Reducing health inequalities through general practice: a realist review and action framework.

Background: Socio-economic inequalities in health have been in the public agenda for decades. General practice has an influential role to play in mitigating the impact of inequalities especially regarding chronic conditions. At the moment, general practice is dealing with serious challenges in relation to workforce shortages, increasing workload and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to identify effective ways so that general practice can play its role in reducing health inequalities. Objectives: We explored what types of interventions and aspects of routine care in general practice decrease or increase inequalities in health and care-related outcomes. We focused on cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We explored for whom these interventions and aspects of care work best, why, and in what circumstances. Our main objective was to synthesise this evidence into specific guidance for healthcare professionals and decision-makers about how best to achieve equitable general practice. Design: Realist review. Main outcome measures: Clinical or care-related outcomes by socio-economic group, or other PROGRESS-Plus criteria. Review methods: Realist review based on Pawson's five steps: (1) locating existing theories, (2) searching for evidence, (3) selecting articles, (4) extracting and organising data and (5) synthesising the evidence. Results: Three hundred and twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and 159 of them were selected for the evidence synthesis. Evidence about the impact of general practice interventions on health inequalities is limited. To reduce health inequalities, general practice needs to be: • connected so that interventions are linked and coordinated across the sector; • intersectional to account for the fact that people's experience is affected by many of their characteristics; • flexible to meet patients' different needs and preferences; • inclusive so that it does not exclude people because of who they are; • community-centred so that people who receive care engage with its design and delivery. These qualities should inform action across four domains: structures like funding and workforce distribution, organisational culture, everyday regulated procedures involved in care delivery, interpersonal and community relationships. Limitations: The reviewed evidence offers limited detail about the ways and the extent to which specific interventions increase or decrease inequalities in general practice. Therefore, we focused on the underpinning principles that were common across interventions to produce higher-level, transferrable conclusions about ways to achieve equitable care. Conclusions: Inequalities in general practice result from complex processes across four different domains that include structures, ideas, regulated everyday procedures, and relationships among individuals and communities. To achieve equity, general practice needs to be connected, intersectional, flexible, inclusive and community-centred. Future work: Future work should focus on how these five essential qualities can be better used to shape the organisational development of future general practice. Study registration: This trial is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020217871. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR130694) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 7. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Health inequalities are unfair differences in health across different groups of the population. In the United Kingdom, the health inequality gap in life expectancy between the richest and poorest is increasing and is caused mostly by differences in long-term conditions like cancer and cardiovascular disease and respiratory conditions, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Partly National Health Service inequalities arise in delays in seeing a doctor and care provided through doctors' surgery, such as delays in getting tests. This study explored how general practice services can increase or decrease inequalities in cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, under what circumstances and for whom. It also produced guidance for general practice, both local general practices and the wider general practice system, to reduce inequalities. We reviewed existing studies using a realist methodology. This methodology helps us understand the different contexts in which interventions work or not. We found that inequalities in general practice result from complex processes across different areas. These include funding and workforce, perceptions about health and disease among patients and healthcare staff, everyday procedures involved in care delivery, and relationships among individuals and communities. To reduce inequalities in general practice, action should be taken in all these areas and services need to be connected (i.e. linked and coordinated across the sector), intersectional (i.e. accounting for the fact that people's experience is affected by many of their characteristics like their gender and socio-economic position), flexible (i.e. meeting patients' different needs and preferences), inclusive (i.e. not excluding people because of who they are) and community-centred (i.e. working with the people who will receive care when designing and providing it). There is no one single intervention that will make general practice more equitable, rather it requires long-term organisational change based on these principles.

