/345) delayed antibiotics. The symptoms and clinical signs most associated with antibiotic prescribing were exudate on tonsils, absence of cough and enlarged or tender anterior cervical lymph nodes. A retrospective analysis of the Centor score was possible for 337 participants of whom 49 % had a low (score ≤ 2) and 48 % a high Centor score (>2). For 50 % of participants, prescribing was in line with National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines, i.e. a Centor score of 3 or 4. Conclusions: Overall, the prevalence of GAS (23 %) was higher than the predicted 15 % for this population. Antibiotic prescribing was high. As the recommended maximum level of antibiotic prescribing is 20 % for sore throat, this presents an opportunity for improvement. A potential strategy could combine high Centor scores with point of care testing.

Abstract Introduction As health reforms move Ireland from a mixed public-private system toward universal healthcare, it is important to understand variations in prescribing practice for patients with differing health cover and socioeconomic status. This study aims to determine how prescribing patterns for patients aged ≥ 65 years in primary care in Ireland differ between patients with public and private health cover. Methods This was an observational study using anonymised data collected as part of a larger study from 44 general practices in Ireland (2011–2018). Data were extracted from electronic records relating to demographics and prescribing for patients aged ≥ 65 years. The cohort was divided between those with public health cover (via the General Medical Services (GMS) scheme) and those without. Standardised rates of prescribing were calculated for pre-specified drug classes. We also analysed the number of medications, polypharmacy, and trends over time between groups, using multilevel linear regression adjusting for age and sex, and hospitalisations. Results Overall, 42,456 individuals were included (56% female). Most were covered by the GMS scheme (62%, n = 26,490). The rate of prescribing in all drug classes was higher for GMS patients compared to non-GMS patients, with the greatest difference in benzodiazepine anxiolytics. The mean number of unique medications prescribed to GMS patients was 10.9 (SD 5.9), and 8.1 (SD 5.8) for non-GMS patients. The number of unique medications prescribed to both GMS and non-GMS cohorts increased over time. The increase was steeper in the GMS group where the mean number of medications prescribed increased by 0.67 medications/year. The rate of increase was 0.13 (95%CI 0.13, 0.14) medications/year lower for non-GMS patients, a statistically significant difference. Conclusion Our study found a significantly larger number of medications were prescribed to patients with public health cover, compared to those without. Increasing medication burden and polypharmacy among older adults may be accelerated for those of lower socioeconomic status. These findings may inform planning for moves towards universal health care, and this would provide an opportunity to evaluate the effect of expanding entitlement on prescribing and medications use.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AmR) is widely considered a global health threat and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and costs. Inappropriate antimicrobial use is the most important modifiable risk factor for AmR. Most human antimicrobial medicines use occurs in primary care [prescribed by general practitioners (GPs), dispensed by community pharmacists (CPs)]. However, up to 50% of use is deemed inappropriate. Point-of-care diagnostic tests are used as a basis for antimicrobial stewardship interventions to improve the diagnostic certainty of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), and therefore ensure prudent antimicrobial use. However, there is a lack of guidance on their use, and they are therefore not routinely used in clinical practice. Objective: A scoping review will be conducted to synthesise the available evidence to inform the development of best practice guidance for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted following guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the International HTA database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as grey literature, will be searched. Screening will be undertaken independently by two reviewers to identify studies and literature reporting the use of point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care by GPs and/ or CPs. Findings will be described using narrative synthesis. Conclusion: The findings of this scoping review will be used to produce draft guidance on the use of point-of-care diagnostic tests in primary care, which will undergo further development using a Delphi consensus methodology involving experts in the field of RTIs, antimicrobial stewardship, point-of-care diagnostics and primary care.

Abstract Background For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is a standard practice. PolyPrime is a theory-based intervention developed to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Methods This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aimed to recruit 12 general practitioner (GP) practices (six in NI; six in the ROI counties that border NI) and ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) per GP practice (n = 120). Practices allocated to the intervention arm watched an online video and scheduled medication reviews with patients on two occasions. We assessed the feasibility of collecting GP record (medication appropriateness, health service use) and patient self-reported data [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health service use)] at baseline, 6 and 9 months. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and medication-related burden quality-of-life (MRB-QoL) tool. An embedded process evaluation and health economics analysis were also undertaken. Pre-specified progression criteria were used to determine whether to proceed to a definitive cRCT. Results Twelve GP practices were recruited and randomised. Three GP practices withdrew from the study due to COVID-related factors. Sixty-eight patients were recruited, with 47 (69.1%) being retained until the end of the study. GP record data were available for 47 patients for medication appropriateness analysis at 9 months. EQ-5D-5L and MRB-QoL data were available for 46 and 41 patients, respectively, at 9 months. GP record and patient self-reported health service use data were available for 47 patients at 9 months. Health service use was comparable in terms of overall cost estimated from GP record versus patient self-reported data. The intervention was successfully delivered as intended; it was acceptable to GPs, practice staff, and patients; and potential mechanisms of action have been identified. All five progression criteria were met (two ‘Go’, three ‘Amend’). Conclusion Despite challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study has demonstrated that it may be feasible to conduct an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care across two healthcare jurisdictions. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Objectives To describe the characteristics of clinical study report (CSR) documents published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and for included pivotal trials, to quantify the timeliness of access to trial results from CSRs compared with conventional published sources.Design Cross-sectional analysis of CSR documents published by the EMA from 2016 to 2018.Methods CSR files and medication summary information were downloaded from the EMA. Individual trials in each submission were identified using document filenames. Number and length of documents and trials were determined. For pivotal trials, trial phase, dates of EMA document publication and matched journal and registry publications were obtained.Results The EMA published documents on 142 medications that were submitted for regulatory drug approval. Submissions were for initial marketing authorisations in 64.1%. There was a median of 15 (IQR 5–46) documents, 5 (IQR 2–14) trials and 9629 (IQR 2711–26,673) pages per submission, and a median of 1 (IQR 1–4) document and 336 (IQR 21–1192) pages per trial. Of all identified pivotal trials, 60.9% were phase 3 and 18.5% were phase 1. Of 119 unique submissions to the EMA, 46.2% were supported by a single pivotal trial, with 13.4% based on a single pivotal phase 1 trial. No trial registry results were identified for 26.1% trials, no journal publications for 16.7% and 13.5% of trials had neither. EMA publication was the earliest information source for 5.8% of pivotal trials, available a median 523 days (IQR 363–882 days) before the earliest publication.Conclusions The EMA Clinical Data website contains lengthy clinical trial documents. Almost half of submissions to the EMA were based on single pivotal trials, many of which were phase 1 trials. CSRs were the only source and a timelier source of information for many trials. Access to unpublished trial information should be open and timely to support decision-making for patients.

