A scoping review of non-professional medication practices and medication safety outcomes during public health emergencies.

OBJECTIVES: Public health emergencies (PHE) can disrupt personal medication practices and increase the risk of medication-related harm and other negative medication-related outcomes. Our aim was to examine the extent and nature of published research on this topic to guide future research and practice. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: Standard electronic databases were searched. PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. Extracted data were organised in response to review questions and narrative accounts developed. RESULTS: A total of 129 studies were included, conducted across 32 countries, mostly in the USA (n = 42). Sixty-eight (53%) reported on infectious events, 49 (39%) climatological or ecological events and the remainder a mixture of terrorism, war or other disasters. The studies described several medication safety outcomes (medication-related harm, adherence, supply) and adaptive medication practices (self-altering prescribed medications, sharing medications and changing healthcare providers). Challenges to maintaining routine medication practices during a PHE included transport, finance, quarantine and knowledge-related issues. Twenty-eight studies (22%) examined health inequalities pertaining to adverse medication-related outcomes, with findings suggesting that gender, age, ethnicity, educational and socio-economic status may be related to inequalities. Research gaps identified included carers', children's and minority communities' experiences and intervention studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable evidence of disruptions to routine personal medication practices during PHEs and of medication-related harm and other negative outcomes. Maintaining medication supply for the management of chronic conditions is a universal problem across all emergency types. Research is needed to address these disruptions, particularly amongst people who experience health inequalities who may need additional support.

OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 2: changes in primary care clinical activity in England during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity across a broad range of clinical services. The NHS stopped non-urgent work in March 2020, later recommending services be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible. AIM: To describe changes in the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in general practice across six clinical areas: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental health, female and reproductive health, screening and related procedures, and processes related to medication. DESIGN AND SETTING: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 23.8 million patient records in general practice, in situ using OpenSAFELY. METHOD: Common primary care activities were analysed using Clinical Terms Version 3 codes and keyword searches from January 2019 to December 2020, presenting median and deciles of code usage across practices per month. RESULTS: Substantial and widespread changes in clinical activity in primary care were identified since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with generally good recovery by December 2020. A few exceptions showed poor recovery and warrant further investigation, such as mental health (for example, for 'Depression interim review' the median occurrences across practices in December 2020 was down by 41.6% compared with December 2019). CONCLUSION: Granular NHS general practice data at population-scale can be used to monitor disruptions to healthcare services and guide the development of mitigation strategies. The authors are now developing real-time monitoring dashboards for the key measures identified in this study, as well as further studies using primary care data to monitor and mitigate the indirect health impacts of COVID-19 on the NHS.