Co-development and testing of an extended community pharmacy model of service delivery for managing osteoarthritis: protocol for a sequential, multi-methods study (PharmOA).

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a common, painful and disabling long-term condition. Delivery of high-quality guideline-informed osteoarthritis care that successfully promotes and maintains supported self-management is imperative. However, osteoarthritis care remains inconsistent, including under use of core non-pharmacological approaches of education, exercise and weight loss. Community pharmacies are an accessible healthcare provider. United Kingdom government initiatives are promoting their involvement in a range of long-term conditions, including musculoskeletal conditions. It is not known what an enhanced community pharmacy role for osteoarthritis care should include, what support is needed to deliver such a role, and whether it would be feasible and acceptable to community pharmacy teams. In this (PharmOA) study, we aim to address these gaps, and co-design and test an evidence-based extended community pharmacy model of service delivery for managing osteoarthritis. METHODS: Informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, Normalisation Process Theory, and the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for developing complex interventions, we will undertake a multi-methods study involving five phases: 1. Systematic review to summarise currently available evidence on community pharmacy roles in supporting adults with osteoarthritis and other chronic (non-cancer) pain. 2. Cross-sectional surveys and one-to-one qualitative interviews with patients, healthcare professionals and pharmacy staff to explore experiences of current, and potential extended community pharmacy roles, in delivering osteoarthritis care. 3. Stakeholder co-design to: a) agree on the extended role of community pharmacies in osteoarthritis care; b) develop a model of osteoarthritis care within which the extended roles could be delivered (PharmOA model of service delivery); and c) refine existing tools to support community pharmacies to deliver extended osteoarthritis care roles (PharmOA tools). 4. Feasibility study to explore the acceptability and feasibility of the PharmOA model of service delivery and PharmOA tools to community pharmacy teams. 5. Final stakeholder workshop to: a) finalise the PharmOA model of service delivery and PharmOA tools, and b) if applicable, prioritise recommendations for its wider future implementation. DISCUSSION: This novel study paves the way to improving access to and availability of high-quality guideline-informed, consistent care for people with osteoarthritis from within community pharmacies.

Harm and Medication-Type Impact Agreement with Hypothetical Deprescribing Recommendations: a Vignette-Based Experiment with Older Adults Across Four Countries.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about what factors are important to older adults when deciding whether to agree with a recommendation to deprescribe. OBJECTIVE: To explore the extent to which medication type and rationale for potential discontinuation influence older adults' acceptance of deprescribing. DESIGN: Cross-sectional 2 (drug: lansoprazole - treat indigestion; simvastatin - prevent cardiovascular disease) by 3 (deprescribing rationale: lack of benefit; potential for harm; both) experimental design. PARTICIPANTS: Online panelists aged ≥65 years from Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States INTERVENTIONS: Participants were presented with a hypothetical patient experiencing polypharmacy whose PCP discussed stopping a medication. We randomized participants to receive one of six vignettes. MAIN MEASURES: We measured agreement with deprescribing (6-point Likert scale, "Strongly disagree (1)" and "Strongly agree (6)") for the hypothetical patient as the primary outcome. We also measured participants' personality traits, perceptions of risk and uncertainty, and attitudes towards polypharmacy and deprescribing. KEY RESULTS: Among 5311 participants (93.3% completion rate), the mean (M) agreement with deprescribing for the hypothetical patient was 4.71 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.67, 4.75). Participants reported higher agreement with stopping lansoprazole (n=2656) (M=4.90, 95% CI: 4.85, 4.95) compared to simvastatin (n=2655) (M=4.53, 95% CI: 4.47, 4.58), P<.001. Participants who received the combination rationale (n=1786) reported higher agreement with deprescribing (M=4.83, 95% CI: 4.76, 4.89) compared to those who received the rationales on lack of benefit (n=1755) (M=4.66, 95% CI: 4.60, 4.73) or potential for harm (n=1770) (M=4.65, 95% CI 4.58, 4.72). In adjusted regression analyses (n=5062), participants with a higher desire to engage in health promotion behaviors (b=0.08, 95% CI 0.02, 0.13) or need for certainty (b=0.12, 95% CI 0.04, 0.20) reported higher agreement with deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults across four countries were accepting of deprescribing in the setting of polypharmacy. The medication type and rationale for discontinuation were important factors in the decision-making process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04676282, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04676282?term=vordenberg&draw=2&rank=1.