Abstract Objectives To determine the feasibility, implementation and outcomes of an Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP) intervention in primary care to assist older adults at risk of functional decline by developing a personalized support plan. Design Feasibility cluster randomized control trial. Setting and participants Eight primary care practices (four in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom and four in the Republic of Ireland) were randomly assigned to either intervention or control arm. Eligible patients were those identified in each practice as 70 years of age or older and assessed as at risk of functional decline. Study participants (intervention n = 34, control n = 31) and research staff were not blinded to group assignment. Anticipatory care intervention The intervention delivered by a registered nurse including: a) a home-based patient assessment; b) care planning on the basis of a holistic patient assessment, and c) documentation of a support plan. Outcome measures A conceptual framework (RE-AIM) guided the assessment on the potential impact of the ACP intervention on patient quality of life, mental health, healthcare utilisation, costs, perception of person-centred care, and reduction of potentially inappropriate prescribing. Data were collected at baseline and at 10 weeks and six months following delivery of the intervention. Results All pre-specified feasibility indicators were met. Patients were unanimous in the acceptance of the ACP intervention. Health care providers viewed the ACP intervention as feasible to implement in routine clinical practice with attending community supports. While there were no significant differences on the primary outcomes (EQ-5D-5L: -0.07 (-0.17, 0.04) p = .180; CES-D: 1.2 (-2.5, 4.8) p = .468) and most secondary measures, ancillary analysis on social support showed responsiveness to the intervention. Incremental cost analysis revealed a mean reduction in costs of €320 per patient (95% CI -31 to 25; p = 0.82) for intervention relative to the control. Conclusions We successfully tested the ACP intervention in primary care settings and have shown that it is feasible to implement. The ACP intervention deserves further testing in a definitive trial to determine whether its implementation would lead to better outcomes or reduced costs. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743 . Registered on 4 April 2019.

Objectives Infectious mononucleosis (IM) is a clinical syndrome that is characterised by lymphadenopathy, fever and sore throat. Although generally not considered a serious illness, IM can lead to significant loss of time from school or work due to profound fatigue, or the development of chronic illness. This study aimed to derive and externally validate clinical prediction rules (CPRs) for IM caused by Epstein-Barr virus (EBV).Design Prospective cohort study.Setting and participants 328 participants were recruited prospectively for the derivation cohort, from seven university-affiliated student health centres in Ireland. Participants were young adults (17–39 years old, mean age 20.6 years) with sore throat and one other additional symptom suggestive of IM. The validation cohort was a retrospective cohort of 1498 participants from a student health centre at the University of Georgia, USA.Main outcome measures Regression analyses were used to develop four CPR models, internally validated in the derivation cohort. External validation was carried out in the geographically separate validation cohort.Results In the derivation cohort, there were 328 participants, of whom 42 (12.8%) had a positive EBV serology test result. Of 1498 participants in the validation cohort, 243 (16.2%) had positive heterophile antibody tests for IM. Four alternative CPR models were developed and compared. There was moderate discrimination and good calibration for all models. The sparsest CPR included presence of enlarged/tender posterior cervical lymph nodes and presence of exudate on the pharynx. This model had moderate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC): 0.70; 95% CI: 0.62–0.79) and good calibration. On external validation, this model demonstrated reasonable discrimination (AUC: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.67–0.72) and good calibration.Conclusions The alternative CPRs proposed can provide quantitative probability estimates of IM. Used in conjunction with serological testing for atypical lymphocytosis and immunoglobulin testing for viral capsid antigen, CPRs can enhance diagnostic decision-making for IM in community settings.

Background: Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular events with only a minority of people treated to satisfactory levels. There is an increasing body of literature pertaining to the beneficial effect of self-blood pressure monitoring (SBPM) on blood pressure control in hypertensive patients. It is cost-effective, well tolerated, and has been shown to be a better predictor of end organ damage than traditional office blood pressure monitoring (OBPM). The aim of this Cochrane review is to provide an up-to-date assessment on the effectiveness of self-monitoring in the management of hypertension.Is SBPM more efficacious in reducing blood pressure, compared with OBPM or usual care?Is SBPM with additional supports more efficacious in reducing blood pressure, compared with no additional support?Are there any adverse events associated with SBPM, compared with OBPM or usual care?Methods: All randomised controlled trials of adult patients with a diagnosis of primary hypertension where the intervention of interest is SBPM will be included. Data extraction, analysis and risk of bias assessment will be carried out by two independent authors. Analysis will be based on intention-to-treat (ITT) data from individual trials.Results: Primary outcome measures include change in mean office systolic and/or diastolic BP, change in mean ambulatory blood pressure, the proportion of patients reaching target BP, and adverse events including mortality or cardiovascular morbidity or related to treatment with antihypertensive agents.Discussion: This review will help to determine if self-monitoring of blood pressure, with or without co-interventions, is effective in lowering blood pressure. Results will be available for conference.

Abstract The misattribution of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) as a symptom or illness can lead to the prescribing of additional medication, referred to as a prescribing cascade. The aim of this systematic review is to identify published prescribing cascades in community‐dwelling adults. A systematic review was reported in line with the PRISMA guidelines and pre‐registered with PROSPERO. Electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) and grey literature sources were searched. Inclusion criteria: community‐dwelling adults; risk‐prescription medication; outcomes‐initiation of new medicine to “treat” or reduce ADR risk; study type‐cohort, cross‐sectional, case‐control, and case‐series studies. Title/abstract screening, full‐text screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment were conducted independently in duplicate. A narrative synthesis was conducted. A total of 101 studies (reported in 103 publications) were included. Study sample sizes ranged from 126 to 11 593 989 participants and 15 studies examined older adults specifically (≥60 years). Seventy‐eight of 101 studies reported a potential prescribing cascade including calcium channel blockers to loop diuretic (n = 5), amiodarone to levothyroxine (n = 5), inhaled corticosteroid to topical antifungal (n = 4), antipsychotic to anti‐Parkinson drug (n = 4), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor to urinary incontinence drugs (n = 4). Identified prescribing cascades occurred within three months to one year following initial medication. Methodological quality varied across included studies. Prescribing cascades occur for a broad range of medications. ADRs should be included in the differential diagnosis for patients presenting with new symptoms, particularly older adults and those who started a new medication in the preceding 12 months.

