Baseline characteristics of people experiencing homelessness with a recent drug overdose in the PHOENIx pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-related deaths in Scotland are the highest in Europe. Half of all deaths in people experiencing homelessness are drug related, yet we know little about the unmet health needs of people experiencing homelessness with recent non-fatal overdose, limiting a tailored practice and policy response to a public health crisis. METHODS: People experiencing homelessness with at least one non-fatal street drug overdose in the previous 6 months were recruited from 20 venues in Glasgow, Scotland, and randomised into PHOENIx plus usual care, or usual care. PHOENIx is a collaborative assertive outreach intervention by independent prescriber NHS Pharmacists and third sector homelessness workers, offering repeated integrated, holistic physical, mental and addictions health and social care support including prescribing. We describe comprehensive baseline characteristics of randomised participants. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight participants had a mean age of 42 years (SD 8.4); 71% male, homelessness for a median of 24 years (IQR 12-30). One hundred and eighteen (92%) lived in large, congregate city centre temporary accommodation. A quarter (25%) were not registered with a General Practitioner. Participants had overdosed a mean of 3.2 (SD 3.2) times in the preceding 6 months, using a median of 3 (IQR 2-4) non-prescription drugs concurrently: 112 (87.5%) street valium (benzodiazepine-type new psychoactive substances); 77 (60%) heroin; and 76 (59%) cocaine. Half (50%) were injecting, 50% into their groins. 90% were receiving care from Alcohol and Drug Recovery Services (ADRS), and in addition to using street drugs, 90% received opioid substitution therapy (OST), 10% diazepam for street valium use and one participant received heroin-assisted treatment. Participants had a mean of 2.2 (SD 1.3) mental health problems and 5.4 (SD 2.5) physical health problems; 50% received treatment for physical or mental health problems. Ninety-one per cent had at least one mental health problem; 66% had no specialist mental health support. Participants were frail (70%) or pre-frail (28%), with maximal levels of psychological distress, 44% received one or no daily meal, and 58% had previously attempted suicide. CONCLUSIONS: People at high risk of drug-related death continue to overdose repeatedly despite receiving OST. High levels of frailty, multimorbidity, unsuitable accommodation and unmet mental and physical health care needs require a reorientation of services informed by evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Trial registration UK Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ISRCTN 10585019.

Pharmacist led homeless outreach engagement and non-medical independent prescribing (Rx) (PHOENIx) intervention for people experiencing homelessness: a non- randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness and associated mortality and multimorbidity rates are increasing. Systematic reviews have demonstrated a lack of complex interventions that decrease unscheduled emergency health services utilisation or increase scheduled care. Better evidence is needed to inform policy responses. We examined the feasibility of a complex intervention (PHOENIx: Pharmacist led Homeless Outreach Engagement Nonmedical Independent prescribing (Rx)) to inform a subsequent pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Non-randomised trial with Usual Care (UC) comparator group set in Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board, Scotland. Participants were adult inpatients experiencing homelessness in a city centre Glasgow hospital, referred to the PHOENIx team at the point of hospital discharge, from 19th March 2018 until 6th April 2019. The follow up period for each patient started on the day the patient was first seen (Intervention group) or first referred (UC), until 24th August 2019, the censor date for all patients. All patients were offered and agreed to receive serial consultations with the PHOENIx team (NHS Pharmacist prescriber working with Simon Community Scotland (third sector homeless charity worker)). Patients who could not be reached by the PHOENIx team were allocated to the UC group. The PHOENIx intervention included assessment of physical/mental health, addictions, housing, benefits and social activities followed by pharmacist prescribing with referral to other health service specialities as necessary. All participants received primary (including specialist homelessness health service based general practitioner care, mental health and addictions services) and secondary care. Main outcome measures were rates of: recruitment; retention; uptake of the intervention; and completeness of collected data, from recruitment to censor date. RESULTS: Twenty four patients were offered and agreed to participate; 12 were reached and received the intervention as planned with a median 7.5 consultations (IQR3.0-14.2) per patient. The pharmacist prescribed a median of 2 new (IQR0.3-3.8) and 2 repeat (1.3-7.0) prescriptions per patient; 10(83%) received support for benefits, housing or advocacy. Twelve patients were not subsequently contactable after leaving hospital, despite agreeing to participate, and were assigned to UC. Two patients in the UC group died of drug/alcohol overdose during follow up; no patients in the Intervention group died. All 24 patients were retained in the intervention or UC group until death or censor date and all patient records were accessible at follow up: 11(92%) visited ED in both groups, with 11(92%) hospitalisations in intervention group, 9(75%) UC. Eight (67%) intervention group patients and 3(25%) UC patients attended scheduled out patient appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility testing of the PHOENIx intervention suggests merit in a subsequent pilot RCT.

