Identifying indicators for the evaluation of community interventions and initiatives in a multi-site public health programme.

INTRODUCTION: Measuring success of community-level programmes and interventions is important, and indicators can provide valuable information to achieve this. However, identifying appropriate indicators can be challenging. Indicators can be identified by official local stakeholders such as local authorities, but involving communities can add value and trust to the project, with community involvement likely to improve programme sustainability. METHODS: As part of the evaluation of multi-site community initiatives, we used local health profiles to identify core indicators that overlapped sites. In addition, we engaged with members of the community during a pilot data collection training day to identify issues they identified as important for measuring health and well-being locally. RESULTS: A total of 313 indicators were identified from local profiles, with 31 indicators meeting inclusion criteria. The community identified 26 issues, collated into eight categories, only three of which were identified in core indicators. Tools were sourced or created for the other community-identified categories. DISCUSSION: The methodology identified validated indicators comparable across all sites, based on local health profiles. It also identified tools for measuring issues identified by members of the community. The exercise demonstrated disconnect between priorities of official bodies, researchers and communities, indicating multiple approaches should be considered when evaluating community initiatives.

The quality of prison primary care: cross-sectional cluster-level analyses of prison healthcare data in the North of England.

Background: Prisoners have significant health needs, are relatively high users of healthcare, and often die prematurely. Strong primary care systems are associated with better population health outcomes. We investigated the quality of primary care delivered to prisoners. Methods: We assessed achievement against 30 quality indicators spanning different domains of care in 13 prisons in the North of England. We conducted repeated cross-sectional analyses of routinely recorded data from electronic health records over 2017-20. Multi-level mixed effects logistic regression models explored associations between indicator achievement and prison and prisoner characteristics. Findings: Achievement varied markedly between indicators, prisons and over time. Achieved processes of care ranged from 1% for annual epilepsy reviews to 94% for blood pressure checks in diabetes. Intermediate outcomes of care ranged from only 0.2% of people with epilepsy being seizure-free in the preceding year to 34% with diabetes having sufficient blood pressure control. Achievement improved over three years for 11 indicators and worsened for six, including declining antipsychotic monitoring and rising opioid prescribing. Achievement varied between prisons, e.g., 1.93-fold for gabapentinoid prescribing without coded neuropathic pain (odds ratio [OR] range 0.67-1.29) and 169-fold for dried blood spot testing (OR range 0.05-8.45). Shorter lengths of stay were frequently associated with lower achievement. Ethnicity was associated with some indicators achievement, although the associations differed (both positive and negative) with indicators. Interpretation: We found substantial scope for improvement and marked variations in quality, which were largely unaltered after adjustment for prison and prisoner characteristics. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research Health and Social Care and Delivery Research Programme: 17/05/26.

Understanding who is and isn't involved and engaged in health research: capturing and analysing demographic data to diversify patient and public involvement and engagement.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) can improve the relevance, quality, ethics and impact of research thus contributing to high quality research. Currently in the UK, people who get involved in research tend to be aged 61 years or above, White and female. Calls for greater diversity and inclusion in PPIE have become more urgent especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, so that research can better address health inequalities and be relevant for all sectors of society. Yet, there are currently no routine systems or requirements to collect or analyse the demographics of people who get involved in health research in the UK. The aim of this study was to develop to capture and analyse the characteristics of who does and doesn't take part in patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) activities. METHODS: As part of its strategic focus on diversity and inclusion, Vocal developed a questionnaire to assess the demographics of people taking part in its PPIE activities. Vocal is a non-profit organisation which supports PPIE in health research across the region of Greater Manchester in England. The questionnaire was implemented across Vocal activities between December 2018 and March 2022. In that time. Vocal was working with approximately 935 public contributors. 329 responses were received: a return rate of 29.3%. Analysis of findings and comparison against local population demographic data, and available national data related to public contributors to health research, was performed. RESULTS: Results show that it is feasible to assess the demographics of people who take part in PPIE activities, through a questionnaire system. Further, our emerging data indicate that Vocal are involving people from a wider range of ages and with a greater diversity of ethnic backgrounds in health research, as compared to available national data. Specifically, Vocal involves more people of Asian, African and Caribbean heritage, and includes a wider range of ages in its PPIE activities. More women than men are involved in Vocal's work. CONCLUSION: Our 'learn by doing' approach to assessing who does and doesn't take part in Vocal's PPIE activities has informed our practice and continues influence our strategic priorities for PPIE. Our system and learning reported here may be applicable and transferable to other similar settings in which PPIE is carried out. We attribute the greater diversity of our public contributors to our strategic priority and activities to promote more inclusive research since 2018.