Abstract Background Aging populations present a challenge to health systems internationally, due to the increasing complexity of care for older adults living with functional decline. This study aimed to elicit expert views of key health professionals on effective and sustainable implementation of a nurse-led, person-centred anticipatory care planning (ACP) intervention for older adults at risk of functional decline in a primary care setting. Methods We examined the feasibility of an ACP intervention in a trans-jurisdictional feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial consisting of home visits by research nurses who assessed participants’ health, discussed their health goals and devised an anticipatory care plan following consultation with participants’ GPs and adjunct clinical pharmacist. As part of the project, we elicited the views and recommendations of experienced key health professionals working with the target population who were recruited using a ‘snowballing technique’ in cooperation with older people health networks in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI), United Kingdom [n = 16: 7 ROI, 9 NI]. Following receipt of written information about the intervention and the provision of informed consent, the health professionals were interviewed to determine their expert views on the feasibility of the ACP intervention and recommendations for successful implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results The ACP intervention was perceived to be beneficial for most older patients with multimorbidity. Effective and sustainable implementation was said to be facilitated by accurate and timely patient selection, GP buy-in, use of existing structures within health systems, multidisciplinary and integrated working, ACP nurse training, as well as patient health literacy. Barriers emerged as significant work already undertaken, increasing workload, lack of time, funding and resources, fragmented services, and geographical inequalities. Conclusions The key health professionals perceived the ACP intervention to be highly beneficial to patients, with significant potential to prevent or avoid functional decline and hospital admissions. They suggested that successful implementation of this primary care based, whole-person approach would involve integrated and multi-disciplinary working, GP buy in, patient health education, and ACP nurse training. The findings have potential implications for a full trial, and patient care and health policy. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743 . Registered on 4 April 2019.

Abstract Background The PolyPrime intervention is a theory-based intervention aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people (aged ≥65 years) in primary care. The intervention consists of an online video which demonstrates how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. The aim of the process evaluation is to further examine the implementation of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care. This will involve investigating whether the PolyPrime intervention can be delivered as intended across two healthcare systems, how acceptable the intervention is to GPs, practice staff and patients, and to identify the intervention’s likely mechanisms of action. Methods The PolyPrime study is an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) which aims to recruit 12 GP practices across Northern Ireland [NI] (n=6) and the six counties in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) that border NI (n=6). Practices have been randomised to intervention or usual care. An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention to GPs, practice staff and patients and potential mechanisms of action (i.e. what components of the intervention were perceived to be effective). Quantitative data will be collected from data collection forms completed by GPs and practice staff and a feedback questionnaire completed by patients from intervention arm practices, which will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with GPs and practice staff and audio-recordings of medication review appointments from the intervention arm practices which will be transcribed and analysed using the framework method. Quantitative and qualitative data will be triangulated to provide an overall assessment of intervention fidelity, intervention acceptability, and mechanisms of action. Discussion This process evaluation will add to feasibility data from the pilot cRCT by providing evidence on the fidelity of implementing the intervention package across two healthcare systems, the acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN41009897 . Registered on 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Objective The DASSL Model, conceived by the Health Research Board, aims to overcome challenges to linking data in Ireland including lack of unique patient identifiers, inconsistent application of legislation and siloed data. The objective of the Proof-of-Concept is to develop and test a demonstrator technical infrastructure to support this model. Approach A stakeholder committee of representatives from government, health services, data controllers, patients/public and researchers was established. National and international data sharing and linkage landscapes were reviewed via interviews, scientific papers and grey literature. Five case studies were developed to demonstrate different linkages, data and research purposes, with synthetic data mimicking real health/social datasets generated using data dictionaries, data controller input, national statistics and Synthpop, Synthetic Data Vault and General Adversarial Networks. The technical infrastructure remains under development with linkage software being evaluated. Stakeholders will test this infrastructure and a final report will outline considerations for a national solution. Results Synthetic versions of administrative data, patient registries, electronic patient records, longitudinal cohorts, imaging and genomics are being generated. Matching variables and content data will be split and securely shared respectively with the Trusted Third Party (TTP) and Health Data Hub (HDH) on a project-by-project basis and at regular intervals. The selected linkage software will be used to match both unique identifiers and personally-identifiable data using probabilistic and deterministic techniques between datasets and with a population spine. The encrypted linkage key will be shared with the HDH, where the data view for each case study will be created by the Research Support Unit using the content data. A locked down virtual Safe Haven will support researcher access with disclosure control check on any outputs. Conclusion A DASSL infrastructure could support sharing, linking and analysis of health and social data in Ireland. However, high quality data including matching variables need to be collected to produce beneficial findings. A national rollout requires a governance and legislative model, improvements in data collection, further public engagement and significant resourcing.