How and why do financial incentives contribute to helping people stop smoking? A realist review.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking remains a key cause of preventable illness and death globally. In response, many countries provide extensive services to help people to stop smoking by offering a variety of effective behavioural and pharmacological therapies. However, many people who wish to stop smoking do not have access to or use stop smoking supports, and new modes of support, including the use of financial incentives, are needed to address this issue. A realist review of published international literature was undertaken to understand how, why, for whom, and in which circumstances financial incentives contribute to success in stopping smoking for general population groups and among pregnant women. METHODS: Systematic searches were undertaken from inception to February 2022 of five academic databases: MEDLINE (ovid), Embase.com, CIHAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO. Study selection was inclusive of all study designs. Twenty-two studies were included. Using Pawson and Tilley's iterative realist review approach, data collected were screened, selected, coded, analysed, and synthesised into a set of explanatory theoretical findings. RESULTS: Data were synthesised into six Context-Mechanism-Outcome Configurations and one overarching programme theory after iterative rounds of analysis, team discussion, and expert panel feedback. Our programme theory shows that financial incentives are particularly useful to help people stop smoking if they have a financial need, are pregnant or recently post-partum, have a high threshold for behaviour change, and/or respond well to external rewards. The incentives work through a number of mechanisms including the role their direct monetary value can play in a person's life and through a process of reinforcement where they can help build confidence and self-esteem. CONCLUSION: This is the first realist review to synthesise how, why, and for whom financial incentives work among those attempting to stop smoking, adding to the existing evidence demonstrating their efficacy. The findings will support the implementation of current knowledge into effective programmes which can enhance the impact of stop smoking care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022298941.

A systematic review of 'equity-focused' game-based learning in the teaching of health staff.

Background: An unequal distribution of the social determinants of health drives health inequalities. Existing training fails to communicate the impossible circumstances that disadvantaged groups face. Game-based learning is increasingly used as an innovative method with the potential to enhance health staff's ability to address health inequalities, but its effectiveness is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of 'equity-focused' game-based learning in training health staff. Study design: Systematic Review. Methods: Three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science) and a citation search were systematically searched for articles from January 2010 to July 2023, reporting on effectiveness of 'equity-focused' game-based learning. Titles and abstracts were screened using eligibility criteria to identify relevant studies. Data was extracted and the ROBINS-I tool was used to assess quality. Results: The search identified 7615 articles, of which thirteen were included involving 2412 healthcare workers. A variety of game-based learning tools were found to have an overall positive effect on motivation, knowledge, attitudes, and engagement of health staff. However, the significance of the results varied depending on specific game context. All included studies were judged to have serious to critical risk of bias. Conclusions: Game-based learning has the potential to improve the effectiveness of 'equity-focused' training for health staff. Educators and researchers should further collaborate to expand the tools available and evaluate their effectiveness on long-term clinical practice.

What impact do self-referral and direct access pathways for patients have on health inequalities?

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in self-referral and direct access as alternatives pathways to care to improve patient access to specialist services. The impact of these pathways on health inequalities is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to explore the impact of self-referral and direct access pathways on inequalities in health care use. DESIGN: Three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science) and grey literature were systematically searched for articles from January 2000 to February 2023, reporting on self-referral and direct access pathways to care. Title and abstracts were screened against eligibility criteria to identify studies that evaluated the impact on health inequalities. Data were extracted from eligible studies after full text review and a quality assessment was performed using the ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 2948 articles. Nineteen records were included, covering seven countries and six healthcare services. The impact of self-referral and direct access on inequalities was mixed, suggesting that the relationship is dependent on patient and system factors. Typically self-referral pathways and direct access pathways tend to widen health inequalities. White, younger, educated women from less deprived backgrounds are more likely to self-refer, exacerbating existing health inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: Self-referral pathways risk widening health inequalities. Further research is required to understand the context-dependent mechanisms by which this can occur, explore ways to mitigate this and even narrow health inequalities, as well as understand the impact on the wider healthcare system.

Reducing health inequalities through general practice.

Although general practice can contribute to reducing health inequalities, existing evidence provides little guidance on how this reduction can be achieved. We reviewed interventions influencing health and care inequalities in general practice and developed an action framework for health professionals and decision makers. We conducted a realist review by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for systematic reviews of interventions into health inequality in general practice. We then screened the studies in the included systematic reviews for those that reported their outcomes by socioeconomic status or other PROGRESS-Plus (Cochrane Equity Methods Group) categories. 159 studies were included in the evidence synthesis. Robust evidence on the effect of general practice on health inequalities is scarce. Focusing on common qualities of interventions, we found that to reduce health inequalities, general practice needs to be informed by five key principles: involving coordinated services across the system (ie, connected), accounting for differences within patient groups (ie, intersectional), making allowances for different patient needs and preferences (ie, flexible), integrating patient worldviews and cultural references (ie, inclusive), and engaging communities with service design and delivery (ie, community-centred). Future work should explore how these principles can inform the organisational development of general practice.