Is polypharmacy associated with difficulty taking medicines in people aged ≥85 living at home? Findings from the Newcastle 85+ Study.

It is unclear whether polypharmacy is associated with difficulty taking medications amongst people aged ≥85 living at home. This is despite the projected decline in availability of family carers, who may support independent living. Using Newcastle 85+ Study data and mixed-effects modelling, we investigated the association between polypharmacy and difficulty taking medications amongst 85-year-olds living at home, over a 10-year time period. Polypharmacy was not associated with difficulty taking medications as either a continuous (OR = 0.99 [0.91-1.08]) or categorical variable (5-9 medications, OR = 0.69 [0.34-1.41]; ≥10 medications, OR = 0.85 [0.34-2.07]). The significant predictors included disability, visual impairment and cognitive impairment. Our results suggest that people aged ≥85 living at home with disability, visual impairment and/or cognitive impairment will have difficulty taking their medications, regardless of how many they are prescribed. Therefore, healthcare professionals should routinely ask about, assess and address problems that these patient groups may have with taking their medicines, independent of the number of drugs taken.

Are there socioeconomic inequalities in polypharmacy among older people? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) may influence prescribing, concordance and adherence to medication regimens. This review set out to investigate the association between polypharmacy and an individual's socioeconomic status. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analyses of observational studies was conducted across four databases. Older people (≥ 55 years) from any healthcare setting and residing location were included. The search was conducted across four databases: Medline (OVID), Web of Science, Embase (OVID) and CINAHL. Observational studies from 1990 that reported polypharmacy according to SES were included. A random-effects model was undertaken comparing those with polypharmacy (≥ 5 medication usage) with no polypharmacy. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and standard errors (SE) were calculated for each study. RESULTS: Fifty-four articles from 13,412 hits screened met the inclusion criteria. The measure of SES used were education (50 studies), income (18 studies), wealth (6 studies), occupation (4 studies), employment (7 studies), social class (5 studies), SES categories (2 studies) and deprivation (1 study). Thirteen studies were excluded from the meta-analysis. Lower SES was associated with higher polypharmacy usage: individuals of lower educational backgrounds displayed 21% higher odds to be in receipt of polypharmacy when compared to those of higher education backgrounds. Similar findings were shown for occupation, income, social class, and socioeconomic categories. CONCLUSIONS: There are socioeconomic inequalities in polypharmacy among older people, with people of lower SES significantly having higher odds of polypharmacy. Future work could examine the reasons for these inequalities and explore the interplay between polypharmacy and multimorbidity.

'Creating a culturally competent pharmacy profession': A qualitative exploration of pharmacy staff perspectives of cultural competence and its training in community pharmacy settings.

INTRODUCTION: Cultural competence is an important attribute underpinning interactions between healthcare professionals, such as pharmacists, and patients from ethnic minority communities. Health- and medicines-related inequalities affecting people from underrepresented ethnic groups, such as poorer access to healthcare services and poorer overall treatment outcomes in comparison to their White counterparts, have been widely discussed in the literature. Community pharmacies are the first port of call for healthcare services accessed by diverse patient populations; yet, limited research exists which explores the perceptions of culturally competent care within the profession, or the delivery of cultural competence training to community pharmacy staff. This research seeks to gather perspectives of community pharmacy teams relating to cultural competence and identify possible approaches for the adoption of cultural competence training. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted in-person, over the telephone or via video call, between October and December 2022. Perspectives on cultural competence and training were discussed. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The reflexive thematic analysis enabled the development of themes. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data management. Ethical approval was obtained from the Newcastle University Ethics Committee (reference: 25680/2022). RESULTS: Fourteen participants working in community pharmacies were interviewed, including eight qualified pharmacists, one foundation trainee pharmacist, three pharmacy technicians/dispensers and two counter assistants. Three themes were developed from the data which centred on (1) defining and appreciating cultural competency within pharmacy services; (2) identifying pharmacies as 'cultural hubs' for members of the diverse, local community and (3) delivering cultural competence training for the pharmacy profession. CONCLUSION: The results of this study offer new insights and suggestions on the delivery of cultural competence training to community pharmacy staff, students and trainees entering the profession. Collaborative co-design approaches between patients and pharmacy staff could enable improved design, implementation and delivery of culturally competent pharmacy services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group at Newcastle University had input in the study design and conceptualisation. Two patient champions inputted to ensure that the study was conducted, and the findings were reported, with cultural sensitivity.

