Barriers to a software reminder system for risk assessment of stroke in atrial fibrillation: a process evaluation of a cluster randomised trial in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but are underused. AURAS-AF (AUtomated Risk Assessment for Stroke in AF) is a software tool designed to identify eligible patients and promote discussions within consultations about initiating anticoagulants. AIM: To investigate the implementation of the software in UK general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Process evaluation involving 23 practices randomly allocated to use AURAS-AF during a cluster randomised trial. METHOD: An initial invitation to discuss anticoagulation was followed by screen reminders appearing during consultations until a decision had been made. The reminders required responses, giving reasons for cases where an anticoagulant was not initiated. Qualitative interviews with clinicians and patients explored acceptability and usability. RESULTS: In a sample of 476 patients eligible for the invitation letter, only 159 (33.4%) were considered suitable for invitation by their GPs. Reasons given were frequently based on frailty, and risk of falls or haemorrhage. Of those invited, 35 (22%) started an anticoagulant (7.4% of those originally identified). A total of 1695 main-screen reminders occurred in 940 patients. In 883 instances, the decision was taken not to initiate and a range of reasons offered. Interviews with 15 patients and seven clinicians indicated that the intervention was acceptable, though the issue of disruptive screen reminders was raised. CONCLUSION: Automated risk assessment for stroke in atrial fibrillation and prompting during consultations are feasible and generally acceptable, but did not overcome concerns about frailty and risk of haemorrhage as barriers to anticoagulant uptake.

Identifying Primary Care Pathways from Quality of Care to Outcomes and Satisfaction Using Structural Equation Modeling.

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationships between the different domains of quality of primary health care for the evaluation of health system performance and for informing policy decision making. DATA SOURCES: A total of 137 quality indicators collected from 7,607 English practices between 2011 and 2012. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study at the practice level. Indicators were allocated to subdomains of processes of care ("quality assurance," "education and training," "medicine management," "access," "clinical management," and "patient-centered care"), health outcomes ("intermediate outcomes" and "patient-reported health status"), and patient satisfaction. The relationships between the subdomains were hypothesized in a conceptual model and subsequently tested using structural equation modeling. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The model supported two independent paths. In the first path, "access" was associated with "patient-centered care" (ß = 0.63), which in turn was strongly associated with "patient satisfaction" (ß = 0.88). In the second path, "education and training" was associated with "clinical management" (ß = 0.32), which in turn was associated with "intermediate outcomes" (ß = 0.69). "Patient-reported health status" was weakly associated with "patient-centered care" (ß = -0.05) and "patient satisfaction" (ß = 0.09), and not associated with "clinical management" or "intermediate outcomes." CONCLUSIONS: This is the first empirical model to simultaneously provide evidence on the independence of intermediate health care outcomes, patient satisfaction, and health status. The explanatory paths via technical quality clinical management and patient centeredness offer specific opportunities for the development of quality improvement initiatives.

Optimal strategies for monitoring lipid levels in patients at risk or with cardiovascular disease: a systematic review with statistical and cost-effectiveness modelling.