Scope, quality and inclusivity of international clinical guidelines on mental health and substance abuse in relation to dual diagnosis, social and community outcomes: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: It is estimated that up to 75% of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) also have substance use disorder (SUD). The aim of this systematic review was to explore the scope, quality and inclusivity of international clinical guidelines on mental health and/or substance abuse in relation to diagnosis and treatment of co-existing disorders and considerations for wider social and contextual factors in treatment recommendations. METHOD: A protocol (PROSPERO CRD42020187094) driven systematic review was conducted. A systematic search was undertaken using six databases including MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsychInfo from 2010 till June 2020; and webpages of guideline bodies and professional societies. Guideline quality was assessed based on 'Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II' (AGREE II) tool. Data was extracted using a pre-piloted structured data extraction form and synthesized narratively. Reporting was based on PRISMA guideline. RESULT: A total of 12,644 records were identified. Of these, 21 guidelines were included in this review. Three of the included guidelines were related to coexisting disorders, 11 related to SMI, and 7 guidelines were related to SUD. Seven (out of 18) single disorder guidelines did not adequately recommend the importance of diagnosis or treatment of concurrent disorders despite their high co-prevalence. The majority of the guidelines (n = 15) lacked recommendations for medicines optimisation in accordance with concurrent disorders (SMI or SUD) such as in the context of drug interactions. Social cause and consequence of dual diagnosis such as homelessness and safeguarding and associated referral pathways were sparsely mentioned. CONCLUSION: Despite very high co-prevalence, clinical guidelines for SUD or SMI tend to have limited considerations for coexisting disorders in diagnosis, treatment and management. There is a need to improve the scope, quality and inclusivity of guidelines to offer person-centred and integrated care.

Assessing Risks of Polypharmacy Involving Medications With Anticholinergic Properties.

PURPOSE: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count. RESULTS: Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase). CONCLUSIONS: The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.

Research priorities in healthcare of persons experiencing homelessness: outcomes of a national multi-disciplinary stakeholder discussion in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Persons experiencing homelessness (PEH) face up to twelve times higher mortality rates compared to the general population. There is a need to develop, evaluate and implement novel interventions to minimise such inequalities. This paper aims to present outcomes of a national stakeholder engagement event that was conducted to discuss research priorities around healthcare of PEH in the United Kingdom (UK). MAIN BODY: A national stakeholder event was organised in Birmingham, UK. This workshop aimed to engage diverse stakeholders from a variety of background including representations from clinical practice, substance misuse, anti-slavery network, public health practice, local authority, homelessness charities, drugs and alcohol services, Public Health England and academia. A total of five key priority areas for research were identified which included: a) interventions to improve access to health services and preventative services; b) interventions to prevent drug and alcohol related deaths; c) improving existing services through quality improvement; d) identifying PEH's preferences of services; and e) interventions to break the link between vulnerabilities, particularly- modern day slavery and homelessness. Effective partnerships across diverse stakeholder groups were deemed to be imperative in developing, testing and implementing novel interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Maximising access to services, prevention of early deaths linked to drugs and alcohol, and identifying effective and ineffective policies and programmes were identified as priority research areas in relation to healthcare of PEH. The outcomes of this discussion will enable design and conduct of interdisciplinary research programmes to address the syndemics of homelessness and linked adverse health outcomes. Priorities identified here are likely to be applicable internationally.

Incentivised chronic disease management and the inverse equity hypothesis: findings from a longitudinal analysis of Scottish primary care practice-level data.