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) can improve the relevance, quality, ethics and impact of research thus contributing to high quality research. Currently in the UK, people who get involved in research tend to be aged 61 years or above, White and female. Calls for greater diversity and inclusion in PPIE have become more urgent especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, so that research can better address health inequalities and be relevant for all sectors of society. Yet, there are currently no routine systems or requirements to collect or analyse the demographics of people who get involved in health research in the UK. Vocal is a non-profit organisation which supports PPIE in health research across the region of Greater Manchester in England. Since 2018, one of Vocal's strategic priorities has been to promote inclusive research by diversifying those who are engaged and involved in research, through the development of more inclusive ways of working together, including methods to understand who is (and isn't) currently involved in Vocal's PPIE activities. We find that it's feasible to capture and analyse demographic data related to PPIE. Further, our emerging data indicate that we are involving people from a wider range of ages and with a greater diversity of ethnic backgrounds in PPIE for health research, as compared to available national data. However, similarly to national trends, more women than men are involved in PPIE work.

Quality indicators and performance measures for prison healthcare: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, people in prison should receive a standard of healthcare provision equivalent to people living in the community. Yet efforts to assess the quality of healthcare through the use of quality indicators or performance measures have been much more widely reported in the community than in the prison setting. This review aims to provide an overview of research undertaken to develop quality indicators suitable for prison healthcare. METHODS: An international scoping review of articles published in English was conducted between 2004 and 2021. Searches of six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo and Criminal Justice Abstracts) were supplemented with journal searches, author searches and forwards and backwards citation tracking. RESULTS: Twelve articles were included in the review, all of which were from the United States. Quality indicator selection processes varied in rigour, and there was no evidence of patient involvement in consultation activities. Selected indicators predominantly measured healthcare processes rather than health outcomes or healthcare structure. Difficulties identified in developing performance measures for the prison setting included resource constraints, data system functionality, and the comparability of the prison population to the non-incarcerated population. CONCLUSIONS: Selecting performance measures for healthcare that are evidence-based, relevant to the population and feasible requires rigorous and transparent processes. Balanced sets of indicators for prison healthcare need to reflect prison population trends, be operable within data systems and be aligned with equivalence principles. More effort needs to be made to meaningfully engage people with lived experience in stakeholder consultations on prison healthcare quality. Monitoring healthcare structure, processes and outcomes in prison settings will provide evidence to improve care quality with the aim of reducing health inequalities experienced by people living in prison.

Acknowledging Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluations in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenia is a severe mental illness with heterogeneous etiology, range of symptoms, and course of illness. Cost-effectiveness analysis often applies averages from populations, which disregards patient heterogeneity even though there are a range of methods available to acknowledge patient heterogeneity. This review evaluates existing economic evaluations of interventions in schizophrenia to understand how patient heterogeneity is currently reflected in economic evaluation. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO via Ovid and the Health Technology Assessment database were run to identify full economic evaluations of interventions aiming to reduce the symptoms associated with schizophrenia. Two levels of screening were used, and explicit inclusion criteria were applied. Prespecified data extraction and critical appraisal were performed. RESULTS: Seventy-six relevant studies were identified. More than half (41 of 76) of the articles acknowledged patient heterogeneity in some way through discussion or methods. There was a range of patient characteristics considered, including demographics and socioeconomic factors (eg, age, educational level, ethnicity), clinical characteristics (eg, symptom severity, comorbidities), and preferences (eg, preferences related to outcomes or symptoms). Subgroup analyses were rarely reported (8 of 76). CONCLUSIONS: Patient heterogeneity was frequently mentioned in studies but was rarely thoroughly investigated in the identified economic evaluations. When investigated, included patient characteristics and methods were found to be heterogeneous. Understanding and acknowledging patient heterogeneity may alter the conclusions of cost-effectiveness evaluations; subsequently, we would encourage further research in this area.

