Antipsychotic Medication and Risk of Metabolic Disorders in People With Schizophrenia: A Longitudinal Study Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Antipsychotics are first-line drug treatments for schizophrenia. When antipsychotic monotherapy is ineffective, combining two antipsychotic drugs is common although treatment guidelines warn of possible increases in side effects. Risks of metabolic side effects with antipsychotic polypharmacy have not been fully investigated. This study examined associations between antipsychotic polypharmacy and risk of developing diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia in adults with schizophrenia, and impact of co-prescription of first- and second-generation antipsychotics. STUDY DESIGN: A population-based prospective cohort study was conducted in the United Kingdom using linked primary care, secondary care, mental health, and social deprivation datasets. Cox proportional hazards models with stabilizing weights were used to estimate risk of metabolic disorders among adults with schizophrenia, comparing patients on antipsychotic monotherapy vs polypharmacy, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, and antipsychotic dose. STUDY RESULTS: Median follow-up time across the three cohorts was approximately 14 months. 6.6% developed hypertension in the cohort assembled for this outcome, with polypharmacy conferring an increased risk compared to monotherapy, (adjusted Hazard Ratio = 3.16; P = .021). Patients exposed to exclusive first-generation antipsychotic polypharmacy had greater risk of hypertension compared to those exposed to combined first- and second-generation polypharmacy (adjusted HR 0.29, P = .039). No associations between polypharmacy and risk of diabetes or hyperlipidemia were found. CONCLUSIONS: Antipsychotic polypharmacy, particularly polypharmacy solely comprised of first-generation antipsychotics, increased the risk of hypertension. Future research employing larger samples, follow-up longer than the current median of 14 months, and more complex methodologies may further elucidate the association reported in this study.

Development and application of simulation modelling for orthopaedic elective resource planning in England.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop a simulation model to support orthopaedic elective capacity planning. METHODS: An open-source, generalisable discrete-event simulation was developed, including a web-based application. The model used anonymised patient records between 2016 and 2019 of elective orthopaedic procedures from a National Health Service (NHS) Trust in England. In this paper, it is used to investigate scenarios including resourcing (beds and theatres) and productivity (lengths of stay, delayed discharges and theatre activity) to support planning for meeting new NHS targets aimed at reducing elective orthopaedic surgical backlogs in a proposed ring-fenced orthopaedic surgical facility. The simulation is interactive and intended for use by health service planners and clinicians. RESULTS: A higher number of beds (65-70) than the proposed number (40 beds) will be required if lengths of stay and delayed discharge rates remain unchanged. Reducing lengths of stay in line with national benchmarks reduces bed utilisation to an estimated 60%, allowing for additional theatre activity such as weekend working. Further, reducing the proportion of patients with a delayed discharge by 75% reduces bed utilisation to below 40%, even with weekend working. A range of other scenarios can also be investigated directly by NHS planners using the interactive web app. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation model is intended to support capacity planning of orthopaedic elective services by identifying a balance of capacity across theatres and beds and predicting the impact of productivity measures on capacity requirements. It is applicable beyond the study site and can be adapted for other specialties.

The impact of restricted provision of publicly funded elective hip and knee joints replacement during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.

AIMS: Elective hip and knee replacement operations were suspended in April 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of this suspension and continued disruption to the delivery of joint replacement surgery is still emerging. We describe the impact of the pandemic on the provision of publicly funded elective hip and knee replacement surgery at one teaching hospital in England and on which patients had surgery. METHODS: We included all elective primary and revision hip and knee replacements performed at one hospital between January 2016 and June 2021. Using data for the years 2016-2019, we estimated the expected number of operations and beds occupied per month in January 2020 to June 2021 using time series linear models (adjusting for season and trend). We compared the predictions with the real data for January 2020 to June 2021 to assess the impact of the pandemic on the provision of elective hip and knee replacements. We compared the length of stay and characteristics (age, gender, number of comorbidities, index of multiple deprivation) of patients who had surgery before the pandemic with those who had surgery during the pandemic. RESULTS: We included 6,964 elective primary and revision hip and knee replacements between January 2016 and June 2021. Between January 2020 and June 2021 primary hip replacement volume was 59% of predicted, and 47% for primary knee replacements. Revision hip replacement volume was 77% of predicted, and 42% for revision knee replacement. Median length of stay was one day shorter for primary (4 vs 3 days) and revision (6 vs 5 days) operations during the pandemic compared with before. Patients operated on during the pandemic were younger and had slightly more comorbidities than those operated on before the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The restricted provision of elective hip and knee replacements during the COVID-19 pandemic changed the patient casemix, but did not introduce new inequalities in access to these operations. Patients were younger, had more comorbidities, and stayed in hospital for less time than those treated before the pandemic. Approximately half the number of operations were performed during the pandemic than would have been expected and the effect was greatest for revision knee replacements.