Is the early identification and referral of suspected head and neck cancers by community pharmacists feasible? A qualitative interview study exploring the views of patients in North East England.

INTRODUCTION: Head and neck cancer (HNC) is the eighth most common cancer in the United Kingdom. Survival rates improve when the cancer is diagnosed at an early stage, highlighting a key need to identify at-risk patients. This study aimed to explore opportunistic HNC identification and referral by community pharmacists (CPs) using a symptom-based risk assessment calculator, from the perspective of patients with a diagnosis of HNC. METHODS: Purposive sampling was used to recruit patients from the HNC pathway in three large teaching hospitals in Northern England. Qualitative methodology was used to collect data through an iterative series of semistructured telephone interviews. Framework analysis was utilised to identify key themes. RESULTS: Four main themes were constructed through the analytic process: (1) HNC presentation and seeking help; (2) the role of the CP; (3) public perception of HNC and (4) the role of a symptom-based risk calculator. Participants agreed that CPs could play a role in the identification and referral of suspected HNCs, but there were concerns about access as patients frequently only encounter the medicine counter assistant when they visit the pharmacy. HNC symptoms are frequently attributed to common or minor conditions initially and therefore considered not urgent, leading to delays in seeking help. While there is public promotion for some cancers, there is little known about HNC. Early presentation of HNC can be quite variable, therefore raising awareness would help. The use of a symptom-based risk calculator was considered beneficial if it enabled earlier referral and diagnosis. Participants suggested that it would also be useful if the public were made aware of it and could self-assess their symptoms. CONCLUSION: In principle, CPs could play a role in the identification and referral of HNC, but there was uncertainty as to how the intervention would work. Future research is needed to develop an intervention that would facilitate earlier identification and referral of HNC while not disrupting CP work and that would promote HNC and the risk calculator more widely. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) was integrated throughout the project. Initially, the proposal was discussed during a Cancer Head and Neck Group Experience (CHANGE) PPIE meeting. CHANGE was set up to support HNC research in 2018. The group is composed of seven members (four female, three male) with an age range of 50-71 years, who were diagnosed at Sunderland Royal Hospital. A patient representative from the University of Sunderland PPIE group and a trustee of the Northern HNC Charity were recruited as co-applicants. They attended project management group meetings and reviewed patient-facing documentation.

Training health care providers to administer VIA as a screening test for cervical cancer: a systematic review of essential training components.

BACKGROUND: Training health care providers to administer visual inspection after application of acetic acid (VIA) is paramount in improving cervical cancer screening services for women in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this systematic review was to create a framework of essential VIA training components and provide illustrating examples of how VIA training programs can be carried out in different clinical settings. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (from 2006 to 2021) was undertaken. Our inclusion criteria comprised articles reporting on implemented cervical cancer screening programs using VIA in a screen-and-treat approach. Trained health care providers with any level of health education were included, and the outcome of interest was the reporting of training components. Data were extracted by two reviewers, and a narrative synthesis of the training programs was performed. We developed a framework of seven essential training components and applied it to assess how training courses were conducted in different settings. RESULTS: 13 primary studies were eligible for inclusion, including 2,722 trained health care providers and 342,889 screened women. Most training courses lasted 5-7 days and included theoretical education, practical skill development, and competence assessment. It was unclear how visual aids and training in client counselling and quality assessment were integrated in the training courses. After the training course, nearly all the VIA training programs made provisions for on-job training at the providers' own clinical settings through supervision, feedback, and refresher training. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing international training recommendations for cervical cancer screening in real-world settings and provides valuable examples of training program implementation across various clinical settings. The diverse reporting practices of quality indicators in different studies hinder the establishment of direct links between these data and training program effectiveness. To enhance future reporting, authors should emphasize specific training components, delivery methods, and contextual factors. Standardized reporting of quality indicators for effective evaluation of VIA training programs is recommended, fostering comparability, facilitating research, and enhancing reporting quality in this field.

Is polypharmacy associated with mortality in the very old: Findings from the Newcastle 85+ Study.