BACKGROUND: Various lipid measurements in monitoring/screening programmes can be used, alone or in cardiovascular risk scores, to guide treatment for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Because some changes in lipids are due to variability rather than true change, the value of lipid-monitoring strategies needs evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical value and cost-effectiveness of different monitoring intervals and different lipid measures for primary and secondary prevention of CVD. DATA SOURCES: We searched databases and clinical trials registers from 2007 (including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Clinical Trials Register, the Current Controlled Trials register, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) to update and extend previous systematic reviews. Patient-level data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and St Luke's Hospital, Japan, were used in statistical modelling. Utilities and health-care costs were drawn from the literature. METHODS: In two meta-analyses, we used prospective studies to examine associations of lipids with CVD and mortality, and randomised controlled trials to estimate lipid-lowering effects of atorvastatin doses. Patient-level data were used to estimate progression and variability of lipid measurements over time, and hence to model lipid-monitoring strategies. Results are expressed as rates of true-/false-positive and true-/false-negative tests for high lipid or high CVD risk. We estimated incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: A total of 115 publications reported strength of association between different lipid measures and CVD events in 138 data sets. The summary adjusted hazard ratio per standard deviation of total cholesterol (TC) to high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol ratio was 1.25 (95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.35) for CVD in a primary prevention population but heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 98%); similar results were observed for non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B and other ratio measures. Associations were smaller for other single lipid measures. Across 10 trials, low-dose atorvastatin (10 and 20 mg) effects ranged from a TC reduction of 0.92 mmol/l to 2.07 mmol/l, and low-density lipoprotein reduction of between 0.88 mmol/l and 1.86 mmol/l. Effects of 40 mg and 80 mg were reported by one trial each. For primary prevention, over a 3-year period, we estimate annual monitoring would unnecessarily treat 9 per 1000 more men (28 vs. 19 per 1000) and 5 per 1000 more women (17 vs. 12 per 1000) than monitoring every 3 years. However, annual monitoring would also undertreat 9 per 1000 fewer men (7 vs. 16 per 1000) and 4 per 1000 fewer women (7 vs. 11 per 1000) than monitoring at 3-year intervals. For secondary prevention, over a 3-year period, annual monitoring would increase unnecessary treatment changes by 66 per 1000 men and 31 per 1000 women, and decrease undertreatment by 29 per 1000 men and 28 per 1000 men, compared with monitoring every 3 years. In cost-effectiveness, strategies with increased screening/monitoring dominate. Exploratory analyses found that any unknown harms of statins would need utility decrements as large as 0.08 (men) to 0.11 (women) per statin user to reverse this finding in primary prevention. LIMITATION: Heterogeneity in meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: While acknowledging known and potential unknown harms of statins, we find that more frequent monitoring strategies are cost-effective compared with others. Regular lipid monitoring in those with and without CVD is likely to be beneficial to patients and to the health service. Future research should include trials of the benefits and harms of atorvastatin 40 and 80 mg, large-scale surveillance of statin safety, and investigation of the effect of monitoring on medication adherence. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003727. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Economic evaluation of a group-based exercise program for falls prevention among the older community-dwelling population.

BACKGROUND: Falls among older people are of growing concern globally. Implementing cost-effective strategies for their prevention is of utmost importance given the ageing population and associated potential for increased costs of fall-related injury over the next decades. The purpose of this study was to undertake a cost-utility analysis and secondary cost-effectiveness analysis from a healthcare system perspective, of a group-based exercise program compared to routine care for falls prevention in an older community-dwelling population. METHODS: A decision analysis using a decision tree model was based on the results of a previously published randomised controlled trial with a community-dwelling population aged over 70. Measures of falls, fall-related injuries and resource use were directly obtained from trial data and supplemented by literature-based utility measures. A sub-group analysis was performed of women only. Cost estimates are reported in 2010 British Pound Sterling (GBP). RESULTS: The ICER of GBP£51,483 per QALY for the base case analysis was well above the accepted cost-effectiveness threshold of GBP£20,000 to £30,000 per QALY, but in a sensitivity analysis with minimised program implementation the incremental cost reached GBP£25,678 per QALY. The ICER value at 95% confidence in the base case analysis was GBP£99,664 per QALY and GBP£50,549 per QALY in the lower cost analysis. Males had a 44% lower injury rate if they fell, compared to females resulting in a more favourable ICER for the women only analysis. For women only the ICER was GBP£22,986 per QALY in the base case and was below the cost-effectiveness threshold for all other variations of program implementation. The ICER value at 95% confidence was GBP£48,212 in the women only base case analysis and GBP£23,645 in the lower cost analysis. The base case incremental cost per fall averted was GBP£652 (GBP£616 for women only). A threshold analysis indicates that this exercise program cannot realistically break even. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that this exercise program is cost-effective for women only. There is no evidence to support its cost-effectiveness in a group of mixed gender unless the costs of program implementation are minimal. Conservative assumptions may have underestimated the true cost-effectiveness of the program.