Abstract Background The use of multiple medications (polypharmacy) is a concern in older people (≥65 years) and is associated with negative health outcomes. For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy is the reality and the key challenge is ensuring appropriate polypharmacy (as opposed to inappropriate polypharmacy). This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aims to further test a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care in two jurisdictions, Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Methods Twelve GP practices across NI (n=6) and the six counties in the ROI that border NI will be randomised to either the intervention or usual care group. Members of the research team have developed an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. The intervention consists of two components: (1) an online video which demonstrates how a GP may prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and (2) a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. Ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥4 medications) will be recruited per GP practice (n=120). GP practices allocated to the intervention arm will be asked to watch the online video and schedule medication reviews with patients on two occasions; an initial and a 6-month follow-up appointment. GP practices allocated to the control arm will continue to provide usual care to patients. The study will assess the feasibility of recruitment, retention and study procedures including collecting data on medication appropriateness (from GP records), quality of life and health service use (i.e. hospitalisations). An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. Discussion This pilot cRCT will provide evidence of the feasibility of a range of study parameters such as recruitment and retention, data collection procedures and the acceptability of the intervention. Pre-specified progression criteria will also be used to determine whether or not to proceed to a definitive cRCT. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Abstract Background Despite efforts to improve the accuracy and transparency of the design, conduct, and reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), deficiencies remain. Such deficiencies contribute to significant, avoidable waste of health research investment and impede reproducibility. This study aimed to synthesise and critically analyse changes over time in the conduct and reporting of internationally published evidence on patient and/or population health-oriented RCTs conducted in one country. Methods This observational study drew on systematic review methods. We searched six databases for published RCTs (database inception to December 2018) where ≥ 80% of participants were recruited in the Republic of Ireland. RCTs of interventions targeted at patients, providers and/or policy makers intended to improve health, healthcare or health research were included. For each study, screening, data extraction and methodological quality appraisal were conducted by one member of the author team. Results From 17,560 titles and abstracts, 752 unique RCTs were published in 745 papers between 1968 and 2018, with a steady year-on-year increase since 1968. The number of participants was in the range of 2–8628. The majority were parallel design (86%) and classified as treatment evaluation. Of the 418 RCTs published since the introduction of mandatory clinical trial registration by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in 2005, 32% (n = 134) provided a trial registration number. This increased to 47% when taking studies published between 2013 and 2018 (n = 232). Since the 1996 publication of the CONSORT statement, 16% of included RCTs made specific reference to a standardised reporting guideline and this increased to 31% for more recent studies published between 2013 and 2018. Overall, 7% (n = 53) of studies referred to a published study protocol, increasing to 20% for studies published between 2013 and 2018. Conclusion Evidence from this single-country study of RCTs published in the international literature suggests that both the number overall, the number registered and the number referencing reporting guidelines have increased steadily over time. Despite widespread endorsement of reporting standards, reporting of RCTs remains suboptimal in domains such as compliance with the CONSORT statement and prospective trial registration. Researchers, funders and journal editors, nationally and internationally, should continue to focus on improving reporting and examining avoidable waste of health research investment.

Abstract Background Medication error at transitions of care is common. The implementation of medicines reconciliation processes to improve this issue has been recommended by many regulatory and safety organisations. The aim of this study was to gain insight from healthcare professionals on the barriers and facilitators to the medicines reconciliation implementation process. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Ireland with a wide range of healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved with medicines reconciliation at transitions of care. Thematic analysis was undertaken using an adaptation of a combined theoretical framework of Grol, Cabana and Sluisveld to classify the barriers and facilitators to implementation of medicines reconciliation. Results Thirty-five participants were interviewed, including eleven community pharmacists (CPs), eight hospital pharmacists (HPs), nine hospital consultants (HCs), five general practitioners (GPs), and two non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs). Themes were categorized into barriers and facilitators. Barriers included resistance from existing professional cultures, staff interest and training, poor communication and minimal information and communications technology (ICT) support. Solutions (facilitators) suggested included supporting effective multidisciplinary teams, greater involvement of pharmacists in medicines reconciliation, ICT solutions (linked prescribing databases, decision support systems) and increased funding to provide additional (e.g. admission and discharge reconciliation) and more advanced services (e.g. community pharmacist delivered medicines use review). Conclusions Medicines reconciliation is advocated as a solution to the known problem of medication error at transitions of care. This study identifies the key challenges and potential solutions that policy makers, managers and HCPs should consider when reviewing the practices and processes of medicines reconciliation in their own organisations.

Abstract Background The treatment and management of long-term health conditions is the greatest challenge facing health systems around the world today. Innovative approaches to patient care in the community such as Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP), which seek to help with the provision of high-quality comprehensive care to older adults at risk of functional decline, require evaluation. This study will evaluate one approach that will include primary care as the setting for ACP. Methods/design This study will help to determine the feasibility for a definitive randomised trial to evaluate the implementation and outcomes of an ACP intervention. The intervention will be delivered by specially trained registered nurses in a primary care setting with older adults identified as at risk of functional decline. The intervention will comprise: (a) information collection via patient assessment; (b) facilitated informed dialogue between the patient, family carer, general practitioner and other healthcare practitioners; and, (c) documentation of the agreed support plan and follow-up review dates. Through a structured consultation with patients and their family carers, the nurses will complete a mutually agreed personalised support plan. Discussion This study will determine the feasibility for a full trial protocol to evaluate the implementation and outcomes of an (ACP) intervention in primary care to assist older adults aged 70 years of age or older and assessed as being at risk of functional decline. The study will be implemented in two jurisdictions on the island of Ireland which employ different health systems but which face similar health challenges. This study will allow us to examine important issues, such as the impact of two different healthcare systems on the health of older people and the influence of different legislative interpretations on undertaking cross jurisdictional research in Ireland. Protocol version Version 1, 17 September 2019. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743. Registered on 4 April 2019.

Abstract In recent decades, opioid use has increased internationally and is a major public health concern. This study aims to characterize changes in opioid and other analgesic prescribing in Ireland over a 15‐year period (2000–2015). This is a repeated cross‐sectional study of administrative pharmacy claims data in 2000 and 2015. Individuals of all ages in Ireland's Eastern Health Board region who were eligible for the General Medical Services (GMS) scheme were included. This scheme covers 40% of the population, mostly those on lower incomes and older people. The primary outcome was dispensing of opioids, both prevalence of any use and rate per 1000 GMS eligible population (standardized to the 2015 population). Logistic regression was used to assess odds of opioid dispensing in 2015 versus 2000, controlling for demographic differences. The eligible study population was 364 436 in 2000 and 523 653 in 2015. In 2000, 19.4% of the eligible population had at least one opioid dispensing compared to 20.8% in 2015. The rate increased from 671 to 1098 dispensings per 1000 population. The increase was highest in the dispensing rates of codeine, tramadol, oxycodone, buprenorphine, and fentanyl. Compared to 2000, there was higher odds in 2015 of being dispensed a strong opioid (adjusted odds ratio 2.0, 95%CI 1.97–2.04) or long‐acting formulation (3.75, 95%CI 3.58–3.92). Increased prescribing of opioids, particularly strong opioids, between 2000 and 2015 is evident in Ireland. This is concerning due to the potential for misuse, and opioid‐related morbidity/mortality.