Polypharmacy is common in the very old (≥85 years), where little is known about its association with mortality. We aimed to investigate the association between polypharmacy and all-cause mortality in the very old, over an 11-year time period. Data were drawn from the Newcastle 85+ Study (741), a cohort of people who were born in 1921 and turned 85 in 2006. Survival analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying covariates, wherein polypharmacy was operationalised continuously. Each additional medication prescribed was associated with a 3% increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.06). Amongst the very old, the risks and benefits of each additional medication prescribed should be carefully considered.

Does polypharmacy shape dependency transitions in the very old? Findings from the Newcastle 85+ Study.

BACKGROUND: helping older people to maintain their independence, and identifying risk factors that compromise this, is of high importance. Polypharmacy is common in the very old (aged ≥ 85) but whether it can shape transitions in dependency in this fastest growing subpopulation is unclear. METHODS: using Newcastle 85+ Study data and multi-state modelling, we investigated the association between each additional medication prescribed and the progression of and recovery from dependency states, over 10 years (age 85-95). Participants were defined as either free from care (independent), requiring care less often than daily (low dependency), or requiring care at regular intervals each day or 24 hourly (medium/high dependency). RESULTS: each additional medication prescribed was associated with a 10% decreased chance of recovery from low dependence to independence (hazard ratio (HR): 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82-0.99). DISCUSSION: when a relatively able person visits the GP or clinical pharmacist, careful consideration should be given to whether the potential benefits from adding a new medication outweigh the risk to reduced recovery of independence.

A qualitative exploration of the barriers and facilitators affecting ethnic minority patient groups when accessing medicine review services: Perspectives of healthcare professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare inequalities and ethnicity are closely related. Evidence has demonstrated that patients from ethnic minority groups are more likely to report a long-term illness than their white counterparts; yet, in some cases, minority groups have reported poorer adherence to prescribed medicines and may be less likely to access medicine services. Knowledge of the barriers and facilitators that impact ethnic minority access to medicine services is required to ensure that services are fit for purpose to meet and support the needs of all. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals were conducted between October and December 2020, using telephone and video call-based software. Perspectives on barriers and facilitators were discussed. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis enabled the development of themes. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data management. Ethical approval was obtained from the Newcastle University Faculty of Medical Sciences Ethics Committee. RESULTS: Eighteen healthcare professionals were interviewed across primary, secondary and tertiary care settings; their roles spanned medicine, pharmacy and dentistry. Three themes were developed from the data regarding the perceived barriers and facilitators affecting access to medicine services for ethnic minority patients. These centred around patient expectations of health services; appreciating cultural stigma and acceptance of certain health conditions; and individually addressing communication and language needs. CONCLUSION: This study provides much-needed evidence relating to the barriers and facilitators impacting minority ethnic communities when seeking medicine support. The results of this study have important implications for the delivery of person-centred care. Involving patients and practitioners in coproduction approaches could enable the design and delivery of culturally sensitive and accessible medicine services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) group at Newcastle University had extensive input in the design and concept of this study before the research was undertaken. Throughout the work, a patient champion (Harpreet Guraya) had input in the project by ensuring that the study was conducted, and the findings were reported, with cultural sensitivity.

'He or she maybe doesn't know there is such a thing as a review': A qualitative investigation exploring barriers and facilitators to accessing medication reviews from the perspective of people from ethnic minority communities.

INTRODUCTION: Regular reviews of medications, including prescription reviews and adherence reviews, are vital to support pharmacological effectiveness and optimize health outcomes for patients. Despite being more likely to report a long-term illness that requires medication when compared to their white counterparts, individuals from ethnic minority communities are less likely to engage with regular medication reviews, with inequalities negatively affecting their access. It is important to understand what barriers may exist that impact the access of those from ethnic minority communities and to identify measures that may act to facilitate improved service accessibility for these groups. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and August 2021 using the following formats as permitted by governmental COVID-19 restrictions: in person, over the telephone or via video call. Perspectives on service accessibility and any associated barriers and facilitators were discussed. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis enabled the development of themes. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data management. Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (ref: 21/HRA/1426). RESULTS: In total 20 participants from ethnic minority communities were interviewed; these participants included 16 UK citizens, 2 refugees and 2 asylum seekers, and represented a total of 5 different ethnic groups. Three themes were developed from the data regarding the perceived barriers and facilitators affecting access to medication reviews and identified approaches to improve the accessibility of such services for ethnic minority patients. These centred on (1) building knowledge and understanding about medication reviews; (2) delivering medication review services; and (3) appreciating the lived experience of patients. CONCLUSION: The results of this study have important implications for addressing inequalities that affect ethnic minority communities. Involving patients and practitioners to work collaboratively in coproduction approaches could enable better design, implementation and delivery of accessible medication review services that are culturally competent. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration and Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group at Newcastle University supported the study design and conceptualization. Seven patient champions inputted to ensure that the research was conducted, and the findings were reported, with cultural sensitivity.