Factors Limiting Subgroup Analysis in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis and a Call for Transparency.

The use of population averages in cost-effectiveness analysis may hide important differences across subgroups, potentially resulting in suboptimal resource allocation, reduced population health and/or increased health inequalities. We discuss the factors that limit subgroup analysis in cost-effectiveness analysis and propose more thorough and transparent reporting. There are many issues that may limit whether subgroup analysis can be robustly included in cost-effectiveness analysis, including challenges with prespecifying and justifying subgroup analysis, identifying subgroups that can be implemented (identified and targeted) in practice, resource and data requirements, and statistical and ethical concerns. These affect every stage of the design, development and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses. It may not always be possible to include and report relevant subgroups in cost effectiveness, e.g. due to data limitations. Reasons for not conducting subgroup analysis may be heterogeneous, and the consequences of not acknowledging patient heterogeneity can be substantial. We recommend that when potentially relevant subgroups have not been included in a cost-effectiveness analysis, authors report this and discuss their rationale and the limitations of this. Greater transparency of subgroup reporting should provide a starting point to overcoming these challenges in future research.

Consultation patterns and frequent attenders in UK primary care from 2000 to 2019: a retrospective cohort analysis of consultation events across 845 general practices.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the distribution of consultations at the practice level and examine whether increases are uniform or driven by people who consult more frequently. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: UK general practice data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD database. PARTICIPANTS: 1 699 709 314 consultation events from 12 330 545 patients, in 845 general practices (1 April 2000 to 31 March 2019). METHODS: Consultation information was aggregated by financial year into: all consultations/all staff; all consultations/general practitioners (GPs); face-to-face consultations/all staff; face-to-face consultations/GPs. Patients with a number of consultations above the 90th centile, within each year, were classified as frequent attenders. Negative binomial regressions examined the association between available practice characteristics and consultation distribution. RESULTS: Among frequent attenders, all consultations by GPs increased from a median (25th and 75th centile) of 13 (10 and 16) to 21 (18 and 25) and all consultations by all staff increased from 27 (23-30) to 60 (51-69) over the study period. Approximately four out of ten consultations of any type concerned frequent attenders and the proportion of consultations attributed to them increased over time, particularly for face-to-face consultations with GPs, from a median of 38.0% (35.9%-40.3%) in 2000-2001 to 43.0% (40.6%-46.4%) in 2018-2019. Regression analyses indicated decreasing trends over time for face-to-face consultations and increasing trends for all consultation types, for both GPs and all staff. Frequent attenders consulted approximately five times more than the rest of the practice population, on average, with adjusted incidence rate ratios ranging between 4.992 (95% CI 4.917 to 5.068) for face-to-face consultations with all staff and 5.603 (95% CI 5.560 to 5.647) for all consultations with GPs. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent attenders progressively contributed to increased workload in general practices across the UK from 2000 to 2019. Important knowledge gaps remain in terms of the demographic, social and health characteristics of frequent attenders and how UK general practices can be prepared to meet the needs of these patients.