Has the pandemic resulted in a renewed and improved focus on heath inequalities in England? A discourse analysis of the framing of health inequalities in national policy.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly exacerbated health inequalities in England. Policy makers sought to ameliorate its impact. This paper aims to identify how health inequalities were framed in national policy documents published in England during the pandemic and how this impacts the framing of policy solutions. Study design: Discourse analysis of selected national policy documents. Methods: First, we identified relevant national policy documents through a broad search and eligibility criteria to identify illustrative policy documents. Second, we undertook a discourse analysis to understand the framing and constitution of health inequalities and consequent solutions within them. Third, we used existing health inequalities literature to critique the findings. Results: Based on analysis of six documents, we found evidence of the idea of lifestyle drift with a marked disjunction between the acknowledgement of the wider determinants of heath and the policy solutions advocated. The target population for interventions is predominantly the worst off, rather than the whole social gradient. Repeated appeals to behaviour change indicate an inherent individualist epistemology. Responsibility and accountability for health inequalities appears delegated locally without the power and resource required to deliver. Conclusion: Policy solutions are unlikely to address health inequalities. This could be done though through (i) shifting interventions towards structural factors and wider determinants of health, (ii) a positive vision of a health equitable society, (iii) a proportional universalism in approach and (iv) a delegation of power and resource alongside responsibility for delivering on health inequalities. These possibilities currently remain outside of the policy language of health inequalities.

Quantifying Radiosensitization of PSMA-Targeted Gold Nanoparticles on Prostate Cancer Cells at Megavoltage Radiation Energies by Monte Carlo Simulation and Local Effect Model.

Active targeting gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are a very promising avenue for cancer treatment with many publications on AuNP mediated radiosensitization at kilovoltage (kV) photon energies. However, uncertainty on the effectiveness of AuNPs under clinically relevant megavoltage (MV) radiation energies hinders the clinical translation of AuNP-assisted radiation therapy (RT) paradigm. The aim of this study was to investigate radiosensitization mediated by PSMA-targeted AuNPs irradiated by a 6 MV radiation beam at different depths to explore feasibility of AuNP-assisted prostate cancer RT under clinically relevant conditions. PSMA-targeted AuNPs (PSMA-AuNPs) were synthesized by conjugating PSMA antibodies onto PEGylated AuNPs through EDC/NHS chemistry. Confocal fluorescence microscopy was used to verify the active targeting of the developed PSMA-AuNPs. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was used to demonstrate the intracellular biodistribution of PSMA-AuNPs. LNCaP prostate cancer cells treated with PSMA-AuNPs were irradiated on a Varian 6 MV LINAC under varying depths (2.5 cm, 10 cm, 20 cm, 30 cm) of solid water. Clonogenic assays were carried out to determine the in vitro cell survival fractions. A Monte Carlo (MC) model developed on TOPAS platform was then employed to determine the nano-scale radial dose distribution around AuNPs, which was subsequently used to predict the radiation dose response of LNCaP cells treated with AuNPs. Two different cell models, with AuNPs located within the whole cell or only in the cytoplasm, were used to assess how the intracellular PSMA-AuNP biodistribution impacts the prostate cancer radiosensitization. Then, MC-based microdosimetry was combined with the local effect model (LEM) to calculate cell survival fraction, which was benchmarked against the in vitro clonogenic assays at different depths. In vitro clonogenic assay of LNCaP cells demonstrated the depth dependence of AuNP radiosensitization under clinical megavoltage beams, with sensitization enhancement ratio (SER) of 1.14 ± 0.03 and 1.55 ± 0.05 at 2.5 cm depth and 30 cm depth, respectively. The MC microdosimetry model showed the elevated percent of low-energy photons in the MV beams at greater depth, consequently resulting in increased dose enhancement ratio (DER) of AuNPs with depth. The AuNP-induced DER reached ~5.7 and ~8.1 at depths of 2.5 cm and 30 cm, respectively. Microdosimetry based LEM accurately predicted the cell survival under 6 MV beams at different depths, for the cell model with AuNPs placed only in the cell cytoplasm. TEM results demonstrated the distribution of PSMA-AuNPs in the cytoplasm, confirming the accuracy of MC microdosimetry based LEM with modelled AuNPs distributed within the cytoplasm. We conclude that AuNP radiosensitization can be achieved under megavoltage clinical radiotherapy energies with a dependence on tumor depth. Furthermore, the combination of Monte Carlo microdosimetry and LEM will be a valuable tool to assist with developing AuNP-aided radiotherapy paradigm and drive clinical translation.