BACKGROUND: The inverse equity hypothesis asserts that new health policies initially widen inequality, then attenuate inequalities over time. Since 2004, the UK's pay-for-performance scheme for chronic disease management (CDM) in primary care general practices (the Quality and Outcomes Framework) has permitted practices to except (exclude) patients from attending annual CDM reviews, without financial penalty. Informed dissent (ID) is one component of exception rates, applied to patients who have not attended due to refusal or non-response to invitations. 'Population achievement' describes the proportion receiving care, in relation to those eligible to receive it, including excepted patients. Examination of exception reporting (including ID) and population achievement enables the equity impact of the UK pay-for-performance contract to be assessed. We conducted a longitudinal analysis of practice-level rates and of predictors of ID, overall exceptions and population achievement for CDM to examine whether the inverse equity hypothesis holds true. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective, longitudinal study using routine primary care data, analysed by multilevel logistic regression. Data were extracted from 793 practices (83% of Scottish general practices) serving 4.4 million patients across Scotland from 2010/2011 to 2012/2013, for 29 CDM indicators covering 11 incentivised diseases. This provided 68,991 observations, representing a total of 15 million opportunities for exception reporting. RESULTS: Across all observations, the median overall exception reporting rate was 7.0% (7.04% in 2010-2011; 7.02% in 2011-2012 and 6.92% in 2012-2013). The median non-attendance rate due to ID was 0.9% (0.76% in 2010-2011; 0.88% in 2011-2012 and 0.96% in 2012-2013). Median population achievement was 83.5% (83.51% in 2010-2011; 83.41% in 2011-2012 and 83.63% in 2012-2013). The odds of ID reporting in 2012/2013 were 16.0% greater than in 2010/2011 (p < 0.001). Practices in Scotland's most deprived communities were twice as likely to report non-attendance due to ID (odds ratio 2.10, 95% confidence interval 1.83-2.40, p < 0.001) compared with those in the least deprived; rural practices reported lower levels of non-attendance due to ID. These predictors were also independently associated with overall exceptions. Rates of population achievement did not change over time, with higher levels (higher remuneration) associated with increased rates of overall and ID exception and more affluent practices. CONCLUSIONS: Non-attendance for CDM due to ID has risen over time, and higher rates are seen in patients from practices located in disadvantaged areas. This suggests that CDM incentivisation does not conform to the inverse equity hypothesis, because inequalities are widening over time with lower uptake of anticipatory care health checks and CDM reviews noted among those most in need. Incentivised CDM needs to include incentives for engaging with the 'hard to reach' if inequalities in healthcare delivery are to be tackled.

Physical health indicators in major mental illness: data from the Quality and Outcome Framework in the UK.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, the Quality and Outcome Framework (QOF) has specific targets for general practictioners to record body-mass index (BMI) and blood pressure (BP) in major mental illness, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Although incentives are given for aspects of major mental illness (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and related psychoses), barriers to care can occur. Our aim was to compare recording of specific targets for BP and BMI in individuals with major mental illness relative to diabetes and chronic kidney disease across the UK. METHODS: Using 2012 and 2013 QOF data from 9731 general practices across all four countries in the UK, we calculated median payment, population achievement, and exception rates for BP indicators in major mental illness and chronic kidney disease and BMI indicators in major mental illness and diabetes. Differences in unweighted rates between practices in the same UK country were tested with a sign test. Differences in population achievement rate between practices in different countries were compared with those in England by use of a quantile regression analysis. FINDINGS: UK payment and population achievement rates for BMI recording in major mental illness were significantly lower than were those in diabetes (payment 92·7% vs 95·5% and population achievement 84·0% vs 92·5%, p<0·0001) and exception rates were higher (8·1% vs 2·0%, p<0·0001). For BP recording, UK payment and population achievement rates were significantly lower for major mental illness than for chronic kidney disease (94·1% vs 97·8% and 87·0% vs 97·1%, p<0·0001), whereas exception rate was higher (6·5% vs 0·0%, p<0·0001). This difference was observed for all UK countries. Median population achievement rates for BMI and BP recording in major mental illness were significantly lower in Scotland than in England (for BMI -1·5%, 99% CI -2·7 to -0·3, and for BP -1·8%, -2·7 to -0·9; p<0·0001 for both). There were no cross-jurisdiction differences for chronic kidney disease and diabetes. INTERPRETATION: We found lower payment rates, higher exception rates, and lower population achievement rates for BMI and BP recording in major mental illness than in diabetes and chronic kidney disease throughout the UK. We also found variation in these rates between countries. This finding is probably multifactorial, reflecting a combination of patient, clinician, and wider organisational factors; however, it might also suggest inequality in access to certain aspects of health care for people with major mental illness. FUNDING: None.