Recommendations for community pharmacy to improve access to medication advice for people from ethnic minority communities: A qualitative person-centred codesign study.

INTRODUCTION: Medicines-centred consultations are vital to support medicine effectiveness and optimize health outcomes for patients. However, inequalities negatively impact ethnic minority populations when accessing medicines advice. It is important to identify opportunities to improve access for these communities however, knowledge of how best to achieve this is lacking; this study will generate recommendations to improve access to medicines advice from community pharmacies for people from ethnic minority communities. METHODS: A series of codesign workshops, with four groups of patient-stakeholders, were conducted between September-November 2021; they took place in-person or via video call (adhering to COVID-19 restrictions). Existing evidence-based perceptions affecting access to medicines advice were critiqued and recommendations were generated, by use of reflexive thematic analysis, to improve access for ethnic minority patients. The workshops were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data analysis. RESULTS: Twelve participants were recruited using purposive sampling; including eight UK citizens, two asylum seekers and two participants in receipt of residency visas. In total, four different ethnic minority groups were represented. Each participant took part in a first and second workshop to share and cocreate recommendations to improve access to medicines advice in community pharmacies. Three recommendations were developed and centred on: (i) delivering and providing culturally competent medicines advice; (ii) building awareness of accessing medicines advice from community pharmacies; and (iii) enabling better discussions with patients from ethnic minority communities. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations have the potential to support community pharmacy services to overcome ethnic inequalities affecting medicines advice; service commissioners should consider these findings to best meet the needs of ethnic minority patients. Cultural competence training for community pharmacy staff could support the creation of pharmacies as inclusive healthcare settings. Collaborative working with ethnic minority communities could enable specific tailoring of medicines-centred services to best meet their needs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Newcastle University Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group had extensive input in the study design and conceptualization. Seven patient champions were appointed to the steering group to ensure that the research was conducted, and findings were reported, with cultural competence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

The Gender Pain Gap: gender inequalities in pain across 19 European countries.

AIMS: Chronic pain is increasingly considered to be an international public health issue, yet gender differences in chronic pain in Europe are under-examined. This work aimed to examine gender inequalities in pain across Europe. METHODS: Data for 27,552 men and women aged 25-74 years in 19 European countries were taken from the social determinants of health module of the European Social Survey (2014). Inequalities in reporting pain were measured by means of adjusted rate differences (ARD) and relative adjusted rate risks (ARR). RESULTS: At the pooled pan-European level, a greater proportion of women (62.3%) reported pain than men (55.5%) (ARD 5.5% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 4.1, 6.9), ARR 1.10 (95% CI 1.08, 1.13)). These inequalities were greatest for back/neck pain (ARD 5.8% (95% CI 4.4, 7.1), ARR 1.15 (95% CI 1.12, 1.19)), but were also significant for hand/arm pain (ARD 4.6% (95% CI 3.5, 5.7), ARR 1.24 (95% CI 1.17, 1.30)) and foot/leg pain (ARD 2.6% (95% CI 1.5, 3.8), ARR 1.12 (95% CI 1.07, 1.18)). There was considerable cross-national variation in gender pain inequalities across European countries. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gender pain inequalities exist across Europe whereby women experience more pain than men. The extent of the gender pain gap varies by country. The gender pain gap is a public health concern and should be considered in future prevention and management strategies.