Levelling up health: A practical, evidence-based framework for reducing health inequalities.

There are substantial inequalities in health across society which have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The UK government have committed to a programme of levelling-up to address geographical inequalities. Here we undertake rapid review of the evidence base on interventions to reduce such health inequalities and developed a practical, evidence-based framework to 'level up' health across the country. This paper overviews a rapid review undertaken to develop a framework of guiding principles to guide policy. To that end and based on an initial theory, we searched one electrotonic database (MEDLINE) from 2007 to July 2021 to identify published umbrella reviews and undertook an internet search to identify relevant systematic reviews, primary studies, and grey literature. Titles and abstracts were screened according to the eligibility criteria. Key themes were extracted from the included studies and synthesised into an overarching framework of guiding principles in consultation with an expert panel. Included studies were cross checked with the initial theoretical domains and further searching undertaken to fill any gaps. We identified 16 published umbrella reviews (covering 667 individual studies), 19 grey literature publications, and 15 key systematic reviews or primary studies. Based on these studies, we develop a framework applicable at national, regional and local level which consisted of five principles - 1) healthy-by-default and easy to use initiatives; 2) long-term, multi-sector action; 3) locally designed focus; 4) targeting disadvantaged communities; and 5) matching of resources to need. Decision-makers working on policies to level up health should be guided by these five principles.

Systematic review of the effectiveness of the health inequalities strategy in England between 1999 and 2010.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to explore the effectiveness of the National Health Inequality Strategy, which was conducted in England between 1999 and 2010. DESIGN: Three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase and PsycINFO) and grey literature were searched for articles published that reported on changes in inequalities in health outcomes in England over the implementation period. Articles published between January 1999 and November 2021 were included. Title and abstracts were screened according to an eligibility criteria. Data were extracted from eligible studies, and risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 10 311 unique studies, which were screened. 42 were reviewed in full text and 11 were included in the final review. Six studies contained data on inequalities of life expectancy or mortality, four on disease-specific mortality, three on infant mortality and three on morbidities. Early government reports suggested that inequalities in life expectancy and infant mortality had increased. However, later publications using more accurate data and more appropriate measures found that absolute and relative inequalities had decreased throughout the strategy period for both measures. Three of four studies found a narrowing of inequalities in all-cause mortality. Absolute inequalities in mortality due to cancer and cardiovascular disease decreased, but relative inequalities increased. There was a lack of change, or widening of inequalities in mental health, self-reported health, health-related quality of life and long-term conditions. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to its aims, the strategy was broadly successful. Policymakers should take courage that progress on health inequalities is achievable with long-term, multiagency, cross-government action. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021285770).

How and why do financial incentives contribute to helping people stop smoking? A realist review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking is harmful to human health and programmes to help people stop smoking are key public health efforts that improve individual and population health outcomes. Research shows that financial incentives improve the success of stop smoking programmes. However, a better understanding of how they work is needed to better inform policy and to support building capability for implementation.The aims of this study: (1) To review the international literature to understand: How, why, in what circumstances and for whom financial incentives improve the success of stop smoking interventions among general population groups and among pregnant women. (2) To provide recommendations for how to best use financial incentives in efforts to promote smoking cessation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A realist review of published international literature will be undertaken to understand how, why, for whom and in which circumstances financial incentives contribute to success in stopping smoking for general population groups and among pregnant women. Systematic searches were undertaken on 16 February 2022 of five academic databases: MEDLINE (ovid), Embase.com, CIHAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO. Iterative searching using citation tracking and of grey literature will be undertaken as needed. Using Pawson and Tilley's iterative realist review approach, data collected will be screened, selected, coded, analysed and synthesised into a set of explanatory theoretical findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review as data sources to be included are previously published. The study will provide important findings for policy-makers and health system leaders to guide the development of stop smoking services which use incentives, for example, as part of the Health Service Executive's Tobacco Free Programme in Ireland. Understanding how contextual factors impact implementation and programmatic success is key to developing a more effective public health approach to stop smoking. Our dissemination strategy will be developed with our stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022298941.