Perspectives of people experiencing homelessness with recent non-fatal street drug overdose on the Pharmacist and Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx) intervention.

INTRODUCTION: In Scotland, a third of all deaths of people experiencing homelessness (PExH) are street-drug-related, and less than half of their multiple physical- and mental health conditions are treated. New, holistic interventions are required to address these health inequalities. PHOENIx (Pharmacist Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx) is delivered on outreach by National Health Service (NHS) pharmacist independent prescribers in partnership with third sector homelessness charity workers. We describe participant's perspectives of PHOENIx. METHODS: This study aims to understand experiences of the PHOENIx intervention by participants recruited into the active arm of a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). Semi-structured in-person interviews explored participants' evaluation of the intervention. In this study, the four components (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring) of the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) framework underpinned data collection and analyses. RESULTS: We identified four themes that were interpreted within the NPT framework that describe participant evaluation of the PHOENIx intervention: differentiating the intervention from usual care (coherence), embedding connection and consistency in practice (cognitive participation), implementation of practical and emotional operational work (collective action), and lack of power and a commitment to long-term support (reflexive monitoring). Participants successfully engaged with the intervention. Facilitators for participant motivation included the relationship-based work created by the PHOENIx team. This included operational work to fulfil both the practical and emotional needs of participants. Barriers included concern regarding power imbalances within the sector, a lack of long-term support and the impact of the intervention concluding. CONCLUSIONS: Findings identify and describe participants' evaluations of the PHOENIx intervention. NPT is a theoretical framework facilitating understanding of experiences, highlighting both facilitators and barriers to sustained engagement and investment. Our findings inform future developments regarding a subsequent definitive RCT of PHOENIx, despite challenges brought about by challenging micro and macro-economic and political landscapes.

Pharmacist intervention in primary care to improve outcomes in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analysis of small trials suggests that pharmacist-led collaborative review and revision of medical treatment may improve outcomes in heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction in a cluster-randomized controlled, event driven, trial in primary care. We allocated 87 practices (1090 patients) to pharmacist intervention and 87 practices (1074 patients) to usual care. The intervention was delivered by non-specialist pharmacists working with family doctors to optimize medical treatment. The primary outcome was a composite of death or hospital admission for worsening heart failure. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN70118765. The median follow-up was 4.7 years. At baseline, 86% of patients in both groups were treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. In patients not receiving one or other of these medications, or receiving less than the recommended dose, treatment was started, or the dose increased, in 33.1% of patients in the intervention group and in 18.5% of the usual care group [odds ratio (OR) 2.26, 95% CI 1.64-3.10; P< 0.001]. At baseline, 62% of each group were treated with a ß-blocker and the proportions starting or having an increase in the dose were 17.9% in the intervention group and 11.1% in the usual care group (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.31-2.35; P< 0.001). The primary outcome occurred in 35.8% of patients in the intervention group and 35.4% in the usual care group (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.83-1.14; P = 0.72). There was no difference in any secondary outcome. CONCLUSION: A low-intensity, pharmacist-led collaborative intervention in primary care resulted in modest improvements in prescribing of disease-modifying medications but did not improve clinical outcomes in a population that was relatively well treated at baseline.