Impact of universal health insurance coverage on hypertension management: a cross-national study in the United States and England.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) galvanised debate in the United States (US) over universal health coverage. Comparison with countries providing universal coverage may illustrate whether the ACA can improve health outcomes and reduce disparities. We aimed to compare quality and disparities in hypertension management by socio-economic position in the US and England, the latter of which has universal health care. METHOD: We used data from the Health and Retirement Survey in the US, and the English Longitudinal Study for Aging from England, including non-Hispanic White respondents aged 50-64 years (US market-based v NHS) and >65 years (US-Medicare v NHS) with diagnosed hypertension. We compared blood pressure control to clinical guideline (140/90 mmHg) and audit (150/90 mmHg) targets; mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure and antihypertensive prescribing, and disparities in each by educational attainment, income and wealth, using regression models. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in aggregate achievement of clinical targets aged 50 to 65 years (US market-based vs. NHS--62.3% vs. 61.3% [p = 0.835]). There was, however, greater control in the US in patients aged 65 years and over (US Medicare vs. NHS--53.5% vs. 58.2% [p = 0.043]). England had no significant socioeconomic disparity in blood pressure control (60.9% vs. 63.5% [p = 0.588], high and low wealth aged ≥65 years). The US had socioeconomic differences in the 50-64 years group (71.7% vs. 55.2% [p = 0.003], high and low wealth); these were attenuated but not abolished in Medicare beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: Moves towards universal health coverage in the US may reduce disparities in hypertension management. The current situation, providing universal coverage for residents aged 65 years and over, may not be sufficient for equality in care.

The English North-South divide: risk factors for cardiovascular disease accounting for cross-sectional socio-economic position.

AIMS: Given a North-South divide in mortality in England, we aimed to assess the extent of a North-South divide in risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD), controlling for markers of socio-economic position (SEP). METHODS: We undertook cross-sectional analyses using respondents from the 2006 Health Survey for England. We assessed mean systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, body mass index (BMI) and smoking prevalence in the two regions. We built nested regression models adding demographic factors, SEP indicators, behavioural risk factors, vascular disease status and CVD preventive medications stepwise into each model. We examined interactions between region, age and gender. RESULTS: Controlling for demographic variables, we found a northern excess in systolic blood pressure (+1.95mmHg (SE = 0.40)), BMI (0.40kgm(-2) (SE = 0.12)) and smoking prevalence (5.6% (SE = 1.1)). The difference in smoking prevalence was entirely abolished by markers of SEP. Systolic blood pressure and BMI differences were attenuated by SEP, behavioural and disease indicators, but remained (+1.63mmHg (SE = 0.41) and 0.25kgm(-2) (SE = 0.12), respectively). However, they were lost after adjustment for preventive medication. The North-South divide in systolic blood pressure was attributed to differences in men and younger-to-middle-aged groups. Northern respondents were more physically active, especially younger men. CONCLUSIONS: English North-South differences in smoking can be explained through adverse, cross-sectional SEP. Northern excesses in blood pressure and BMI may be associated with differential clinical management. Risk factor differences may, in part, explain a previously found North-South divide in mortality. Further exploration of geographic inequalities, concentrating on the impact of healthcare, may be warranted.

Ethnic group differences in cardiovascular risk assessment scores: national cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: There are marked inequalities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence and outcomes between ethnic groups. CVD risk scores are increasingly used in preventive medicine and should aim to accurately reflect differences between ethnic groups. Ethnicity, as an independent risk factor for CVD, can be accounted for in CVD risk scores primarily using two methods, either directly incorporating it as a risk factor in the algorithm or through a post hoc adjustment of risk. We aim to compare these two methods in terms of their prediction of CVD across ethnic groups using representative national data from England. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study using data from the Health Survey for England. We measured ethnic group differences in risk estimation between the QRISK2, which includes ethnicity and Joint British Societies 2 (JBS2) algorithm, which uses post hoc risk adjustment factor for South Asian men. RESULTS: The QRISK2 score produces lower median estimates of CVD risk than JBS2 overall (6.6% [lower quartile-upper quartile (LQ-UQ)=4.0-18.6] compared with 9.3% [LQ-UQ=2.3-16.9]). Differences in median risk scores are significantly greater in South Asian men (7.5% [LQ-UQ=3.6-12.5]) compared with White men (3.0% [LQ-UQ=0.7-5.9]). Using QRISK2, 19.1% [95% confidence interval (CI)=16.2-22.0] fewer South Asian men are designated at high risk compared with 8.8% (95% CI=5.9-7.8) fewer in White men. Across all ethnic groups, women had a lower median QRISK2 score (0.72 [LQ-UQ=- 0.6 to 2.13]), although relatively more (2.0% [95% CI=1.4-2.6]) were at high risk than with JBS2. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnicity is an important CVD risk factor. Current scoring tools used in the UK produce significantly different estimates of CVD risk within ethnic groups, particularly in South Asian men. Work to accurately estimate CVD risk in ethnic minority groups is important if CVD prevention programmes are to address health inequalities.