A narrative review of recent tools and innovations toward automating living systematic reviews and evidence syntheses.

Living reviews are an increasingly popular research paradigm. The purpose of a 'living' approach is to allow rapid collation, appraisal and synthesis of evolving evidence on an important research topic, enabling timely influence on patient care and public health policy. However, living reviews are time- and resource-intensive. The accumulation of new evidence and the possibility of developments within the review's research topic can introduce unique challenges into the living review workflow. To investigate the potential of software tools to support living systematic or rapid reviews, we present a narrative review informed by an examination of tools contained on the Systematic Review Toolbox website. We identified 11 tools with relevant functionalities and discuss the important features of these tools with respect to different steps of the living review workflow. Four tools (NestedKnowledge, SWIFT-ActiveScreener, DistillerSR, EPPI-Reviewer) covered multiple, successive steps of the review process, and the remaining tools addressed specific components of the workflow, including scoping and protocol formulation, reference retrieval, automated data extraction, write-up and dissemination of data. We identify several ways in which living reviews can be made more efficient and practical. Most of these focus on general workflow management, or automation through artificial intelligence and machine-learning, in the screening process. More sophisticated uses of automation mostly target living rapid reviews to increase the speed of production or evidence maps to broaden the scope of the map. We use a case study to highlight some of the barriers and challenges to incorporating tools into the living review workflow and processes. These include increased workload, the need for organisation, ensuring timely dissemination and challenges related to the development of bespoke automation tools to facilitate the review process. We describe how current end-user tools address these challenges, and which knowledge gaps remain that could be addressed by future tool development. Dedicated web presences for automatic dissemination of in-progress evidence updates, rather than solely relying on peer-reviewed journal publications, help to make the effort of a living evidence synthesis worthwhile. Despite offering basic living review functionalities, existing end-user tools could be further developed to be interoperable with other tools to support multiple workflow steps seamlessly, to address broader automatic evidence retrieval from a larger variety of sources, and to improve dissemination of evidence between review updates.

Impact of pausing elective hip and knee replacement surgery during 2017 on subsequent service provision at a major NHS Trust: a descriptive observational study using interrupted time series.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of a temporary cancellation of elective surgery in winter 2017 on trends in primary hip and knee replacement at a major National Health Service (NHS) Trust, and whether lessons can be learnt about efficient surgery provision. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational descriptive study using interrupted time series analysis of hospital records to explore trends in primary hip and knee replacement surgery at a major NHS Trust, as well as patient characteristics, 2016-2019. INTERVENTION: A temporary cancellation of elective services for 2 months in winter 2017. OUTCOMES: NHS-funded hospital admissions for primary hip or knee replacement, length of stay and bed occupancy. Additionally, we explored the ratio of elective to emergency admissions at the Trust as a measure of elective capacity, and the ratio of public to private provision of NHS-funded hip and knee surgery. RESULTS: After winter 2017, there was a sustained reduction in the number of knee replacements, a decrease in the proportion of most deprived people having knee replacements and an increase in average age for knee replacement and comorbidity for both types of surgery. The ratio of public to private provision dropped after winter 2017, and elective capacity generally has reduced over time. There was clear seasonality in provision of elective surgery, with less complex patients admitted during winter. CONCLUSIONS: Declining elective capacity and seasonality has a marked effect on the provision of joint replacement, despite efficiency improvements in hospital treatment. The Trust has outsourced less complex patients to independent providers, and/or treated them during winter when capacity is most limited. There is a need to explore whether these are strategies that could be used explicitly to maximise the use of limited elective capacity, provide benefit to patients and value for money for taxpayers.