Treatment burden for people experiencing homelessness with a recent non-fatal overdose: a questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) who have problem drug use have complex medical and social needs, with barriers to accessing services and treatments. Their treatment burden (workload of self-management and impact on wellbeing) remains unexplored. AIM: To investigate treatment burden in PEH with a recent non-fatal overdose using a validated questionnaire, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS). DESIGN AND SETTING: The PETS questionnaire was collected as part of a pilot randomised control trial (RCT) undertaken in Glasgow, Scotland; the main outcome is whether this pilot RCT should progress to a definitive RCT. METHOD: An adapted 52-item, 12-domain PETS questionnaire was used to measure treatment burden. Greater treatment burden was indicated by higher PETS scores. RESULTS: Of 128 participants, 123 completed PETS; mean age was 42.1 (standard deviation [SD] 8.4) years, 71.5% were male, and 99.2% were of White ethnicity. Most (91.2%) had >5 chronic conditions, with an average of 8.5 conditions. Mean PETS scores were highest in domains focusing on the impact of self-management on wellbeing: physical and mental exhaustion (mean 79.5, SD 3.3) and role and social activity limitations (mean 64.0, SD 3.5) Scores were higher than those observed in studies of patients who are not homeless. CONCLUSION: In a socially marginalised patient group at high risk of drug overdose, the PETS showed a very high level of treatment burden and highlights the profound impact of self-management work on wellbeing and daily activities. Treatment burden is an important person-centred outcome to help compare the effectiveness of interventions in PEH and merits inclusion in future trials as an outcome measure.

Provision of drug and alcohol services amidst COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative evaluation on the experiences of service providers.

BACKGROUND: The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of drug and alcohol (D&A) services and associated outcomes have been under-researched. AIM: This study aimed to understand the experiences of service providers in relation to how drug and alcohol (D&A) services were affected during COVID-19 pandemic, including the adaptations made and lessons learnt for the future. METHOD: Focus groups and semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants from various D&A service organisations across the UK. Data were audio recorded, followed by transcription and thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 46 participants representing various service providers were recruited between October and January 2022. The thematic analysis identified ten themes. COVID-19 required significant changes to how the treatment was provided and prioritised. Expansion of telehealth and digital services were described, which reduced service wait times and increased opportunities for peer network. However, they described missed opportunities for disease screening, and some users risked facing digital exclusion. Participants who provided opiate substitution therapy service spoke of improving service provider/user trust following the shift from daily supervised treatment consumption to weekly dispensing. At the same time, they feared fatal overdoses and non-adherence to treatment. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the multifaceted impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK-based D&A service provisions. The long-term impact of reduced supervision on Substance Use Disorder treatment and outcomes and any effect of virtual communications on service efficiency, patient-provider relationships and treatment retention and successes are unknown, suggesting the need for further study to assess their utility.

Protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial to evaluate integrated support from pharmacist independent prescriber and third sector worker for people experiencing homelessness: the PHOENIx community pharmacy study.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) have complex health and social care needs and most die in their early 40 s. PEH frequently use community pharmacies; however, evaluation of the delivery of structured, integrated, holistic health and social care intervention has not been previously undertaken in community pharmacies for PEH. PHOENIx (Pharmacy Homeless Outreach Engagement Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx) has been delivered and tested in Glasgow, Scotland, by NHS pharmacist independent prescribers and third sector homelessness support workers offering health and social care intervention in low threshold homeless drop-in venues, emergency accommodation and emergency departments, to PEH. Building on this work, this study aims to test recruitment, retention, intervention adherence and fidelity of community pharmacy-based PHOENIx intervention. METHODS: Randomised, multi-centre, open, parallel-group external pilot trial. A total of 100 PEH aged 18 years and over will be recruited from community pharmacies in Glasgow and Birmingham. PHOENIx intervention includes structured assessment in the community pharmacy of health, housing, benefits and activities, in addition to usual care, through weekly visits lasting up to six months. A primary outcome is whether to proceed to a definitive trial based on pre-specified progression criteria. Secondary outcomes include drug/alcohol treatment uptake and treatment retention; overdose rates; mortality and time to death; prison/criminal justice encounters; healthcare utilisation; housing tenure; patient-reported measures and intervention acceptability. Analysis will include descriptive statistics of recruitment and retention rates. Process evaluation will be conducted using Normalisation Process Theory. Health, social care and personal resource use data will be identified, measured and valued. DISCUSSION: If the findings of this pilot study suggest progression to a definitive trial, and if the definitive trial offers positive outcomes, it is intended that PHOENIx will be a publicly funded free-to-access service in community pharmacy for PEH. The study results will be shared with wider stakeholders and patients in addition to dissemination through medical journals and scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trial Registration ISRCTN88146807. Approved protocol version 2.0 dated July 19, 2022.