The effects of an evidence- and theory-informed feedback intervention on opioid prescribing for non-cancer pain in primary care: A controlled interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: The rise in opioid prescribing in primary care represents a significant international public health challenge, associated with increased psychosocial problems, hospitalisations, and mortality. We evaluated the effects of a comparative feedback intervention with persuasive messaging and action planning on opioid prescribing in primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A quasi-experimental controlled interrupted time series analysis used anonymised, aggregated practice data from electronic health records and prescribing data from publicly available sources. The study included 316 intervention and 130 control primary care practices in the Yorkshire and Humber region, UK, serving 2.2 million and 1 million residents, respectively. We observed the number of adult patients prescribed opioid medication by practice between July 2013 and December 2017. We excluded adults with coded cancer or drug dependency. The intervention, the Campaign to Reduce Opioid Prescribing (CROP), entailed bimonthly, comparative, and practice-individualised feedback reports to practices, with persuasive messaging and suggested actions over 1 year. Outcomes comprised the number of adults per 1,000 adults per month prescribed any opioid (main outcome), prescribed strong opioids, prescribed opioids in high-risk groups, prescribed other analgesics, and referred to musculoskeletal services. The number of adults prescribed any opioid rose pre-intervention in both intervention and control practices, by 0.18 (95% CI 0.11, 0.25) and 0.36 (95% CI 0.27, 0.46) per 1,000 adults per month, respectively. During the intervention period, prescribing per 1,000 adults fell in intervention practices (change -0.11; 95% CI -0.30, -0.08) and continued rising in control practices (change 0.54; 95% CI 0.29, 0.78), with a difference of -0.65 per 1,000 patients (95% CI -0.96, -0.34), corresponding to 15,000 fewer patients prescribed opioids. These trends continued post-intervention, although at slower rates. Prescribing of strong opioids, total opioid prescriptions, and prescribing in high-risk patient groups also generally fell. Prescribing of other analgesics fell whilst musculoskeletal referrals did not rise. Effects were attenuated after feedback ceased. Study limitations include being limited to 1 region in the UK, possible coding errors in routine data, being unable to fully account for concurrent interventions, and uncertainties over how general practices actually used the feedback reports and whether reductions in prescribing were always clinically appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated comparative feedback offers a promising and relatively efficient population-level approach to reduce opioid prescribing in primary care, including prescribing of strong opioids and prescribing in high-risk patient groups. Such feedback may also prompt clinicians to reconsider prescribing other medicines associated with chronic pain, without causing a rise in referrals to musculoskeletal clinics. Feedback may need to be sustained for maximum effect.

Factors Affecting Patients' Use of Electronic Personal Health Records in England: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are secure Web-based tools that enable individuals to access, manage, and share their medical records. England recently introduced a nationwide ePHR called Patient Online. As with ePHRs in other countries, adoption rates of Patient Online remain low. Understanding factors affecting patients' ePHR use is important to increase adoption rates and improve the implementation success of ePHRs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine factors associated with patients' use of ePHRs in England. METHODS: The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology was adapted to the use of ePHRs. To empirically examine the adapted model, a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample was carried out in 4 general practices in West Yorkshire, England. Factors associated with the use of ePHRs were explored using structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Of 800 eligible patients invited to take part in the survey, 624 (78.0%) returned a valid questionnaire. Behavioral intention (BI) was significantly influenced by performance expectancy (PE; beta=.57, P<.001), effort expectancy (EE; beta=.16, P<.001), and perceived privacy and security (PPS; beta=.24, P<.001). The path from social influence to BI was not significant (beta=.03, P=.18). Facilitating conditions (FC) and BI significantly influenced use behavior (UB; beta=.25, P<.001 and beta=.53, P<.001, respectively). PE significantly mediated the effect of EE and PPS on BI (beta=.19, P<.001 and beta=.28, P=.001, respectively). Age significantly moderated 3 paths: PE→BI, EE→BI, and FC→UB. Sex significantly moderated only the relationship between PE and BI. A total of 2 paths were significantly moderated by education and internet access: EE→BI and FC→UB. Income moderated the relationship between FC and UB. The adapted model accounted for 51% of the variance in PE, 76% of the variance in BI, and 48% of the variance in UB. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the main factors that affect patients' use of ePHRs in England, which should be taken into account for the successful implementation of these systems. For example, developers of ePHRs should involve patients in the process of designing the system to consider functions and features that fit patients' preferences and skills to ensure systems are useful and easy to use. The proposed model accounted for 48% of the variance in UB, indicating the existence of other, as yet unidentified, factors that influence the adoption of ePHRs. Future studies should confirm the effect of the factors included in this model and identify additional factors.