Identification of risk factors associated with prolonged hospital stay following primary knee replacement surgery: a retrospective, longitudinal observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify risk factors associated with prolonged length of hospital stay and staying in hospital longer than medically necessary following primary knee replacement surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective, longitudinal observational study. SETTING: Elective knee replacement surgeries between 2016 and 2019 were identified using routinely collected data from an NHS Trust in England. PARTICIPANTS: There were 2295 knee replacement patients with complete data included in analysis. The mean age was 68 (SD 11) and 60% were female. OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed a binary length of stay outcome (>7 days), a continuous length of stay outcome (≤30 days) and a binary measure of whether patients remained in hospital when they were medically fit for discharge. RESULTS: The mean length of stay was 5.0 days (SD 3.9), 15.4% of patients were in hospital for >7 days and 7.1% remained in hospital when they were medically fit for discharge. Longer length of stay was associated with older age (b=0.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.09), female sex (b=0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.67), high deprivation (b=0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.48) and more comorbidities (b=2.48, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.81). Remaining in hospital beyond being medically fit for discharge was associated with older age (OR=1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.09), female sex (OR=1.71, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.47) and high deprivation (OR=2.27, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.06). CONCLUSIONS: The regression models could be used to identify which patients are likely to occupy hospital beds for longer. This could be helpful in scheduling operations to aid hospital efficiency by planning these patients' operations for when the hospital is less busy.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced suicide rates differentially according to socioeconomic indices and ethnicity? More evidence is needed globally.

The COVID-19 pandemic has harmed many people's mental health globally. Whilst the evidence generated thus far from high-income countries regarding the pandemic's impact on suicide rates is generally reassuring, we know little about its influence on this outcome in lower- and middle-income countries or among marginalised and disadvantaged people. There are some signals for concern regarding the pandemic's potentially unequal impact on suicide rates, with some of the affected demographic subgroups and regions being at elevated risk before the pandemic began. However, the evidence-base for this topic is currently sparse, and studies conducted to date have generally not taken account of pre-pandemic temporal trends. The collection of accurate, complete and comparable data on suicide rate trends in ethnic minority and low-income groups should be prioritised. The vulnerability of low-income groups will likely be exacerbated further by the current energy supply and cost-of-living crises in many countries. It is therefore crucial that reassuring messaging highlighting the stability of suicide rates during the pandemic does not lead to complacency among policymakers.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on presentations to health services following self-harm: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the impact of the pandemic on healthcare presentations for self-harm has accumulated rapidly. However, existing reviews do not include studies published beyond 2020. AIMS: To systematically review evidence on presentations to health services following self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A comprehensive search of databases (WHO COVID-19 database; Medline; medRxiv; Scopus; PsyRxiv; SocArXiv; bioRxiv; COVID-19 Open Research Dataset, PubMed) was conducted. Studies published from 1 January 2020 to 7 September 2021 were included. Study quality was assessed with a critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included: 57% (29/51) were rated as 'low' quality, 31% (16/51) as 'moderate' and 12% (6/51) as 'high-moderate'. Most evidence (84%, 43/51) was from high-income countries. A total of 47% (24/51) of studies reported reductions in presentation frequency, including all six rated as high-moderate quality, which reported reductions of 17-56%. Settings treating higher lethality self-harm were overrepresented among studies reporting increased demand. Two of the three higher-quality studies including study observation months from 2021 reported reductions in self-harm presentations. Evidence from 2021 suggests increased numbers of presentations among adolescents, particularly girls. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained reductions in numbers of self-harm presentations were seen into the first half of 2021, although this evidence is based on a relatively small number of higher-quality studies. Evidence from low- and middle-income countries is lacking. Increased numbers of presentations among adolescents, particularly girls, into 2021 is concerning. Findings may reflect changes in thresholds for help-seeking, use of alternative sources of support and variable effects of the pandemic across groups.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and the Risk of Suicidal and Self-Harm Thoughts and Behaviour: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a complex impact on risks of suicide and non-fatal self-harm worldwide with some evidence of increased risk in specific populations including women, young people, and people from ethnic minority backgrounds. This review aims to systematically address whether SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease confer elevated risk directly. METHOD: As part of a larger Living Systematic Review examining self-harm and suicide during the pandemic, automated daily searches using a broad list of keywords were performed on a comprehensive set of databases with data from relevant articles published between January 1, 2020 and July 18, 2021. Eligibility criteria for our present review included studies investigating suicide and/or self-harm in people infected with SARS-CoV-2 with or without manifestations of COVID-19 disease with a comparator group who did not have infection or disease. Suicidal and self-harm thoughts and behaviour (STBs) were outcomes of interest. Studies were excluded if they reported data for people who only had potential infection/disease without a confirmed exposure, clinical/molecular diagnosis or self-report of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Studies of news reports, treatment studies, and ecological studies examining rates of both SARS-CoV-2 infections and suicide/self-harm rates across a region were also excluded. RESULTS: We identified 12 studies examining STBs in nine distinct samples of people with SARS-CoV-2. These studies, which investigated STBs in the general population and in subpopulations, including healthcare workers, generally found positive associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease and subsequent suicidal/self-harm thoughts and suicidal/self-harm behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified some evidence that infection with SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 disease may be associated with increased risks for suicidal and self-harm thoughts and behaviours but a causal link cannot be inferred. Further research with longer follow-up periods is required to confirm these findings and to establish whether these associations are causal.