Introduction: Internationally, health systems face the challenge of managing a growing ageing population living with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Potentially inappropriate prescribing is common among patients with polypharmacy, increasing the risk for adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Several prescribing indicator sets exist to improve prescribing and reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing, but do not address prescribing cascades. Prescribing cascades occur when a medication is prescribed to treat an ADR to another prescribed medication, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and constitute an important area to consider when characterising problematic polypharmacy. This is a protocol for a systematic review examining prescribing cascades in community-dwelling adults. Methods: The review will be reported adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search of Medline (Ovid), EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library will be conducted from inception to March 2021, using a predetermined strategy. Grey literature will be searched using Open Grey, MedNar, Dart Europe, and the Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) databases. No restrictions will be placed on language or publication year. Inclusion criteria are: population - community-dwelling adults (≥18 years); risk - prescription medication with the potential to cause side effects; outcomes - initiation of a new medicine to ‘treat’ or reduce the risk of experiencing an ADR. Prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case control and case series studies will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts; studies meeting inclusion criteria will undergo independent full-text screening by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis will be conducted. Study quality will be independently assessed using the relevant Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. Discussion: This systematic review will identify examples of prescribing cascades for community-dwelling adults and contribute to developing an evidence base regarding such cascades. Registration: PROSPERO [CRD42021243163, 31/03/2021].

Background: Potentially inappropriate care can result from overuse or underuse of treatments, tests, or procedures. Overuse is defined as the use of health services with no clear benefit to the recipient or where harms outweigh benefits and/or costs of care. Underuse is defined as failure to deliver an effective and cost-effective healthcare intervention. Cardiovascular procedures such as coronary artery bypass grafting, carotid endarterectomy, coronary angiography, and coronary angioplasty (with/without stenting) are potentially both underused and overused. This systematic review aims to identify rates of potential overuse and underuse of these cardiovascular procedures and explore any associated patient or healthcare system factors. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane library will be conducted using a predefined search strategy. Eligible studies for inclusion will examine rates of overuse and underuse of cardiovascular procedures, measured against national/international guidelines, for adults aged ≥18 years. Primary observational studies including cross-sectional and cohort studies will be included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Risk of bias for all included studies will be assessed using a modified version of the Hoy risk of bias tool. Where adequate data exists, and if statistically appropriate, meta-analyses will be conducted. If statistical pooling of the data is not possible, the findings will be narratively summarised focusing on the review’s objectives. Conclusion: This systematic review will examine overuse and underuse of cardiovascular procedures for adults. The results will help inform policy makers, researchers, patients, and clinicians in the appropriate use of these procedures, in line with international guidelines. Registration: This protocol has been submitted for registration on PROSPERO (CRD42021239041).

Objective Ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) conditions are those for which intensified primary care management could potentially prevent emergency admissions. This study aimed to quantify geographical variation in emergency admissions with ACS conditions in older adults and explore factors influencing variation.Design Repeated cross-sectional study.Setting 34 public hospitals in the Ireland.Participants Adults aged ≥65 years hospitalised for seven ACS conditions between 2012 and 2016 (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), diabetes, angina, pyelonephritis/urinary tract infections (UTIs), dehydration and pneumonia).Primary outcome measure Age and sex standardised emergency admission rates (SARs) per 1000 older adults.Analysis Age and sex SARs were calculated for 21 geographical areas. Extremal quotients and systematic components of variance (SCV) quantified variation. Spatial regression analyses was conducted for SARs with unemployment, urban population proportion, hospital turnover, supply of general practitioners (GPs), and supply of hospital-based specialists as explanatory variables.Results Over time, an increase in UTI/pyelonephritis SARs was seen while SARs for angina and CHF decreased. Geographic variation was moderate overall and high for dehydration and angina (SCV=11.7–50.0). For all conditions combined, multivariable analysis showed lower urban population (adjusted coefficient: −2.2 (−3.4 to −0.9, p

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor used to treat heart failure. The evidence for this novel medication is largely based on one pivotal phase III trial which was stopped early due to significant clinical benefits being shown. However potential limitations in trial design have been highlighted in recent literature, necessitating a thorough review of all evidence for sacubitril/valsartan. Methods: This review will be conducted using the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for sacubitril/valsartan will be systematically searched for in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Toxline and Scopus. Clinical trials registries will be searched, as will eight grey literature databases. In addition, unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) of relevant trials will be requested from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Clinical Study Data Request database. Studies will be included if they involve randomising adult patients with heart failure to either sacubitril/valsartan or usual care, with either an active comparator or placebo as a control. Heart failure of any subtype or NYHA class will be included. All relevant clinical and safety outcomes will be reviewed, particularly hospitalisation due to heart failure and cardiovascular mortality. Two reviewers will assess eligibility of selected studies for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed separately for trial publications, clinical trial registries and for CSRs using a piloted form. Methodological quality of included trials from published sources will be assessed separately using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2). Narrative synthesis of included studies will be conducted and, if appropriate, meta-analysis for clinical efficacy and safety outcomes. Discussion: This review will collate all available RCT data on sacubitril/valsartan including published and unpublished sources in order to obtain a more complete picture of the evidence base for sacubitril/valsartan. Registration: This protocol is registered on PROSPERO (reference CRD42020162031).