Automated Risk Assessment for Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation (AURAS-AF)--an automated software system to promote anticoagulation and reduce stroke risk: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at significantly increased risk of stroke. Oral anticoagulants (OACs) substantially reduce this risk, with gains seen across the spectrum of baseline risk. Despite the benefit to patients, OAC prescribing remains suboptimal in the United Kingdom (UK). We will investigate whether an automated software system, operating within primary care electronic medical records, can improve the management of AF by identifying patients eligible for OAC therapy and increasing uptake of this treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial, involving general practices using the Egton Medical Information Systems (EMIS) Web clinical system. We will randomise practices to use an electronic software tool or to continue with usual care. The tool will a) produce (and continually refresh) a list of patients with AF who are eligible for OAC therapy--practices will invite these patients to discuss therapy at the start of the trial--and b) generate electronic screen reminders in the medical records of those eligible, appearing throughout the trial. The software will run for 6 months in 23 intervention practices. A total of 23 control practices will manage their AF register in line with the usual care offered. The primary outcome is change in proportion of eligible patients with AF who have been prescribed OAC therapy after six months. Secondary outcomes are incidence of stroke, transient ischaemic attack, other major thromboembolism, major haemorrhage and reports of inappropriate OAC prescribing in the data collection sample--those deemed eligible for OACs. We will conduct a process evaluation in parallel with the randomised trial. We will use qualitative methods to examine patient and practitioner views of the intervention and its impact on primary care practice, including its time implications. DISCUSSION: AURAS-AF will investigate whether a simple intervention, using electronic primary care records, can improve OAC uptake in a high risk group for stroke. Given previous concerns about safety, especially surrounding inappropriate prescribing, we will also examine whether electronic reminders safely impact care in this clinical area. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://ISRCTN 55722437.

Effectiveness of a national cardiovascular disease risk assessment program (NHS Health Check): results after one year.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess whether the National Health Service (NHS) Health Check, a systematic cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and management program, was associated with reduction in CVD risk in attendees after one year. METHODS: We extracted data from patients aged 40-74 years, with high estimated CVD risk, who were registered with general practices in a deprived, culturally diverse setting in England. We included 4748 patients at baseline (July 2008-November 2009), with 3712 at follow-up (December 2009-March 2011). We used a pre-post study design to assess changes in global CVD risk, individual CVD risk factors and statin prescription in patients with a complete and partial Health Check. RESULTS: There were significant reductions in mean CVD risk score (28.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI)=27.3-29.1 to 26.2%; 95% CI, 25.4-27.1), diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol levels and lipid ratios after one year in patients with a complete Health Check. Statin prescription increased from 14.0% (95% CI=11.9-16.0) to 60.6% (95% CI=57.7-63.5). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of NHS Health Check was associated with significant but modest reductions in CVD risk among screened high-risk individuals. Further cost-effectiveness analysis and work accounting for uptake is required to assess whether the program can make significant changes to population health.

Uptake of the NHS Health Check programme in an urban setting.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Health Check programme aims to improve prevention, early diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in England. High and equitable uptake is essential for the programme to effectively reduce the CVD burden. OBJECTIVES: Assessing the impact of a local financial incentive scheme on uptake and statin prescribing in the first 2 years of the programme. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using data from electronic medical records of general practices in Hammersmith and Fulham, London on all patients aged 40-74 years. We assessed uptake of complete Health Check, exclusion of patients from the programme (exception reporting) and statin prescriptions in patients confirmed with high CVD risk. RESULTS: The Health Check uptake was 32.7% in Year 1 and 20.0% in Year 2. Older patients had higher uptake of Health Check than younger (65- to 74-year-old patients: Year 1 adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.05 (1.67-2.52) & Year 2 AOR 2.79 (2.49-3.12) compared with 40- to 54-year-old patients). The percentage of confirmed high risk patients prescribed a statin was 17.7% before and 52.9% after the programme. There was a marked variation in Health Check uptake, exception reporting and statin prescribing between practices. CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of the Health Check was low in the first year in patients with estimated high risk despite financial incentives to general practices; although this matched the national required rate in second year. Further evaluations for cost and clinical effectiveness of the programme are needed to clarify whether this spending is appropriate, and to assess the impact of financial incentives on programme performance.

Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk amongst the population eligible for the NHS Health Check Programme.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) Health Check Programme aims to identify and manage patients in England aged 40-74 years with a 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score over 20%. We aimed to assess the prevalence of high CVD risk in the English population, using the two CVD risk scores and the 20% cut off mandated in national policy, and the prevalence of risk factors within this population. DESIGN: Modelling study using patients registered in general practice in England. METHODS: Using data from the Health Survey for England, we modelled the prevalence of high CVD risk in general practice populations. RESULTS: Of those eligible for an NHS Health Check, 10.5% (2,012,000) had a risk score greater than 20% using the QRISK2 risk score; 22.0% (4,267,000) using Joint British Societies' (JBS2) score. There was a median of 206 (range 0-1693) and 447 (0-3321) patients per practice at high risk respectively, with wide geographic variation. Within the high-risk population, there was a high prevalence of CVD risk factors; in the QRISK2 population, for example 82.6% were physically inactive. To reduce risk in those at high CVD risk, we estimate the total costs of the Programme to be £176 million using QRISK2 or £378 million using JBS2. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of high-risk patients will be identified by the Programme; health service commissioners must ensure the adequate provision and the targeted allocation of risk reduction services for the Programme to be effective. The NHS must consider whether extra costs using JBS2 are warranted. The Programme must be fully monitored to ensure its cost effectiveness and appropriate outcomes such as the numbers at high risk assessed.

Assessment of cardiovascular risk factors prior to NHS Health Checks in an urban setting: cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the completeness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor recording and levels of risk factors in patients eligible for the NHS Health Check. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Twenty-eight general practices located in Hammersmith and Fulham, London, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 42,306 patients aged 40 to 74 years without existing cardiovascular disease or diabetes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MEASUREMENT AND LEVEL OF CVD RISK FACTORS: blood pressure, cholesterol, body mass index (BMI), blood glucose and smoking status. RESULTS: There was a high recording of smoking status (86.1%) and blood pressure (82.5%); whilst BMI, cholesterol and glucose recording was lower. There was large variation in BMI, cholesterol, glucose recording between practices (29.7-91.5% for BMI). Women had significantly better risk factor recording than men (AOR = 1.70 [1.61-1.80] for blood pressure). All risk factors were better recorded in the least deprived patient group (AOR = 0.79 [0.73-0.85] for blood pressure) and patients with diagnosed hypertension (AOR = 7.24 [6.67-7.86] for cholesterol). Risk factor recording varied considerably between practices but was more strongly associated with patient than practice level characteristics. Age-adjusted levels of cholesterol and BMI were not significantly different between men and women. More men had raised blood glucose, blood pressure and BMI than women (29.7% [29.1-30.4] compared to 19.8% [19.3-20.3] for blood pressure). CONCLUSIONS: Before the NHS Health Check, CVD risk factor recording varied considerably by practice and patient characteristics. We identified significant elevated levels of raised CVD risk factors in the population eligible for a Health Check, which will require considerable work to manage.

Health-related quality of life advantage of long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatment for schizophrenia: a time trade-off study.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to estimate utility values for alternative treatment intervals for long acting antipsychotic intramuscular injections for the treatment of schizophrenia. METHODS: Vignettes were developed using the published literature and an iterative consultation process with expert clinicians and patient representative groups. Four vignettes were developed. The first was a vignette of relapsed/untreated schizophrenia. The other three vignettes presented a standardised picture of well-managed schizophrenia with variations in the intervals between injections: once every 2-weeks, 4-weeks and 3-months. A standardised time trade off (TTO) approach was used to obtain utility values for the vignettes. As a societal perspective was sought, a representative sample of individuals from across the community (Sydney, Australia) was recruited. Ninety-eight people completed the TTO interview. The vignettes were presented in random order to prevent possible ordering effects. RESULTS: A clear pattern of increasing utility was observed with increasing time between injections. Untreated schizophrenia was rated as very poor health-related quality of life with a mean (median) utility of 0.27 (0.20). The treated health states were rated at much higher utilities and were statistically significantly different (p < 0.001) from each other: (1) 2-weekly: mean (median) utility = 0.61 (0.65); (2) 4-weekly: mean (median) utility = 0.65 (0.70); (3) 3-monthly: mean (median) utility = 0.70 (0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided robust data indicating that approximately a 0.05 utility difference exists between treatment options, with the highest utility assigned to 3-monthly injections.