Factors that affect the use of electronic personal health records among patients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are web-based tools that enable patients to access parts of their medical records and other services. In spite of the potential benefits of using ePHRs, their adoption rates remain very low. The lack of use of ePHRs among patients leads to implementation failures of these systems. Many studies have been conducted to examine the factors that influence patients' use of ePHRs, and they need to be synthesised in a meaningful way. OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to systematically review the evidence regarding factors that influence patients' use of ePHRs. METHODS: The search included: 42 bibliographic databases (e.g. Medline, Embase, CINHAL, and PsycINFO), hand searching, checking reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews, contacting experts, and searching two general web engines. Study selection, data extraction, and study quality assessment were carried out by two reviewers independently. The quality of studies was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The extracted data were synthesised narratively according to the outcome: intention to use, subjective measures of use, and objective measures of use. The identified factors were categorised into groups based on Or and Karsh's conceptual framework. RESULTS: Of 5225 citations retrieved, 97 studies were relevant to this review. These studies examined more than 150 different factors: 59 related to intention to use, 52 regarding subjectively-measured use, and 105 related to objectively-measured use. The current review was able to draw definitive conclusions regarding the effect of only 18 factors. Of these, only three factors have been investigated in connection with every outcome, which are: perceived usefulness, privacy and security concerns, and internet access. CONCLUSION: Of the numerous factors examined by the included studies, this review concluded the effect of 18 factors: 13 personal factors (e.g. gender, ethnicity, and income), four human-technology factors (e.g. perceived usefulness and ease of use), and one organisational factor (facilitating conditions). These factors should be taken into account by stakeholders for the successful implementation of these systems. For example, patients should be assured that the system is secure and no one can access their records without their permission in order to decrease their concerns about the privacy and security. Further, advertising campaigns should be carried out to increase patients' awareness of the system. More studies are needed to conclude the effect of other factors. In addition, researchers should conduct more theory-based longitudinal studies for assessing factors affecting initial use and continuing use of ePHRs among patients.

Specialist palliative care support is associated with improved pain relief at home during the last 3 months of life in patients with advanced disease: analysis of 5-year data from the national survey of bereaved people (VOICES).

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that more than half of patients with advanced progressive diseases approaching the end-of-life report pain and that pain relief for these patients is poorest at home compared to other care settings such as acute care facilities and hospice. Although home is the most common preferred place of death, the majority of deaths occur outside the home. Specialist palliative care is associated with improved quality of life, but systematic reviews of RCTs have failed to show a consistent association with better pain relief. The aim of this study was to examine the factors associated with good pain relief at home in the last 3 months of life for people with advanced progressive disease. METHODS: Data were obtained from the National Bereavement Survey in England, a cross-sectional post-bereavement survey of a stratified random sample of 246,763 deaths which were registered in England from 2011 to 2015. From 110,311 completed surveys (45% response rate), the analysis was based on individual-level data from 43,509 decedents who were cared for at home before death. RESULTS: Decedents who experienced good pain relief at home before death were significantly more likely to have received specialist palliative care (adjusted OR = 2.67; 95% CI, 2.62 to 2.72) and to have a recorded preferred place of death (adjusted OR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.84 to 1.90) compared to those who did not. Good pain relief was more likely to be reported by a spouse or partner of the decedents compared to reports from their son or daughter (adjusted OR = 1.50, 95% CI, 1.47 to 1.53). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that patients at home who are approaching the end-of-life experience substantially better pain relief if they receive specialist palliative care and their preferred place of death is recorded regardless of their disease aetiology.

Monocular and binocular visual impairment in the UK Biobank study: prevalence, associations and diagnoses.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of, associations with and diagnoses leading to mild visual impairment or worse (logMAR >0.3) in middle-aged adults in the UK Biobank study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prevalence estimates for monocular and binocular visual impairment were determined for the UK Biobank participants with fundus photographs and spectral domain optical coherence tomography images. Associations with socioeconomic, biometric, lifestyle and medical variables were investigated for cases with visual impairment and matched controls, using multinomial logistic regression models. Self-reported eye history and image grading results were used to identify the primary diagnoses leading to visual impairment for a sample of 25% of cases. RESULTS: For the 65 033 UK Biobank participants, aged 40-69 years and with fundus images, 6682 (10.3%) and 1677 (2.6%) had mild visual impairment or worse in one or both eyes, respectively. Increasing deprivation, age and ethnicity were independently associated with both monocular and binocular visual impairment. No primary diagnosis for the recorded level of visual impairment could be identified for 49.8% of eyes. The most common identifiable diagnoses leading to visual impairment were cataract, amblyopia, uncorrected refractive error and vitreoretinal interface abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of visual impairment in the UK Biobank study cohort is lower than for population-based studies from other industrialised countries. Monocular and binocular visual impairment are associated with increasing deprivation, age and ethnicity. The UK Biobank dataset does not allow confident identification of the causes of visual impairment, and the results may not be applicable to the wider UK population.