Aim To apply the drug utilisation 90% (DU90%) indicator (the number of unique drugs which makes up 90% of a doctor’s prescribing) to general practitioner (GP) practices prescribing in England to examine time trends, practice-level variation, and relationships with practice characteristics, prescribing costs and low-value prescribing.Study design Retrospective cohort study.Setting Primary care in England, using publicly available prescribing data available from the National Health Service (NHS) digital platform for 2013–2017.Participants All general practices in England (n=7620).Primary and secondary outcome measures The DU90% was calculated on an annual basis for each practice based on medication British National Formulary codes. Low-value prescribing was defined using NHS 2017 guidance (including lidocaine plasters, liothyronine, omega-3 supplements). Descriptive statistics were generated per year on time trends and practice-level variation in the DU90%. Multilevel linear regression was used to examine the practice characteristics (relating to staff, patients and deprivation of the practice area).Results Among 7620 practices, mean DU90% ranged from 130.0 to 131.0 across study years, and regarding variation between practices, there was a 1.4-fold difference between the lowest and highest 5% of practices. A range of medications were included in the DU90% of virtually all practices, including atorvastatin, levothyroxine, omeprazole, ramipril, amlodipine, simvastatin and aspirin. A higher volume of prescribing was associated with a lower DU90%, while having more patients, higher proportions of patients who are women or aged ≥45 years, higher number of GPs working in the practice and being in a more deprived area were associated with a higher DU90%. Practices in higher quintiles of DU90% had higher levels of low-priority prescribing and prescribing costs.Conclusion GP practices typically use 130 different medications in the bulk of their prescribing. Higher DU90% was associated with higher levels of low-priority prescribing and prescribing costs. Increasing use of personal formularies may enhance prescribing quality and reduce costs.

Objective Multichotomous tests have three or more outcome or risk categories, and can provide richer information and a better fit with clinical decision-making than dichotomous tests. Our objective is to present a fully developed approach to the meta-analysis of multichotomous clinical prediction rules (CPRs) and tests, including meta-analysis of stratum specific likelihood ratios.Study design We have developed a novel approach to the meta-analysis of likelihood ratios for multichotomous tests that avoids the need to dichotomise outcome categories, and demonstrate its application to a sample CPR. We also review previously reported approaches to the meta-analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC) and meta-analysis of a measure of calibration (observed:expected) for multichotomous tests or CPRs.Results Using data from 10 studies of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk score for prostate cancer recurrence, we calculated summary estimates of the likelihood ratios for low, moderate and high risk groups of 0.40 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.49), 1.24 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.55) and 4.47 (95% CI 3.21 to 6.23), respectively. Applying the summary estimates of the likelihood ratios for each risk group to the overall prevalence of cancer recurrence in a population allows one to estimate the likelihood of recurrence for each risk group in that population.Conclusion An approach to meta-analysis of multichotomous tests or CPRs is presented. A spreadsheet for data preparation and code for R and Stata are provided for other researchers to download and use. Combined with summary estimates of the AUROCC and calibration, this is a comprehensive strategy for meta-analysis of multichotomous tests and CPRs.

BackgroundAs the population of older adults increases, the complexity of care required to support those who choose to remain in the community amplifies. Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP), through earlier identification of healthcare needs, is evidenced to improve quality of life, decrease aggressive interventions, and prolong life. With patient acceptability of growing importance in the design, implementation, and evaluation of healthcare interventions, this study reports on the acceptability of a primary care based ACP intervention on the island of Ireland.MethodsAs part of the evaluation of a feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) testing an ACP intervention for older people at risk of functional decline, intervention participants [n = 34] were interviewed in their homes at 10-week follow-up to determine acceptability. The intervention consisted of home visits by specifically trained registered nurses who assessed participants' health, discussed their health goals and plans, and devised an anticipatory care plan in collaboration with participants' GPs and adjunct clinical pharmacist. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze interview data. The feasibility cRCT involved eight general practitioner (GP) practices as cluster sites, stratified by jurisdiction, four in Northern Ireland (NI) (two intervention, two control), and four in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) (two intervention, two control). Participants were assessed for risk of functional decline. A total of 34 patients received the intervention and 31 received usual care.FindingsThematic analysis resulted in five main themes: timing of intervention, understanding of ACP, personality & individual differences, loneliness & social isolation, and views on healthcare provision. These map across the Four Factor Model of Acceptability ('4FMA'), a newly developed conceptual framework comprising four components: intervention factors, personal factors, social support factors, and healthcare provision factors.ConclusionAcceptability of this primary care based ACP intervention was high, with nurses' home visits, GP anchorage, multidisciplinary working, personalized approach, and active listening regarded as beneficial. Appropriate timing, and patient health education emerged as vital.

Objective To determine the prevalence and predictors of oral to intravenous antibiotic switch among adult emergency department (ED) patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs).Design Multicentre, pilot cohort study.Setting Three urban EDs in Dublin, Ireland.Participants Consecutive ED patients aged >16 years old with ABSSSIs between March 2015 and September 2016.Intervention Oral flucloxacillin 500 mg–1 g four times a day (alternative in penicillin allergy).Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcome was to determine the prevalence and predictors of oral to intravenous antibiotic switch. Secondary outcomes were to determine the prevalence and predictors of receiving an extended course of oral antibiotic treatment and measurement of interobserver reliability for clinical predictors at enrolment.Results Overall, 159 patients were enrolled of which eight were lost to follow-up and five were excluded. The majority of patients were male (65.1%) and

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor used to treat heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The evidence base for this novel medication is largely based on one pivotal phase III trial which was stopped early due to significant clinical benefits being shown. However potential limitations in the trial design have been highlighted in recent medical literature, necessitating a thorough review of the evidence base for sacubitril/valsartan. Methods: This review will be conducted using the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for sacubitril/valsartan will be systematically searched for in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Toxline and Scopus. Clinical trials registries will be searched, as will eight grey literature databases. In addition, unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) of relevant trials will be requested from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Clinical Study Data Request database. Studies will be included if they involve randomising adult patients with heart failure to either sacubitril/valsartan or usual care with either an active comparator or placebo as a control. All relevant clinical and safety outcomes will be reviewed, particularly hospitalisation due to heart failure and cardiovascular mortality. Two reviewers will assess eligibility of selected trials for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed separately for trial publications, clinical trial registries and for CSRs using a piloted form. Methodological quality of included trials from published sources will be assessed separately using the recently updated Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2. Narrative synthesis of included studies will be conducted and, if appropriate, meta-analysis for clinical efficacy and safety outcomes. Discussion: This review will collate all available RCT data on sacubitril/valsartan including published and unpublished sources in order to obtain a more complete picture of the evidence base for sacubitril/valsartan. Registration: This protocol has been submitted for registration on PROSPERO.