A cost analysis of febrile neutropenia management in Australia: ambulatory v. in-hospital treatment.

BACKGROUND: Adult febrile neutropenic oncology patients, at low risk of developing medical complications, may be effectively and safely managed in an ambulatory setting, provided they are appropriately selected and adequate supportive facilities and clinical services are available to monitor these patients and respond to any clinical deterioration. METHODS: A cost analysis was modelled using decision tree analysis, published cost and effectiveness parameters for ambulatory care strategies and data from the State of Victoria's hospital morbidity dataset. Two-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed to evaluate the uncertainty of costs and outcomes associated with ambulatory care. RESULTS: The modelled cost analysis showed that cost savings for two ambulatory care strategies were ~30% compared to standard hospital care. The weighted average cost saving per episode of 'low-risk' febrile neutropenia using Strategy 1 (outpatient follow-up only) was 35% (range: 7-55%) and that for Strategy 2 (early discharge and outpatient follow-up) was 30% (range: 7-39%). Strategy 2 was more cost-effective than Strategy 1 and was deemed the more clinically favoured approach. CONCLUSION: This study outlines a cost structure for a safe and comprehensive ambulatory care program comprised of an early discharge pathway with outpatient follow-up, and promotes this as a cost effective approach to managing 'low-risk' febrile neutropenic patients.

The cost associated with administering risperidone long-acting injections in the Australian community.

BACKGROUND: Risperidone long-acting injection (LAI) is mostly administered twice weekly to people with schizophrenia by nurses at community mental health centres (CMHC) or through mobile outreach visits. This study estimates the cost of resource utilisation associated with the administration of risperidone LAI and the potential savings from substituting two-weekly injections with a longer interval product of therapeutic equivalence. METHODS: A survey of mental health staff overseeing the administration of risperidone LAI at 253 distinct Australian CMHCs was undertaken in November 2009. For the two-week period prior to the survey, respondents were asked questions on injection time (and related tasks) and, for mobile outreach visits, distance and time travelled as well as reduction in visits. Results were stratified by Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC) region. Resource use was quantified and valued in Australian dollars. RESULTS: Results are derived from 74 CMHCs, representing approximately 26% of the national average risperidone LAI unit two-week sales. Stratified average injection time (including related tasks) for risperidone LAI ranged from 18-29 minutes, with a national average of 20.12 minutes. For mobile outreach visits, average distance per patient ranged from 19.4 to 55.5 km for One Staff Visits and 15.2 to 218.1 km for More Than One Staff Visits, and average time travelled ranged from 34.1 to 54.5 minutes for One Staff Visits and 29.2 to 136.3 minutes for More Than One Staff visits. The upper range consistently reflected greater resource utilisation in rural areas compared to urban areas. If administration of risperidone LAI had not been required, 20% fewer mobile outreach visits would have occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The national average saving per two-weekly risperidone long-acting injection avoided is $75.14. In 2009 in Australia, this would have saved ~$11 million for injection administration costs alone if all patients taking two-weekly risperidone LAI had instead been treated with a therapeutically equivalent long-acting injectable antipsychotic requiring one less injection per month.

Implementation of the NHS Health Checks programme: baseline assessment of risk factor recording in an urban culturally diverse setting.