The Clinical Frailty Scale can indicate prognosis and care requirements on discharge in oncology and haemato-oncology inpatients: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Routinely used performance status scales, assessing patients' suitability for cancer treatment, have limited ability to account for multimorbidity, frailty and cognition. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a suggested alternative, but research detailing its use in oncology is limited. This study aims to evaluate if CFS is associated with prognosis and care needs on discharge in oncology inpatients. METHODS: We evaluated a large, single-centre cohort study in this research. CFS was recorded for adult inpatients at a Regional Cancer Centre. The associations between CFS, age, tumour type, discharge destination and care requirements and survival were evaluated. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A total of 676 patients were included in the study. Levels of frailty were high (Median CFS 6, 81.8% scored ≥5) and CFS correlated with performance status (R = 0.13: P = 0.047). Patients who were frail (CFS ≥ 5) were less likely to be discharged home (62.9%) compared with those who were not classed as frail (86.1%) (OR 3.6 [95%CI 2.1 to 6.3]: P < 0.001). Higher CFS was significantly associated with poorer prognosis in all ages. Solid organ malignancy (hazard ratio [HR] 2.60 [95%CI 2.05-3.32]) and CFS (HR 1.43 [95%CI 1.29-1.59]; P < 0.001) were independently associated with poorer survival. This study demonstrated that CFS may help predict prognosis in adult oncology inpatients of any age. This may aid informed shared decision-making in this setting. Future work should establish if routine CFS measurement can aid the appropriate prescription of systemic therapy and enable early conversations about discharge planning.

Demographic and psychological predictors of community pharmacists' cancer-related conversations with patients: a cross-sectional analysis and survey study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in the role of community pharmacy in the early diagnosis and prevention of cancer. This study set out to examine how often community pharmacists (CPs) encourage patients to spot or respond to potential signs and symptoms of cancer, and how often they help people to make an informed decision about taking part in bowel cancer screening. METHODS: Data from 400 UK CPs, who completed the 2018 Cancer Research UK Healthcare Professional Tracker survey, were analysed. The primary outcomes were: 'how often CPs encourage patients to spot or respond to potential signs and symptoms of cancer' and 'how often CPs encourage eligible people to make an informed decision to participate in bowel cancer screening'. Associations between behaviours and demographic and psychological variables (Capability, Opportunity and Motivation) were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Most (n = 331, 82.8%) CPs reported occasionally, frequently or always encouraging patients to spot or respond to potential signs and symptoms of cancer, while only half (n = 203, 50.8%) reported occasionally, frequently or always helping people make an informed decision to participate in bowel cancer screening. Female sex (aOR: 3.20, 95%CI: 1.51, 6.81; p < 0.01) and increased Opportunity (aOR: 1.72, 95%CIs: 1.12, 2.64; p < 0.05) and Motivation (aOR: 1.76, 95%CIs: 1.37, 2.27; p < 0.001) were associated with encouraging patients to spot or respond to potential signs and symptoms of cancer; all three psychological variables were associated with helping people to make an informed decision to participate in bowel cancer screening (Capability: aOR: 1.39, 95%CIs: 1.26, 1.52, p < 0.001; Opportunity: aOR: 1.44, 95%CIs: 1.11, 1.87; p < 0.01; Motivation: aOR: 1.45, 95%CIs: 1.05, 2.00; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Most CPs encourage patients to spot or respond to potential cancer symptoms, while only half help them make an informed decision to participate in bowel cancer screening. A multifaceted approach, targeting multiple COM-B components, is required to change these behaviours.

Patterns of opioid use in older people diagnosed with cancer in New South Wales, Australia.

PURPOSE: Opioids provide effective analgesia for most cancer patients, but little is known about individual-level opioid use after cancer diagnosis. We examined the patterns of and factors associated with opioid use in older people diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: We used the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) client data linked with the New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry and the Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme data. We included people aged ≥65 years diagnosed with cancer in NSW, Australia in 2005 to 2015. We examined patterns of opioid use in the 12 months after cancer diagnosis and used cause-specific hazards models to examine factors associated with opioid use. RESULTS: Of 13 527 people diagnosed with cancer, 51% were dispensed opioids after their diagnosis. We observed the highest proportions of use in people diagnosed with pancreas, liver, or lung cancers. Opioid use was associated with female sex, younger age, more advanced degree of cancer spread, opioid use before cancer diagnosis, and multimorbidity. Forty-four percentages of all people dispensed opioids had a history of opioid use in the 12 months before their cancer diagnosis; these people had higher median number of different opioids and opioid dispensings, and a shorter time to first opioid dispensing than opioid-naive people. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that many older cancer patients were dispensed opioids before their cancer diagnosis. Previously opioid-treated people had more intense opioid use patterns after diagnosis than opioid-naïve people. Acknowledging the history of opioid use is important as it may complicate pain treatment in clinical practice.