Assessing the impact of care farms on quality of life and offending: a pilot study among probation service users in England.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of conducting a cost-effectiveness study of using care farms (CFs) to improve quality of life and reduce reoffending among offenders undertaking community orders (COs). To pilot questionnaires to assess quality of life, connection to nature, lifestyle behaviours, health and social-care use. To assess recruitment and retention at 6 months and feasibility of data linkage to Police National Computer (PNC) reconvictions data and data held by probation services. DESIGN: Pilot study using questionnaires to assess quality of life, individually linked to police and probation data. SETTING: The pilot study was conducted in three probation service regions in England. Each site included a CF and at least one comparator CO project. CFs are working farms used with a range of clients, including offenders, for therapeutic purposes. The three CFs included one aquaponics and horticulture social enterprise, a religious charity focusing on horticulture and a family-run cattle farm. Comparator projects included sorting secondhand clothes and activities to address alcohol misuse and anger management. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited 134 adults (over 18) serving COs in England, 29% female. RESULTS: 52% of participants completed follow-up questionnaires. Privatisation of UK probation trusts in 2014 negatively impacted on recruitment and retention. Linkage to PNC data was a more successful means of follow-up, with 90% consenting to access their probation and PNC data. Collection of health and social-care costs and quality-adjusted life year derivation were feasible. Propensity score adjustment provided a viable comparison method despite differences between comparators. We found worse health and higher reoffending risk among CF participants due to allocation of challenging offenders to CFs, making risk of reoffending a confounder. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment would be feasible in a more stable probation environment. Follow-up was challenging; however, assessing reconvictions from PNC data is feasible and a potential primary outcome for future studies.

Geographical inequalities in uptake of NHS funded eye examinations: Poisson modelling of small-area data for Essex, UK.

Background: Small-area analysis of National Health Service (NHS)-funded sight test uptake in Leeds showed significant inequalities in access among people aged <16 or ≥60. Methods: Data were extracted from 604 126 valid General Ophthalmic Services (GOS)1 claim forms for eye examinations for Essex residents between October 2013 and July 2015. Expected GOS1 uptake for each lower super output area was based on England annual uptake. Poisson regression modelling explored associations in GOS1 uptake ratio with deprivation. Results: People aged ≥60 or <16 living in the least deprived quintile were 15% and 26%, respectively, more likely to have an NHS funded eye examination than the most deprived quintile, although all are equally entitled. GOS1 uptake is higher in the more deprived quintiles among 16-59-year old, as means tested social benefits are the main eligibility criteria in this age-group. Inequalities were also observed at local authority level. Conclusions: Inequalities in access among people ≥60 years were not as large as those reported in Leeds, although inequalities in <16-year old were similar. However, demonstrable inequalities in this data set over a longer time period and a larger and more diverse area than Leeds, reinforce the argument that interventions are needed to address eye examination uptake inequalities.

Variations in dementia diagnosis in England and association with general practice characteristics.

OBJECTIVES: Improving dementia diagnosis rates in England has been a key strategic aim of the UK Government but the variation and low diagnosis rates are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the variation in actual versus expected diagnosis of dementia across England, and how these variations were associated with general practice characteristics. METHOD: A cross-sectional, ecological study design using secondary data sources and median regression modelling was used. Data from the year 2011 for 7711 of the GP practices in England (92.7%). Associations of dementia diagnosis rates (%) per practice, calculated using National Health Service England's 'Dementia Prevalence Calculator' and various practice characteristics were explored using a regression model. RESULTS: The median dementia diagnosis rate was 41.6% and the interquartile range was 31.2-53.9%. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated positive associations between dementia diagnosis rates and deprivation of the population, overall Quality and Outcomes Framework performance, type of primary care contract and size of practice list. Negative associations were found between dementia diagnosis rates and average experience of GPs in the practice and the proportion of the practice caseload over 65 years old. CONCLUSION: Dementia diagnosis rates vary greatly across GP practices in England. This study has found independent associations between dementia diagnosis rates and a number of patient and practice characteristics. Consideration of these factors locally may provide targets for case-finding interventions and so facilitate timely diagnosis.