Medicines prescribing for homeless persons: analysis of prescription data from specialist homelessness general practices.

BACKGROUND: Specialist homelessness practices remain the main primary care access point for many persons experiencing homelessness. Prescribing practices are poorly understood in this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate prescribing of medicines to homeless persons who present to specialist homelessness primary care practices and compares the data with the general population. SETTING: Analyses of publicly available prescribing and demographics data pertaining to primary care in England. METHODS: Prescribing data from 15 specialist homelessness practices in England were extracted for the period 04/2019-03/2020 and compared with data from (a) general populations, (b) the most deprived populations, and (c) the least deprived populations in England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Prescribing rates, measured as the number of items/1000 population in key disease areas. RESULTS: Data corresponding to 20,572 homeless persons was included. Marked disparity were observed in regards to prescribing rates of drugs for Central Nervous System disorders. For example, prescribing rates were 83-fold (mean (SD) 1296.7(1447.6) vs. 15.7(9.2) p = 0.033) items), and 12-fold (p = 0.018) higher amongst homeless populations for opioid dependence and psychosis disorders respectively compared to the general populations. Differences with populations in the least deprived populations were even higher. Prescribing medicines for other long-term conditions other than mental health and substance misuse was lower in the homeless than in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the prescribing activities in the homeless population relate to mental health conditions and substance misuse. It is possible that other long-term conditions that overlap with homelessness are under-diagnosed and under-managed. Wide variations in data across practices needs investigation.

Perennial pastures reduce nitrous oxide emissions in mixed farming systems in a semi-arid environment.

Perennial pastures play a crucial role in mixed farming systems by supplying feed for livestock, restoring soil fertility, reducing deep drainage, providing an opportunity to manage herbicide-resistant weeds and breaking soil-borne disease cycles. However, to our knowledge there is no data on the role of perennial pastures in mitigating N2O emissions from the phased crop rotations in semi-arid environments. Two 4-year field experiments were conducted in a semi-arid environment in southern Australia to (a) evaluate the role of perennial pastures in mitigating N2O emissions in mixed farming systems, and (b) compare the cumulative N2O emissions from different pasture mixes. Results showed that the annual N2O emissions were 31% lower from chicory-based pastures and 12-17% lower from perennial grass-based pastures compared with lucerne-based pastures. During the pasture phase, actively growing pastures kept N2O emissions at a relatively low level (59 g N2O-N ha-1 year-1), but N2O emissions increased significantly upon termination of the pastures. Results showed that the N2O emitted during the summer (December to February) after the pastures were terminated accounted for 70% of the total N2O emissions in the final pasture year. Furthermore, perennial grass and chicory-based pastures were highly productive during favorable conditions, leading to a low N2O emission intensity. It is suggested that emphasis be placed on utilizing highly persistent species to foster a longer and more productive pasture phase, and to manage N-supply in the transition between pasture and crop phases as this is where the greatest risk of N2O emission exists.

