Exercise facilities for neurologically disabled populations - Perceptions from the fitness industry.

BACKGROUND: People with neurological disabilities (pwND) face many barriers to undertaking physical activity. One option for exercise alongside formal physiotherapy is local fitness facilities but accessibility is often found wanting and gyms are seen as unwelcoming to pwND. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this exploratory study was to investigate the perceptions of fitness facility managers with respect to exercise for pwND in a gym environment. The aim was to identify potential barriers to provision by the fitness industry for pwND. METHODS: The participants included those who were in a position to influence provision at a policy level and those working at management level within fitness providers. A mixed methods approach was used: a quantitative questionnaire and 4 qualitative interviews. Descriptive and correlational analysis, thematic content analysis and concurrent triangulation analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Specially trained staff is perceived to be necessary to make fitness facilities accessible for pwND. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring the provision of specially trained staff to support pwND to exercise in gyms may be the main barrier to provision for this population. Investigation into the standard training of fitness professionals combining the expertise of neurological physiotherapists with that of fitness professionals to meet the needs of pwND would be advantageous.

Trends over time in prescribing by English primary care nurses: a secondary analysis of a national prescription database.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of countries legislate for nurses to have medication prescribing authority although it is a contested issue. The UK is one of these countries, giving authority to nurses with additional qualifications since 1992 and incrementally widened the scope of nurse prescribing, most recently in 2006. The policy intention for primary care was to improve efficiency in service delivery through flexibility between medical and nursing roles. The extent to which this has occurred is uncertain. This study investigated nurses prescribing activities, over time, in English primary care settings. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of a national primary care prescription database 2006-2010 and National Health Service workforce database 2010 was undertaken. RESULTS: The numbers of nurses issuing more than one prescription annually in primary care rose from 13,391 in 2006 to 15,841 in 2010. This represented forty three percent of those with prescribing qualifications and authorisation from their employers. The number of items prescribed by nurses rose from 1.1% to 1.5% of total items prescribed in primary care. The greatest volume of items prescribed by independent nurse prescribers was in the category of penicillins, followed by dressings. However, the category where independent nurse prescribers contributed the largest proportion of all primary care prescriptions was emergency contraception (9.1%). In contrast, community practitioner nurse prescribers' greatest volume and contribution was in the category of gel and colloid dressings (27%), medicated stockings (14.5%) and incontinence appliances (4.2%). There were slightly higher rates of nurse prescribing in areas with higher levels of socio-economic deprivation and fewer physicians per capita, but the correlations were weak and warrant further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of prescriptions written by nurses in primary care in England is very small in comparison to physicians. Our findings suggest that nurse prescribing is used where it is seen to have relative advantage by all stakeholders, in particular when it supports efficiency in nursing practice and also health promotion activities by nurses in general practice. It is in these areas that there appears to be flexibility in the prescribing role between nurses and general practitioners.

Predictors of two forms of attrition in a longitudinal health study involving ageing participants: an analysis based on the Whitehall II study.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies are crucial providers of information about the needs of an ageing population, but their external validity is affected if partipants drop out. Previous research has identified older age, impaired cognitive function, lower educational level, living alone, fewer social activities, and lower socio-economic status as predictors of attrition. METHODS: This project examined attrition in participants of the Whitehall II study aged between 51-71 years, using data from questionnaires participants have completed biennially since 1985 when the study began. We examine the possibility of two distinct forms of attrition--non-response and formally requesting to withdraw--and whether they have different predictors. Potential predictors were age, gender, marital status, occupational grade, retirement, home ownership, presence of longstanding illness, SF-36 quality of life scores, social participation and educational level comparing participants and those who had withdrawn from the study. RESULTS: The two forms of attrition share many predictors and are associated but remain distinct. Being older, male, having a lower job grade, not being a home owner, not having a long standing illness, having higher levels of education, and not having retired, were all associated with a greater probability of non-response; being married was associated with higher probability in women and lower in men. Being older, male, having a lower job grade, not being a home owner, having lower SF-36 scores, taking part in fewer social activities, and not having a long standing illness, were all associated with greater probability of withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a strong gender effect on both routes not previously considered in analyses of attrition. Investigators of longitudinal studies should take measures to retain older participants and lower level socio-economic participants, who are more likely to cease participating. Recognition should be given to the tendency for people with health problems to be more diligent participants in studies with a medical screening aspect, and for those with lower socio-economic status (including home ownership), quality of life and social participation, to be more likely to request withdrawal. Without taking these features into account, bias and loss of power could affect statistical analyses.

Challenges in comparing the quality of life of older people between ethnic groups, and the implications for national well-being indicators: a secondary analysis of two cross-sectional surveys.

BACKGROUND: The current international interest in well-being indicators among governmental agencies means that many quality of life scales are potential components of such national indicator sets. Measuring well-being in minority groups is complex and challenging. Scales are available that have been validated in specific parts of the population, such as older people. However, validation among combinations of minority groups, such as older adults of ethnic minority backgrounds, is lacking. FINDINGS: We pooled data from two surveys of older adults in Great Britain: one conducted among White British people, and one among four ethnic minority groups. Quality of life was measured by the Older People's Quality of Life (OPQOL); Control, Autonomy, Self-realisation, Pleasure (CASP-19); and World Health Organization Quality of Life scale for older people (WHOQOL-OLD). We found differences, some significant, between groups in terms of self-reported importance of various aspects of quality of life. A regression model of each total quality of life scale revealed greater unexplained variability in the White British group than the others. Principal components analysis within each ethnic group's data showed considerable differences in the correlation structures. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences between ethnic groups that are consistent across the three scales and are not explained by a battery of predictor variables. If scales such as these are used to compare quality of life between ethnic groups, or equivalently between geographical regions, the different results in each group are liable to bias any comparison which could lead to inequitable policy decisions.