BACKGROUND: National Health Service (NHS) Health Checks, a population-wide prevention programme introduced during 2009, aims to measure and manage cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors among all persons aged 40-74 years in England. The potential workload implications of the programme for general practice are considerable, particularly in deprived culturally diverse settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine the baseline levels of CVD risk factor recording in general practices located in Ealing, North West London. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using data extracted from electronic medical records in 14 general practices between December 2008 and January 2009. The completeness of blood pressure, smoking, body mass index (BMI) and cholesterol recording was examined by practice and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Recording of blood pressure [85.6% (practice interquartile range = 10.1)] and smoking status [95.8% (2.6)] was very high in practices. Recording of BMI [72.8% (23.4)] and cholesterol [55.6% (25.3)] was considerably lower. There were large differences in recording between practices (range for cholesterol: 33.6-78.0%), though these were largely explained by patient characteristics. In regression analysis, hypertensive patients [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 36.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 21.0-62.9], women [AOR = 2.88 (95% CI 2.64-3.15)] and older patients [AOR = 2.75 (95% CI 2.28-3.32) for 65-74 against 35-44 years of age] had better recording of blood pressure as well as BMI and cholesterol. Recording of blood pressure [AOR = 1.38 (95% CI 1.09-1.75)] and cholesterol [AOR = 1.47 (95% CI 1.30-1.66)] was significantly higher among South Asian patients. CONCLUSIONS: The workload implications of the NHS Health Checks programme for general practices in England are substantial. There are considerable variations in risk factor recording between practices and between age, gender and ethnic groups.

The comparison of cardiovascular risk scores using two methods of substituting missing risk factor data in patient medical records.

BACKGROUND: Targeted screening for cardiovascular disease (CVD) can be carried out using existing data from patient medical records. However, electronic medical records in UK general practice contain missing risk factor data for which values must be estimated to produce risk scores. OBJECTIVE: To compare two methods of substituting missing risk factor data; multiple imputation and the use of default National Health Survey values. METHODS: We took patient-level data from patients in 70 general practices in Ealing, North West London. We substituted missing risk factor data using the two methods, applied two risk scores (QRISK2 and JBS2) to the data and assessed differences between methods. RESULTS: Using multiple imputation, mean CVD risk scores were similar to those using default national survey values, a simple method of imputation. There were fewer patients designated as high risk (>20%) using multiple imputation, although differences were again small (10.3% compared with 11.7%; 3.0% compared with 3.4% in women). Agreement in high-risk classification between methods was high (Kappa = 0.91 in men; 0.90 in women). CONCLUSIONS: A simple method of substituting missing risk factor data can produce reliable estimates of CVD risk scores. Targeted screening for high CVD risk, using pre-existing electronic medical record data, does not require multiple imputation methods in risk estimation.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for lung cancer with low dose spiral CT (computed tomography) in the Australian setting.

INTRODUCTION: Low dose spiral computed tomography (CT) is a sensitive screening tool for lung cancer that is currently being evaluated in both non-randomised studies and randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We conducted a quantitative decision analysis using a Markov model to determine whether, in the Australian setting, offering spiral CT screening for lung cancer to high risk individuals would be cost-effective compared with current practice. This exploratory analysis was undertaken predominantly from the perspective of the government as third-party funder. In the base-case analysis, the costs and health outcomes (life-years saved and quality-adjusted life years) were calculated in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 male current smokers for two alternatives: (1) screen for lung cancer with annual CT for 5 years starting at age 60 year and treat those diagnosed with cancer or (2) no screening and treat only those who present with symptomatic cancer. RESULTS: For male smokers aged 60-64 years, with an annual incidence of lung cancer of 552 per 100,000, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 57,325 dollars per life-year saved and 105,090 dollars per QALY saved. For females aged 60-64 years with the same annual incidence of lung cancer, the cost-effectiveness ratio was 51,001 dollars per life-year saved and 88,583 dollars per QALY saved. The model was used to examine the relationship between efficacy in terms of the expected reduction in lung cancer mortality at 7 years and cost-effectiveness. In the base-case analysis lung cancer mortality was reduced by 27% and all cause mortality by 2.1%. Changes in the estimated proportion of stage I cancers detected by screening had the greatest impact on the efficacy of the intervention and the cost-effectiveness. The results were also sensitive to assumptions about the test performance characteristics of CT scanning, the proportion of lung cancer cases overdiagnosed by screening, intervention rates for benign disease, the discount rate, the cost of CT, the quality of life in individuals with early stage screen-detected cancer and disutility associated with false positive diagnoses. Given current knowledge and practice, even under favourable assumptions, reductions in lung cancer mortality of less than 20% are unlikely to be cost-effective, using a value of 50,000 dollars per life-year saved as the threshold to define a "cost-effective" intervention. CONCLUSION: The most feasible scenario under which CT screening for lung cancer could be cost-effective would be if very high-risk individuals are targeted and screening is either highly effective or CT screening costs fall substantially.