Conceptualisation of health inequalities by local healthcare systems: A document analysis.

In 2019, local healthcare systems in England were asked to develop formal plans to reduce health inequalities. Here, we explore plans to understand how local healthcare systems conceptualise health inequalities and why. A broad Internet search and targeted search of NHS websites were conducted to identify all publicly accessible healthcare planning documents (National Health Service (NHS) Long-Term Plan (LTP) response documents) produced by local health partnerships in England. A thematic document analysis of the accessible plans was undertaken in NVivo by coding text relating to health inequalities. Of the 44 documents developed, 13 were publicly accessible. These 13 local plans were submitted to NHS England for review between September 2019 and January 2020 and averaged 167 pages (range: 41-273 pages). Only one document contained a chapter dedicated to health inequalities. After analysis, five themes were identified: (1) variation and (2) vagueness explained how health inequalities were conceptualised and (3) use of value judgements, (4) lack of prior conceptualisation and approach and (5) a lack of commitment to action in the documents to reduce health inequalities explained what led to the overall vagueness and variation. Local healthcare systems were found to conceptualise health inequalities in a vague and varying manner, and their conceptualisations did not reflect established health inequalities frameworks. A clear conceptual national framework for addressing health inequalities is needed to support local healthcare systems, so they can address health inequalities meaningfully and sustainably.

Reducing inequality in avoidable emergency admissions: Case studies of local health care systems in England using a realist approach.

OBJECTIVE: People in disadvantaged areas are more likely to have an avoidable emergency hospital admission. Socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency hospital admissions is monitored in England. Our aim was to inform local health care purchasing and planning by identifying recent health care system changes (or other factors), as reported by local health system leaders, that might explain narrowing or widening trends. METHODS: Case studies were undertaken in one pilot and at five geographically distinct local health care systems (Clinical Commissioning Groups, CCGs), identified as having consistently increasing or decreasing inequality. Local settings were explored through discussions with CCG officials and stakeholders to identify potential local determinants. Data were analysed using a realist evaluation approach to generate context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. RESULTS: Of the five geographically distinct CCGs, two had narrowing inequality, two widening, and one narrowing inequality, which widened during the project. None of the CCGs had designed a large-scale package of service changes with the explicit aim of reducing socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency admissions, and local decision makers were unfamiliar with their own trends. Potential primary and community care determinants included: workforce, case finding and exclusion, proactive care co-ordination for patients with complex needs, and access and quality. Potential commissioning determinants included: data use and incentives, and targeting of services. Other potential determinants included changes in care home services, national A&E targets, and wider issues - such as public services financial constraints, residential gentrification, and health care expectations. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any bespoke initiatives that explained the inequality trends. The trends were more likely due to an interplay of multiple health care and wider system factors. Local decision makers need greater awareness, understanding and support to interpret, use and act upon inequality indicators. They are unlikely to find simple, cheap interventions to reduce inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions. Rather, long-term multifaceted interventions are required that embed inequality considerations into mainstream decision making.