Vitreoretinal interface abnormalities in middle-aged adults with visual impairment in the UK Biobank study: prevalence, impact on visual acuity and associations.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of vitreoretinal interface abnormalities (VRIA), the degree of visual impairment and associations with VRIA among adults, aged 40-69 years, in the UK Biobank study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Colour fundus photographs and spectral domain optical coherence tomography images were graded for 25% of the 8359 UK Biobank participants with mild visual impairment or worse (LogMAR >0.3 or Snellen <6/12) in at least one eye. The prevalence and contribution of VRIA to visual impairment was determined and multinomial logistic regression models were used to investigate association with known risk factors and other predetermined socioeconomic, biometric, lifestyle and medical variables for cases and matched controls. RESULTS: The minimum prevalence of any VRIA was 17.6% and 8.1% in the eyes with and without visual impairment, respectively. VRIA were identified as the primary cause of visual impairment in 3.6% of eyes. Although epiretinal membrane and vitreomacular traction were the most common VRIA, the degree of visual impairment was typically milder with these than with other VRIA. Visual impairment with a VRIA was positively associated with increasing age (relative risk ratio (RRR) 1.22 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.40)), female gender (RRR 1.28; 1.08 to 1.52) and Asian or Asian British ethnicity (RRR 1.60; 1.10 to 2.32). CONCLUSIONS: VRIA are common in middle-aged adults in the UK Biobank study, especially in eyes with visual impairment. VRIA were considered to be the primary cause of visual impairment in 3.6% of all eyes with visual impairment, although there was variation in the degree of visual impairment for each type of VRIA.

Are differences in travel time or distance to healthcare for adults in global north countries associated with an impact on health outcomes? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether there is an association between differences in travel time/travel distance to healthcare services and patients' health outcomes and assimilate the methodologies used to measure this. DESIGN: Systematic Review. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Transport database, HMIC and EBM Reviews for studies up to 7 September 2016. Studies were excluded that included children (including maternity), emergency medical travel or countries classed as being in the global south. SETTINGS: A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care (these were not restricted in the search). RESULTS: 108 studies met the inclusion criteria. The results were mixed. 77% of the included studies identified evidence of a distance decay association, whereby patients living further away from healthcare facilities they needed to attend had worse health outcomes (eg, survival rates, length of stay in hospital and non-attendance at follow-up) than those who lived closer. 6 of the studies identified the reverse (a distance bias effect) whereby patients living at a greater distance had better health outcomes. The remaining 19 studies found no relationship. There was a large variation in the data available to the studies on the patients' geographical locations and the healthcare facilities attended, and the methods used to calculate travel times and distances were not consistent across studies. CONCLUSIONS: The review observed that a relationship between travelling further and having worse health outcomes cannot be ruled out and should be considered within the healthcare services location debate.

Empirically derived cut-points for sedentary behaviour: are we sitting differently?