Can we accurately forecast non-elective bed occupancy and admissions in the NHS? A time-series MSARIMA analysis of longitudinal data from an NHS Trust.

OBJECTIVES: The main objective of the study was to develop more accurate and precise short-term forecasting models for admissions and bed occupancy for an NHS Trust located in Bristol, England. Subforecasts for the medical and surgical specialties, and for different lengths of stay were realised DESIGN: Autoregressive integrated moving average models were specified on a training dataset of daily count data, then tested on a 6-week forecast horizon. Explanatory variables were included in the models: day of the week, holiday days, lagged temperature and precipitation. SETTING: A secondary care hospital in an NHS Trust in South West England. PARTICIPANTS: Hospital admissions between September 2016 and March 2020, comprising 1291 days. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of the forecasts was assessed through standard measures, as well as compared with the actual data using accuracy thresholds of 10% and 20% of the mean number of admissions or occupied beds. RESULTS: The overall Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) admissions forecast was compared with the Trust's forecast, and found to be more accurate, namely, being closer to the actual value 95.6% of the time. Furthermore, it was more precise than the Trust's. The subforecasts, as well as those for bed occupancy, tended to be less accurate compared with the overall forecasts. All of the explanatory variables improved the forecasts. CONCLUSIONS: ARIMA models can forecast non-elective admissions in an NHS Trust accurately on a 6-week horizon, which is an improvement on the current predictive modelling in the Trust. These models can be readily applied to other contexts, improving patient flow.

Suicide and self-harm in low- and middle- income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

There is widespread concern over the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide and self-harm globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where the burden of these behaviours is greatest. We synthesised the evidence from the published literature on the impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in LMIC. This review is nested within a living systematic review (PROSPERO ID CRD42020183326) that continuously identifies published evidence (all languages) through a comprehensive automated search of multiple databases (PubMed; Scopus; medRxiv, PsyArXiv; SocArXiv; bioRxiv; the WHO COVID-19 database; and the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset by Semantic Scholar (up to 11/2020), including data from Microsoft Academic, Elsevier, arXiv and PubMed Central.) All articles identified by the 4th August 2021 were screened. Papers reporting on data from a LMIC and presenting evidence on the impact of the pandemic on suicide or self-harm were included. Methodological quality was assessed using an appropriate tool, and a narrative synthesis presented. A total of 22 studies from LMIC were identified representing data from 12 countries. There was an absence of data from Africa, the Pacific, and the Caribbean. The reviewed studies mostly report on the early months of COVID-19 and were generally methodologically poor. Few studies directly assessed the impact of the pandemic. The most robust evidence, from time-series studies, indicate either a reduction or no change in suicide and self-harm behaviour. As LMIC continue to experience repeated waves of the virus and increased associated mortality, against a backdrop of vaccine inaccessibility and limited welfare support, continued efforts are needed to track the indirect impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in these countries.