Abstract Background Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Control of T2DM can be challenging for healthcare professionals for a number of reasons, including poor concordance with medications, difficulties modifying lifestyle behaviour and also clinical inertia, which is defined as a reluctance among health professionals to intensify medications. A complex intervention, called ComputeriseD dECisIonal support for poorly controlleD typE 2 Diabetes mellitus in Irish General Practice (DECIDE), was developed, identifying T2DM patients with poor glycaemic and blood pressure control and aiming to target clinical inertia, by supporting therapeutic action, including GP-led medication intensification where appropriate. A small-scale, uncontrolled, non-randomised feasibility study highlighted the acceptability of the DECIDE intervention within Irish General Practice. This paper presents a protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the DECIDE intervention. Methods/Design The pilot cluster RCT will involve 14 practices and 140 patients in Irish General Practice. Intervention GPs will participate in the DECIDE intervention, comprising (a) a training programme for the practices and (b) a web-based clinical decision support system supporting treatment escalation, tailored to specific patient information. Only patients who have poorly controlled T2DM (defined as HbA1c > 70 mmol/mol and/or BP > 150/95) will be included. The primary outcomes will include measures of feasibility such as recruitment and retention of practices and acceptability of the intervention and also HbA1c. Secondary outcomes will include medication intensification, blood pressure and lipids. Control GPs will continue to provide usual care. A process evaluation will be performed to determine whether the intervention is delivered as intended and treatment fidelity assessed to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of interventions. An exploratory health economic analysis will examine the potential costs and cost effectiveness of the intervention relative to the control. Discussion A pilot cluster RCT will establish the feasibility of a complex intervention which aims to support primary care for patients with poorly controlled T2DM in Irish General Practice. Trial registration The protocol for the pilot cluster RCT is registered on the ISRCTN Registry at: ISRCTN69498919.

Abstract Background Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be seen as failure to meet recommended targets for management of key risk factors including glycaemic control, blood pressure and lipids. Poor control of risk factors is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Failure to intensify medications for patients with poor control of T2DM when indicated is called clinical inertia and is one contributory factor to poor control of T2DM. We aimed to develop a theory and evidence-based complex intervention to improve appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM in Irish general practice. Methods The first stage of the Medical Research Council Framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions was utilised. To identify current evidence, we performed a systematic review to examine the effectiveness of interventions targeting patients with poorly controlled T2DM in community settings. The Behaviour Change Wheel theoretical approach was used to identify suitable intervention functions. Workshops, simulation, collaborations with academic partners and observation of physicians were utilised to operationalise the intervention functions and design the elements of the complex intervention. Results Our systematic review highlighted that professional-based interventions, potentially through clinical decision support systems, could address poorly controlled T2DM. Appropriate intensification of anti-glycaemic and cardiovascular medications, by general practitioners (GPs), for adults with poorly controlled T2DM was identified as the key behaviour to address clinical inertia. Psychological capability was the key driver of the behaviour, which needed to change, suggesting five key intervention functions (education, training, enablement, environmental restructuring and incentivisation) and nine key behaviour change techniques, which were operationalised into a complex intervention. The intervention has three components: (a) a training program/academic detailing of target GPs, (b) a remote finder tool to help GPs identify patients with poor control of T2DM in their practice and (c) A web-based clinical decision support system. Conclusions This paper describes a multifaceted process including an exploration of current evidence and a thorough theoretical understanding of the predictors of the behaviour resulting in the design of a complex intervention to promote the implementation of evidence-based guidelines, through appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM.

Abstract Background Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of at least two chronic conditions, becomes increasingly common in older people and is associated with poorer health outcomes and significant polypharmacy. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recently published a multimorbidity guideline that advises providing an individualised medication review for all people prescribed 15 or more repeat medicines. This study incorporates this guideline and aims to assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention designed to support general practitioners (GPs) to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing and consider deprescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in Irish primary care. Methods This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial, involving 30 general practices and 450 patients throughout Ireland. Practices will be eligible to participate if they have at least 300 patients aged 65 years and over on their patient panel and if they use either one of the two predominant practice management software systems in use in Ireland. Using a software patient finder tool, practices will identify and recruit patients aged 65 years and over, who are prescribed at least 15 repeat medicines. Once baseline data collection is complete, practices will be randomised using minimisation by an independent third party to either intervention or control. Given the nature of the intervention, it is not possible to blind participants or study personnel. GPs in intervention practices will receive login details to a website where they will access training videos and a template for conducting an individualised structured medication review, which they will undertake with each of their included patients. Control practices will deliver usual care over the 6-month study period. Primary outcome measures pertain to the individual patient level and are the proportion of patients with any PIP and the number of repeat medicines. Discussion Disease-specific approaches in multimorbidity may be inappropriate and result in fragmented and poorly co-ordinated care. This pragmatic study is evaluating a complex intervention that is relevant across multiple conditions and addresses potential concerns around medicines safety in this vulnerable group of patients. The potential for system-wide implementation will be explored with a parallel mixed methods process evaluation. Trial registration ISRCTN: 12752680 , Registered 20 October 2016.

Abstract Background Older adults are susceptible to adverse effects from the concurrent use of medications and alcohol. The aim of this study was to systematically review the prevalence of concurrent use of alcohol and alcohol-interactive (AI) medicines in older adults and associated adverse outcomes. Methods A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus and Web of Science (January 1990 to June 2016), and hand searching references of retrieved articles. Observational studies reporting on the concurrent use of alcohol and AI medicines in the same or overlapping recall periods in older adults were included. Two independent reviewers verified that studies met the inclusion criteria, critically appraised included studies and extracted relevant data. A narrative synthesis is provided. Results Twenty studies, all cross-sectional, were included. Nine studies classified a wide range of medicines as AI using different medication compendia, thus resulting in heterogeneity across studies. Three studies investigated any medication use and eight focused on psychotropic medications. Based on the quality assessment of included studies, the most reliable estimate of concurrent use in older adults ranges between 21 and 35%. The most reliable estimate of concurrent use of psychotropic medications and alcohol ranges between 7.4 and 7.75%. No study examined longitudinal associations with adverse outcomes. Three cross-sectional studies reported on falls with mixed findings, while one study reported on the association between moderate alcohol consumption and adverse drug reactions at hospital admission. Conclusions While there appears to be a high propensity for alcohol-medication interactions in older adults, there is a lack of consensus regarding what constitutes an AI medication. An explicit list of AI medications needs to be derived and validated prospectively to quantify the magnitude of risk posed by the concurrent use of alcohol for adverse outcomes in older adults. This will allow for risk stratification of older adults at the point of prescribing, and prioritise alcohol screening and brief alcohol interventions in high-risk groups.