A qualitative study exploring the lived experience of medication use in different disease states: Linking experiences of disease symptoms to medication adherence.

WHAT IS KNOWN: Medication non-adherence leads to negative health outcomes. Medication adherence is predicted if patients understand the necessity of medication use to control disease symptoms and progression. It could be expected then, that patients with diseases with symptoms which are managed with medications, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder or gout, or diseases with high-mortality rates, such as cancer, would have higher adherence rates than asymptomatic diseases, such as hypertension. However, poor medication adherence remains problematic in both symptomatic and asymptomatic diseases. Further work is needed to explore patient experiences of medication adherence to understand the link between adherence and symptom control. OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' lived experiences of medication adherence. METHODS: Participants were recruited from community pharmacies and general practices. Forty-one semi-structured interviews and three focus groups were used to collect data from patients with disease states that had different symptomatic and asymptomatic profiles. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key parts of the experience of using medications. RESULTS: Participants reported similar experiences of medication adherence despite having different disease symptoms. Participants said that they used medications because it was an expected part of everyday life and that medications 'must be needed' because they had been supplied, rather than being used for a particular symptom. Participants reported short-term episodes of non-adherence were unlikely to lead to negative health outcomes but may result in negative social consequences. DISCUSSION: The findings broaden our understanding of patient experiences of medication use by indicating patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic diseases share similar experiences of medication use. The necessity to use medications appeared to come from 'the system' of healthcare professionals, family and friends that supply and recommend medications. WHAT IS NEW: There were key similarities in experiences of medication adherence in patients with different disease states. The negative consequences of short-term episodes of non-adherence were normalized by healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: Patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic diseases share similar experiences of medication adherence.

Are there socio-economic inequalities in utilization of predictive biomarker tests and biological and precision therapies for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Novel biological and precision therapies and their associated predictive biomarker tests offer opportunities for increased tumor response, reduced adverse effects, and improved survival. This systematic review determined if there are socio-economic inequalities in utilization of predictive biomarker tests and/or biological and precision cancer therapies. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed, and PsycINFO were searched for peer-reviewed studies, published in English between January 1998 and December 2019. Observational studies reporting utilization data for predictive biomarker tests and/or cancer biological and precision therapies by a measure of socio-economic status (SES) were eligible. Data was extracted from eligible studies. A modified ISPOR checklist for retrospective database studies was used to assess study quality. Meta-analyses were undertaken using a random-effects model, with sub-group analyses by cancer site and drug class. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for each study. Pooled utilization ORs for low versus high socio-economic groups were calculated for test and therapy receipt. RESULTS: Among 10,722 citations screened, 62 papers (58 studies; 8 test utilization studies, 37 therapy utilization studies, 3 studies on testing and therapy, 10 studies without denominator populations or which only reported mean socio-economic status) met the inclusion criteria. Studies reported on 7 cancers, 5 predictive biomarkers tests, and 11 biological and precision therapies. Thirty-eight studies (including 1,036,125 patients) were eligible for inclusion in meta-analyses. Low socio-economic status was associated with modestly lower predictive biomarker test utilization (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.05; 10 studies) and significantly lower biological and precision therapy utilization (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.91; 30 studies). Associations with therapy utilization were stronger in lung cancer (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-1.00; 6 studies), than breast cancer (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78-1.10; 8 studies). The mean study quality score was 6.9/10. CONCLUSIONS: These novel results indicate that there are socio-economic inequalities in predictive biomarker tests and biological and precision therapy utilization. This requires further investigation to prevent differences in outcomes due to inequalities in treatment with biological and precision therapies.

Withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs in older people.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is an important risk factor for subsequent cardiovascular events, including ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, cognitive decline and premature death. Overall, the use of antihypertensive medications has led to reduction in cardiovascular disease, morbidity rates and mortality rates. However, the use of antihypertensive medications is also associated with harms, especially in older people, including the development of adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions and can contribute to increasing medication-related burden. As such, discontinuation of antihypertensives may be considered and appropriate in some older people. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether withdrawal of antihypertensive medications is feasible, and evaluate the effects of withdrawal of antihypertensive medications on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, hypertension and quality of life in older people. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to April 2019: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2019, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also conducted reference checking, citation searches and, when appropriate, contacted study authors to identify any additional studies. The searches had no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of withdrawal versus continuation of antihypertensive medications used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults (defined as 50 years and over). Participants were eligible if they lived in the community, residential aged care facilities, or were based in hospital settings. We sought to include trials looking at the complete withdrawal of the antihypertensive medication, and those focusing on a dose reduction of the antihypertensive medicine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We compared the intervention of discontinuing or reducing antihypertensive medication to usual treatment using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for continuous variables and we used Peto odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI for binary variables. Our primary outcomes included: mortality, myocardial infarction, development of adverse drug reactions or adverse drug withdrawal reactions. Secondary outcomes included: blood pressure, hospitalisation, stroke, success of withdrawing from antihypertensives, quality of life, and falls. Two authors independently, and in duplicate, conducted all stages of study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (1073 participants). Study duration and follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 56 weeks. Meta-analysis of studies showed that, in the discontinuation group compared to continuation, the odds for all-cause mortality were 2.08 (95% CI 0.79 to 5.46; low certainty of evidence), for myocardial infarction 1.86 (95% CI 0.19 to 17.98; very low certainty of evidence) and for stroke 1.44 (95% CI 0.25 to 8.35; low certainty of evidence). Blood pressure was higher in the discontinuation group than the continuation group (systolic blood pressure: MD = 9.75 mmHg, 95% CI 7.33 to 12.18; and diastolic blood pressure: MD = 3.5 mmHg, 95% CI 1.82 to 5.18; low certainty of evidence). For the development of adverse events, meta-analysis was not possible; antihypertensive discontinuation did not appear to increase the risk of adverse events and may lead to resolution of adverse drug reactions, although eligible studies had limited reporting of adverse effects of drug withdrawal (very low certainty of evidence). One study reported hospitalisation with an odds ratio of 0.83 for discontinuation compared to continuation (95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; low certainty of evidence). No studies were identified which reported falls. Between 10.5% and 33.3% of participants in the discontinuation group compared to 9% to 15% in the continuation group experienced raised blood pressure or other clinical criteria (as pre-defined by the studies) that would require restarting of therapy/removal from the study. The sources of bias included selective reporting (reporting bias), lack of blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), and lack of blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence of an effect of discontinuing compared with continuing antihypertensives used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults on all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. The evidence was low to very low certainty mainly due to small studies and low event rates. These limitations mean that we cannot make any firm conclusions about the effect of deprescribing antihypertensives on these outcomes. Future research should focus on populations with the greatest uncertainty of the benefit:risk ratio for use of antihypertensive medications, such as those with frailty, older age groups and those taking polypharmacy, and measure clinically important outcomes such as falls, quality of life and adverse drug events.

An examination of trends in antibiotic prescribing in primary care and the association with area-level deprivation in England.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, there are growing concerns about antimicrobial resistance. This has resulted in increased scrutiny of antibiotic prescribing trends - particularly in primary care where the majority of prescribing occurs. In England, antibiotic prescribing targets are set nationally but little is known about the local context of antibiotic prescribing. This study aimed to examine trends in antibiotic prescribing (including broad-spectrum), and the association with area-level deprivation and region in England. METHODS: Antibiotic prescribing data by GP surgery in England were obtained from NHS Business Service Authority for the years 2014-2018. These data were matched with the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 at the Lower Layer Super Output Area level Lower Layer Super Output Area (LSOA) level. Linear regression methods were employed to explore the relationship between antibiotic use and area-level deprivation as well as region, after controlling for a range of other confounding variables, including health need, rurality, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Over time, the amount of antibiotic prescribing significantly reduced from 1.11 items per STAR-PU to 0.96 items per STAR-PU - a reduction of 13.6%. The adjusted models found that, at LSOA level, the most deprived areas of England had the highest levels of antibiotic prescribing (0.03 items per STAR-PU higher). However, broad spectrum antibiotic prescribing exceeding 10% of all antibiotic prescribing within a GP practice was higher in more affluent areas. There were also significant regional differences - with the North East and the East of England having the highest levels of antibiotic prescribing (by 0.16 items per STAR-PU). CONCLUSION: Although antibiotic prescribing has reduced over time, there remains significant variation in by area-level deprivation and region in England - with higher antibiotic prescribing in more deprived areas. Future prescribing targets should account for local factors to ensure the most deprived communities are not inappropriately penalised.