Pharmacist and Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx): a study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The number of people experiencing homelessness (PEH) is increasing worldwide. Systematic reviews show high levels of multimorbidity and mortality. Integrated health and social care outreach interventions may improve outcomes. No previous studies have targeted PEH with recent drug overdose despite high levels of drug-related deaths and few data describe their health/social care problems. Feasibility work suggests a collaborative health and social care intervention (Pharmacist and Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx, PHOENIx) is potentially beneficial. We describe the methods of a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) with parallel process and economic evaluation of PEH with recent overdose. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Detailed health and social care information will be collected before randomisation to care-as-usual plus visits from a pharmacist and a homeless outreach worker (PHOENIx) for 6-9 months or to care-as-usual. The outcomes are the rates of presentations to emergency department for overdose or other causes and whether to progress to a definitive RCT: recruitment of ≥100 participants within 4 months, ≥60% of patients remaining in the study at 6 and 9 months, ≥60% of patients receiving the intervention, and ≥80% of patients with data collected. The secondary outcomes include health-related quality of life, hospitalisations, treatment uptake and patient-reported measures. Semistructured interviews will explore the future implementation of PHOENIx, the reasons for overdose and protective factors. We will assess the feasibility of conducting a cost-effectiveness analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by South East Scotland National Health Service Research Ethics Committee 01. Results will be made available to PEH, the study funders and other researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10585019.

Pharmaceutical care issues in lung cancer: can community pharmacists support patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy?

OBJECTIVES: Most patients receive systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) as day cases and toxicities, if they occur, are likely to appear first in primary care. Pharmaceutical care can be delivered by community pharmacists, but little is known about the epidemiology of SACT toxicities in the community and potential interventions to address these which raise the following questions: what are the typologies of SACT-associated toxicities experienced by community-based patients and what are the associated pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs)? The aim of this study was to identify toxicities and pharmaceutical care issues of patients prescribed SACT for lung cancer and understand the potential for community pharmacists to deliver aspects of cancer care including toxicity management. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of clinical records of patients prescribed oral and parenteral SACT in 2013-14, to describe patient characteristics; SACT toxicity; PCIs and episodes of unscheduled care. KEY FINDINGS: Twelve categories of toxicity and 13 categories of PCIs were identified from 50 patients. More PCIs were observed with oral SACT/oral-parenteral combinations than with parenteral regimens. The PCIs which could be managed by community pharmacists were mucositis; skin toxicity; gastrointestinal toxicity; reinforcing patient education and identification/prevention of drug interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacists are ideally placed to provide pharmaceutical care to patients with lung cancer prescribed SACT. Cancer specialists in secondary care can signpost patients to community pharmacists for early management of low-grade SACT toxicity.

Representation of persons experiencing homelessness and coding of homelessness in general practices: descriptive evaluation using healthcare utilisation data.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies focused on primary healthcare needs of persons experiencing homelessness (PEH) are often based on data from specialist homeless healthcare services. AIM: To explore the presentation of PEH, coding of homelessness, and associated health conditions in mainstream primary care general practices in England. DESIGN & SETTING: EMIS electronic database search of medical records was conducted across 48 general practices in a clinical commissioning group (CCG), representing one of the most socioeconomically deprived regions in England, which also lacks a specialist primary healthcare service for PEH. METHOD: Key terms and codes were used to identify PEH, their respective diagnoses across 22 health conditions, and prescribed medications over the past 4 years. RESULTS: From a population of approximately 321 000, 43 (0.013%) people were coded as PEH, compared with a homelessness prevalence of 0.5% in the English general population. Mental health conditions were the most prevalent diagnoses among the PEH registrants (56.6%); the recorded prevalence of other common long-term conditions in PEH was lower than the levels observed in PEH registered with specialist homelessness health services. CONCLUSION: In a population with approximately four times higher rate of statutory homelessness, PEH representation in mainstream general practices was under-represented by several folds. As homelessness overlaps with mental health, substance misuse, and long-term health conditions, consistent coding of homelessness in medical records is imperative in order to offer tailored support and prevention actions when patients present for services.