ObjectivesWhether unintended discontinuation of common, evidence-based, long-term medication occurs after hospitalisation; what factors are associated with unintended discontinuation; and whether the presence of documentation of medication at hospital discharge is associated with continuity of medication in general practice.DesignRetrospective cohort study between 2012 and 2015.SettingElectronic records and hospital supplied discharge notifications in 44 Irish general practices.Participants20 488 patients aged 65 years or more prescribed long-term medication for chronic conditions.Primary and secondary outcomesDiscontinuity of four evidence-based medication drug classes: antithrombotic, lipid-lowering, thyroid replacement drugs and respiratory inhalers in hospitalised versus non-hospitalised patients; patient and health system factors associated with discontinuity; impact of the presence of medication in the hospital discharge summary on continuity of medication in a patient’s general practitioner (GP) prescribing record at 6 months follow-up.ResultsIn patients admitted to hospital, medication discontinuity ranged from 6%–11% in the 6 months posthospitalisation. Discontinuity of medication is significantly lower for hospitalised patients taking respiratory inhalers (adjusted OR (AOR) 0.63, 95% CI (0.49 to 0.80), p

INTRODUCTION:Self-reported measures of healthcare utilisation are often used in longitudinal cohort studies involving older community-dwelling people. The aim of this study is to compare healthcare utilisation rates using patient self-report and manual extraction from the general practice (GP) electronic medical record (EMR). METHODS:Study population: Two prospective cohort studies (n = 806 and n = 1,377, aged ≥70 years) conducted in the Republic of Ireland were compared. Study outcomes: GP, outpatient department (OPD) and emergency department (ED) visits over a one-year period. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics of the two cohorts are presented. A negative binomial regression was performed and results are presented as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For the outcome of any ED visit, linear regression was performed, yielding risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI. RESULTS:The annual rates of GP, OPD and ED visits were 6.30 (SD 4.63), 2.11 (SD 2.46) and 0.26 (SD 0.62) respectively in GP EMR cohort, compared to 5.65 (SD 8.06), 2.09 (SD 5.83) and 0.32 (SD 0.84) in the self-report cohort. In univariate regression analysis comparing healthcare utilisation, the self-report cohort reported a lower frequency of GP visits (unadjusted IRR 0.90 (95% CI 0.84, 0.96), p = 0.02)), a greater frequency of ED visits (1.20 (0.98, 1.49), p = 0.083)), and no difference in OPD visits (unadjusted IRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.86, 1.13), p = 0.845)). In multivariate analysis, adjusted for relevant confounders, there was no difference in GP visits (adjusted IRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.92, 1.06), p = 0.684)) or OPD visits (adjusted IRR 1.09 (0.95, 1.25), p = 0.23)) between the two cohorts. However, the self-report cohort reported 37% more ED visits (adjusted IRR 1.37 (1.10, 1.71), p = 0.005)) and were more likely to report any ED visit (adjusted RR 1.23 (95% CI 1.02, 1.48), p = 0.028)). CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that reported rates of GP and OPD visits were similar but there were differences in reported ED visits, with significantly higher self-reported visits. This may be due to ED visits not being notified to the GP and contextual issues such as transfer of healthcare utilisation data between sectors may vary in different healthcare systems.

Background: Health services internationally are exploring the potential of telehealth to support the management of the growing number of people with long-term conditions (LTCs). Aim: To develop, implement and evaluate new care programmes for patients with LTCs, focusing on two common LTCs as exemplars: depression or high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Methods Development: We synthesised quantitative and qualitative evidence on the effectiveness of telehealth for LTCs, conducted a qualitative study based on interviews with patients and staff and undertook a postal survey to explore which patients are interested in different forms of telehealth. Based on these studies we developed a conceptual model [TElehealth in CHronic disease (TECH) model] as a framework for the development and evaluation of the Healthlines Service for patients with LTCs. Implementation: The Healthlines Service consisted of regular telephone calls to participants from health information advisors, supporting them to make behaviour change and to use tailored online resources. Advisors sought to optimise participants’ medication and to improve adherence. Evaluation: The Healthlines Service was evaluated with linked pragmatic randomised controlled trials comparing the Healthlines Service plus usual care with usual care alone, with nested process and economic evaluations. Participants were adults with depression or raised CVD risk recruited from 43 general practices in three areas of England. The primary outcome was response to treatment and the secondary outcomes included anxiety (depression trial), individual risk factors (CVD risk trial), self-management skills, medication adherence, perceptions of support, access to health care and satisfaction with treatment. Trial results Depression trial: In total, 609 participants were randomised and the retention rate was 86%. Response to treatment [Patient Health Questionnaire 9-items (PHQ-9) reduction of ≥ 5 points and score of

The optimal method of fixation for primary total hip replacements (THR), particularly fixation with or without the use of cement is still controversial. In a systematic review and metaanalysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing cemented versus uncemented THRS available in the published literature, we found that there is no significant difference between cemented and uncemented THRs in terms of implant survival as measured by the revision rate. Better short-term clinical outcome, particularly an improved pain score can be obtained with cemented fixation. However, the results are unclear for the long-term clinical and functional outcome between the two groups. No difference was evident in the mortality and the post operative complication rate. On the other hand, the radiographic findings were variable and do not seem to correlate with clinical findings as differences in the surgical technique and prosthesis design might be associated with the incidence of osteolysis. We concluded in our review that cemented THR is similar if not superior to uncemented THR, and provides better short term clinical outcomes. Further research, improved methodology and longer follow up are necessary to better define specific subgroups of patients in whom the relative benefits of cemented and uncemented implant fixation can be clearly demonstrated.