Sedentary behaviour (SB) is associated with a number of adverse health outcomes. Studies that have used ActiGraph monitors to define sedentary time tend to use a threshold of <100 counts per minute (cpm) for classifying SB; however, this cut-point was not empirically derived for adults. It is not known whether ActiGraph cut-points for SB differ depending on the context in which it occurs. We aimed to: (1) empirically derive an optimal threshold for classifying SB, using the cpm output from the ActiGraph GT3X+, compared to the sedentary classification from the activPAL3™; and (2) ascertain whether this varied by day of the week and in working time versus non-working time. A convenience sample of 30 office-based university employees (females (66.67%); age 40.47 ± 10.95 years; BMI 23.93 ± 2.46 kg m-2) wore the ActiGraph GT3X+ and activPAL3™ devices simultaneously for seven days. Data were downloaded in 1 min epochs and non-wear time was removed. Generalised estimating equations were used to make minute by minute comparisons of sedentary time from the two devices, using sedentary minutes (when all 60 s were classified as sitting/lying) from the activPAL3™ as the criterion measure. After data reduction participants provided on average 11 h 27 min of data per day. The derived cut-points from the models were significantly higher on a Saturday (97 cpm) compared to weekdays (60 cpm) and Sunday (57 cpm). Derived cpm for sedentary time during working time were significantly lower compared to non-working time (35 (95%CI 30-41) versus 73 (54-113)). Compared to the 100 cpm and 150 cpm thresholds, the empirically derived cut-points were not significantly different in terms of area-under-the-curve, but had lower mean bias for working and non-working times. Accelerometer cut-points for SB can depend on day and also domain, suggesting that the nature of sitting differs depending on the context in which sedentary time is accrued.

Prevalence, Nature, Severity and Risk Factors for Prescribing Errors in Hospital Inpatients: Prospective Study in 20 UK Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: It has been suggested that doctors in their first year of post-graduate training make a disproportionate number of prescribing errors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the prevalence of prescribing errors made by first-year post-graduate doctors with that of errors by senior doctors and non-medical prescribers and to investigate the predictors of potentially serious prescribing errors. METHODS: Pharmacists in 20 hospitals over 7 prospectively selected days collected data on the number of medication orders checked, the grade of prescriber and details of any prescribing errors. Logistic regression models (adjusted for clustering by hospital) identified factors predicting the likelihood of prescribing erroneously and the severity of prescribing errors. RESULTS: Pharmacists reviewed 26,019 patients and 124,260 medication orders; 11,235 prescribing errors were detected in 10,986 orders. The mean error rate was 8.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.6-9.1) errors per 100 medication orders. Rates of errors for all doctors in training were significantly higher than rates for medical consultants. Doctors who were 1 year (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95 % CI 1.80-2.52) or 2 years in training (OR 2.23; 95 % CI 1.89-2.65) were more than twice as likely to prescribe erroneously. Prescribing errors were 70 % (OR 1.70; 95 % CI 1.61-1.80) more likely to occur at the time of hospital admission than when medication orders were issued during the hospital stay. No significant differences in severity of error were observed between grades of prescriber. Potentially serious errors were more likely to be associated with prescriptions for parenteral administration, especially for cardiovascular or endocrine disorders. CONCLUSION: The problem of prescribing errors in hospitals is substantial and not solely a problem of the most junior medical prescribers, particularly for those errors most likely to cause significant patient harm. Interventions are needed to target these high-risk errors by all grades of staff and hence improve patient safety.

Injecting drug use in prison: prevalence and implications for needle exchange policy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to explore prison drug injecting prevalence, identify any changes in injecting prevalence and practice during imprisonment and explore views on prison needle exchange. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: An empirical prospective cohort survey conducted between 2006 and 2008. The study involved a random sample of 267 remand and sentenced prisoners from a large male category B prison in England where no prison needle exchange operates. Questionnaires were administered with prisoners on reception and, where possible, at one, three and six months during their sentence. FINDINGS: In total, 64 per cent were injecting until admission into prison. The majority intended to stop injecting in prison (93 per cent), almost a quarter due to the lack of needle exchange (23 per cent). Yet when hypothetically asked if they would continue injecting in prison if needle exchange was freely available, a third of participants (33 per cent) believed that they would. Injecting cessation happened on prison entry and appeared to be maintained during the sentence. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Not providing sterile needles may increase risks associated with injecting for prisoners who continue to inject. However, providing such equipment may prolong injecting for other prisoners who currently cease injecting on account of needle exchange programmes (NEPs) not being provided in the UK prison setting. Practical implications - Not providing sterile needles may increase risks associated with injecting for prisoners who continue to inject. However, providing such equipment may prolong injecting for other prisoners who currently cease injecting on account of NEPs not being provided in the UK prison setting. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This survey is the first to question specifically regarding the timing of injecting cessation amongst male prisoners and explore alongside intention to inject should needle exchange facilities be provided in prison.