Value of information in the osteoarthritis setting: cost effectiveness of COX-2 selective inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs and proton pump inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Recent National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance recommended that when traditional NSAIDs or cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors are used by people with osteoarthritis (OA), they should be prescribed along with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). However, specific recommendations about the type of NSAID or COX-2 could not be made due to high levels of uncertainty in the economic evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the value of obtaining further evidence to inform the economic evaluation of NSAIDs, COX-2s and PPIs for people with OA. METHODS: An economic evaluation with an expected value of perfect information (EVPI) analysis was conducted, using a Markov model with data identified from a systematic review. The base-case model used adverse event data from the three largest randomized trials of COX-2 inhibitors, and we repeated the analysis using observational adverse event data. The model was run for a hypothetical population of people with OA, and subgroup analyses were conducted for people with raised gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) risk. The EVPI was based upon the OA population in England - approximately 2.8 million people. Of these, 50% were assumed to use NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors for 3 months per year and 56% of these were assumed to be patients with raised GI and CV risk. RESULTS: The value of further information for this decision problem was very high. Population-level EVPI was £85.1 million in the low-risk group and £179.5 million in the high-risk group (2007-8 values). Expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) analysis showed that the groups of parameters for which further evidence was likely to be of most value were CV adverse event risks and all adverse event rates associated with the specific drugs celecoxib and ibuprofen. The value of perfect information remained high even when observational adverse event data were used. CONCLUSIONS: There is a very high value associated with obtaining further information on uncertain parameters for the economic evaluation of NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors and PPIs for people with OA. Obtaining further randomized or observational information on CV risks is likely to be particularly cost effective.

Cost effectiveness of COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs alone or in combination with a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cost effectiveness of cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) selective inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the addition of proton pump inhibitors to these treatments, for people with osteoarthritis. DESIGN: An economic evaluation using a Markov model and data from a systematic review was conducted. Estimates of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal adverse events were based on data from three large randomised controlled trials, and observational data were used for sensitivity analyses. Efficacy benefits from treatment were estimated from a meta-analysis of trials reporting total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index score. Other model inputs were obtained from the relevant literature. The model was run for a hypothetical population of people with osteoarthritis. Subgroup analyses were conducted for people at high risk of gastrointestinal or cardiovascular adverse events. Comparators Licensed COX 2 selective inhibitors (celecoxib and etoricoxib) and traditional NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen) for which suitable data were available were compared. Paracetamol was also included, as was the possibility of adding a proton pump inhibitor (omeprazole) to each treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was cost effectiveness, which was based on quality adjusted life years gained. Quality adjusted life year scores were calculated from pooled estimates of efficacy and major adverse events (that is, dyspepsia; symptomatic ulcer; complicated gastrointestinal perforation, ulcer, or bleed; myocardial infarction; stroke; and heart failure). RESULTS: Addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was highly cost effective for all patient groups considered (incremental cost effectiveness ratio less than pound1000 (euro1175, $1650)). This finding was robust across a wide range of effectiveness estimates if the cheapest proton pump inhibitor was used. In our base case analysis, adding a proton pump inhibitor to a COX 2 selective inhibitor (used at the lowest licensed dose) was a cost effective option, even for patients at low risk of gastrointestinal adverse events (incremental cost effectiveness ratio approximately pound10 000). Uncertainties around relative adverse event rates meant relative cost effectiveness for individual COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was difficult to determine. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis who are taking a traditional NSAID or COX 2 selective inhibitor is cost effective. The cost effectiveness analysis was sensitive to adverse event data and the specific choice of COX 2 selective inhibitor or NSAID agent should, therefore, take into account individual cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks.

Staffing levels and patient dependence in English stroke units.

Little research has been performed to determine how a stroke unit should be staffed and what the links are between patient dependency and staffing. For this study, 140 stroke units were randomly selected--35 from each of the four quartiles of performance in the National Sentinel Audit of Stroke. A questionnaire was sent to each of the units to collect data on patient numbers and dependency, staffing numbers and therapy, and nursing contact times on a single weekday. The response rate was 66% (92 sites) and information on 1,398 patients was provided. The median number of beds was 18 (interquartile range 12-24). Staffing levels per 10 beds were a median of 10.9 nurses, 1.7 physiotherapists, 1.3 occupational therapists and 0.4 speech and language therapists. Of the patients, 74% received physiotherapy, 46% occupational therapy and 25% speech and language therapy during the day with median contact times being 170 minutes for nursing, 40 minutes for physiotherapy, 45 minutes for occupational therapy and 30 minutes for speech therapy. There was a weak correlation between patient dependency and contact time with nurses and therapists. Stroke patients in England receive relatively little rehabilitation from therapists and there is a wide variation in the amount of nursing time each patient receives.