Health equity audits: a systematic review of the effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to explore whether health equity audits (HEAs) are effective in improving the equity of service provision and reducing health inequalities. DESIGN: Three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science) and grey literature (Opengrey, Google Scholar) were systematically searched for articles published after 2000, reporting on the effectiveness of HEA. Title and abstracts were screened according to an eligibility criteria to identify studies which included a full audit cycle (eg, initial equity analysis, service changes and review). Data were extracted from studies meeting the eligibility criteria after full text review and risk of bias assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 596 articles. Fifteen records were reviewed in full text and three records were included in final review. An additional HEA report was identified through contact with an author. Three different HEAs were included from one peer-reviewed journal article, two published reports and one unpublished report (n=4 records on n=3 HEAs). This included 102 851 participants and over 148 practices/pharmacies (information was not recorded for all records). One study reviewed health equity impacts of HEA implementation in key indicators for coronary heart disease, type 2 diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Two HEAs explored Stop Smoking Services on programme access and equity. All reported some degree of reduction in health inequalities compared with prior HEA implementation. However, impact of HEA implementation compared with other concurrent programmes and initiatives was unclear. All included studies were judged to have moderate to serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to identify effective interventions to address health inequalities. While HEAs are recommended, we only identified limited weak evidence to support their use. More evidence is needed to explore whether HEA implementation can reduce inequalities and which factors are influencing effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered prior to its conduction in PROSPERO (CRD 42020218642).

Assessment of CT to CBCT contour mapping for radiomic feature analysis in prostate cancer.

This study provides a quantitative assessment of the accuracy of a commercially available deformable image registration (DIR) algorithm to automatically generate prostate contours and additionally investigates the robustness of radiomic features to differing contours. Twenty-eight prostate cancer patients enrolled on an institutional review board (IRB) approved protocol were selected. Planning CTs (pCTs) were deformably registered to daily cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) to generate prostate contours (auto contours). The prostate contours were also manually drawn by a physician. Quantitative assessment of deformed versus manually drawn prostate contours on daily CBCT images was performed using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), mean distance-to-agreement (MDA), difference in center-of-mass position (ΔCM) and difference in volume (ΔVol). Radiomic features from 6 classes were extracted from each contour. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and mean absolute percent difference in radiomic feature-derived data (mean |%Δ|RF) between auto and manual contours were calculated. The mean (± SD) DSC, MDA, ΔCM and ΔVol between the auto and manual prostate contours were 0.90 ± 0.04, 1.81 ± 0.47 mm, 2.17 ± 1.26 mm and 5.1 ± 4.1% respectively. Of the 1,010 fractions under consideration, 94.8% of DIRs were within TG-132 recommended tolerance. 30 radiomic features had a CCC > 0.90 and 21 had a mean |%∆|RF < 5%. Auto-propagation of prostate contours resulted in nearly 95% of DIRs within tolerance recommendations of TG-132, leading to the majority of features being regarded as acceptably robust. The use of auto contours for radiomic feature analysis is promising but must be done with caution.

Inequalities in the distribution of the general practice workforce in England: a practice-level longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: In England, demand for primary care services is increasing and GP shortages are widespread. Recently introduced primary care networks (PCNs) aim to expand the use of additional practice-based roles such as physician associates (PAs), pharmacists, paramedics, and others through financial incentives for recruitment of these roles. Inequalities in general practice, including additional roles, have not been examined in recent years, which is a meaningful gap in the literature. Previous research has found that workforce inequalities are associated with health outcome inequalities. AIM: To examine recent trends in general practice workforce inequalities. DESIGN & SETTING: A longitudinal study using quarterly General Practice Workforce datasets from 2015-2020 in England. METHOD: The slope indices of inequality (SIIs) for GPs, nurses, total direct patient care (DPC) staff, PAs, pharmacists, and paramedics per 10 000 patients were calculated quarterly, and plotted over time, with and without adjustment for patient need. RESULTS: Fewer GPs, total DPC staff, and paramedics per 10 000 patients were employed in more deprived areas. Conversely, more PAs and pharmacists per 10 000 patients were employed in more deprived areas. With the exception of total DPC staff, these observed inequalities widened over time. The unadjusted analysis showed more nurses per 10 000 patients employed in more deprived areas. These values were not significant after adjustment but approached a more equal or pro-poor distribution over time. CONCLUSION: Significant workforce inequalities exist and are even increasing for several key general practice roles, with workforce shortages disproportionately affecting more deprived areas. Policy solutions are urgently needed to ensure an equitably distributed workforce and reduce health inequities.