Understanding Stakeholder Views Regarding the Design of an Intervention Trial to Reduce Anticholinergic Burden: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), is defined as the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medication which are widely prescribed to older adults despite increasing ACB being associated with adverse effects such as: falls, dementia and increased mortality. This research explores the views of health care professionals (HCPs) and patients on a planned trial to reduce ACB by stopping or switching anticholinergic medications. The objectives were to explore the views of key stakeholders (patients, the public, and HCPs) regarding the potential acceptability, design and conduct of an ACB reduction trial. Materials and Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with 25 HCPs involved in prescribing medication with anticholinergic properties and with 22 members of the public and patients who were prescribed with the medication. Topic guides for the interviews and focus groups explored aspects of feasibility including: 1) views of a trial of de-prescribing/medication switching; 2) how to best communicate information about such a trial; 3) views on who would be best placed and preferred to undertake such medication changes, e.g., pharmacists or General Practitioners (GPs)? 4) perceived barriers and facilitators to trial participation and the smooth conduct of such a trial; 5) HCP views on the future implementability of this approach to reducing ACB and 6) patients' willingness to be contacted for participation in a future trial. Qualitative data analysis was underpinned by Normalization Process Theory. Results: The public, patients and HCPs were supportive of an ACB reduction trial. There was consensus among the different groups that key points to consider with such a trial included: 1) ensuring patient engagement throughout to enable concerns/potential pitfalls to be addressed from the beginning; 2) ensuring clear communication to minimise potential misconceptions about the reasons for ACB reduction; and 3) provision of access to a point of contact for patients throughout the life of a trial to address concerns; The HCPs in particular suggested two more key points: 4) minimise the workload implications of any trial; and 5) pharmacists may be best placed to carry out ACB reviews, though overall responsibility for patient medication should remain with GPs. Conclusion: Patients, the public and HCPs are supportive of trials to reduce ACB. Good communication and patient engagement during design and delivery of a trial are essential as well as safety netting and minimising workload.

Comparing the Impact of Primary Care Practice Design in Two Inner City UK Homelessness Services.

Background: Specialist homeless primary health care services in the United Kingdom have arisen from the need for bespoke approaches to providing health care for people experiencing homelessness but descriptions of the design characteristics of homeless health services together with associated long-term condition (LTC) prevalence, health care utilization, and prescribing remain unexplored, thereby limiting our understanding of potential impact of service configuration on outcomes. Aim: Description of specialist homeless general practitioner services in Glasgow and Edinburgh, in terms of practice design (staff, skill mix, practice systems of registration, and follow-up); and exploration of the potential impact of differences on LTC prevalence, health care utilization, and prescribing. Method: Patient data were collected from computerized general practitioner records in Glasgow (2015, n = 133) and Edinburgh (2016, n = 150). Homeless health service configuration and anonymized patient data, including demographics, LTCs service utilization, and prescribing were summarized and compared. Results: Marked differences in infrastructure emerged between 2 practices, including the patient registration process, segmentation versus integration of services, recording systems, and the availability of staff expertise. Patient characteristics differed in terms of LTC diagnoses, health care utilization and prescribing. Higher rates of recorded mental health and addiction problems were found in Edinburgh, as well as higher rates of physical LTCs, for example, cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. There were significantly higher rates of consultations with nurses and other staff in Edinburgh, although more patients had consultations with pharmacists in Glasgow. Medication adherence was low in both cohorts, and attendance at referral appointments was particularly poor in Glasgow. Conclusion: Service design and professional skill mix influence recording of LTCs, service uptake, and identification and management of health conditions. Service configuration, professional skill mix, and resources may profoundly affect diagnoses, utilization of health care, and prescribing. Attention to homeless service design is important when providing care to this disadvantaged patient group.

The Help for Hay Fever community pharmacy-based pilot randomised controlled trial for intermittent allergic rhinitis.

Management of intermittent allergic rhinitis (IAR) is suboptimal in the UK. An Australian community pharmacy-based intervention has been shown to help patients better self-manage their IAR. We conducted a pilot cluster RCT in 12 Scottish community pharmacies to assess transferability of the Australian intervention. Trained staff in intervention pharmacies delivered the intervention to eligible customers (n = 60). Non-intervention pharmacy participants (n = 65) received usual care. Outcome measures included effect size of change in the mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (miniRQLQ) between baseline, 1-week and 6-week follow-up. Trial procedures were well received by pharmacy staff, and customer satisfaction with the intervention was high. The standardised effect size for miniRQLQ total score was -0.46 (95% CI, -1.05, 0.13) for all participants and -0.14 (95% CI,-0.86, 0.57) in the complete case analysis, suggesting a small overall treatment effect in the intervention group. A full-scale RCT is warranted to fully evaluate the effectiveness of this service.