Systematic review of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicidal behaviour amongst health and social care workers across the world.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of healthcare and social care workers, and its potential effect on suicidal thoughts and behaviour is of particular concern. METHODS: This systematic review identified and appraised the published literature that has reported on the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal thoughts and behaviour and self-harm amongst healthcare and social care workers worldwide up to May 31, 2021. RESULTS: Out of 37 potentially relevant papers identified, ten met our eligibility criteria. Our review has highlighted that the impact of COVID-19 has varied as a function of setting, working relationships, occupational roles, and psychiatric comorbidities. LIMITATIONS: There have been no completed cohort studies comparing pre- and post-pandemic suicidal thoughts and behaviours. It is possible some papers may have been missed in the search. CONCLUSIONS: The current quality of evidence pertaining to suicidal behaviour in healthcare workers is poor, and evidence is entirely absent for those working in social care. The clinical relevance of this work is to bring attention to what evidence exists, and to encourage, in practice, proactive approaches to interventions for improving healthcare and social care worker mental health.

Associations of GP practice characteristics with the rate of ambulatory care sensitive conditions in people living with dementia in England: an ecological analysis of routine data.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions (ACSCs) are potentially avoidable. Dementia is one of the leading chronic conditions in terms of variability in ACSC admissions by general practice, as well as accounting for around a third of UK emergency admissions. METHODS: Using Bayesian multilevel linear regression models, we examined the ecological association of organizational characteristics of general practices (ACSC n=7076, non-ACSC n=7046 units) and Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG n=212 units) in relation to ACSC and non-ACSC admissions for people with dementia in England. RESULTS: The rate of hospital admissions are variable between GP practices, with deprivation and being admitted from home as risk factors for admission for ACSC and non-ACSC admissions. The budget allocated by the CCG to mental health shows diverging effects for ACSC versus non-ACSC admissions, so it is likely there is some geographic variation. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of factors that could explain avoidable admissions for PWD at the practice level were examined; most were equally predictive for avoidable and non-avoidable admissions. However, a high amount of variation found at the practice level, in conjunction with the diverging effects of the CCG mental health budget, implies that guidance may be applied inconsistently, or local services may have differences in referral criteria. This indicates there is potential scope for improvement.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable morbidity, mortality and disruption to people's lives around the world. There are concerns that rates of suicide and suicidal behaviour may rise during and in its aftermath. Our living systematic review synthesises findings from emerging literature on incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour as well as suicide prevention efforts in relation to COVID-19, with this iteration synthesising relevant evidence up to 19 th October 2020. Method:  Automated daily searches feed into a web-based database with screening and data extraction functionalities. Eligibility criteria include incidence/prevalence of suicidal behaviour, exposure-outcome relationships and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes of interest are suicide, self-harm or attempted suicide and suicidal thoughts. No restrictions are placed on language or study type, except for single-person case reports. We exclude one-off cross-sectional studies without either pre-pandemic measures or comparisons of COVID-19 positive vs. unaffected individuals. Results: Searches identified 6,226 articles. Seventy-eight articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified a further 64 relevant cross-sectional studies that did not meet our revised inclusion criteria. Thirty-four articles were not peer-reviewed (e.g. research letters, pre-prints). All articles were based on observational studies. There was no consistent evidence of a rise in suicide but many studies noted adverse economic effects were evolving. There was evidence of a rise in community distress, fall in hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour and early evidence of an increased frequency of suicidal thoughts in those who had become infected with COVID-19. Conclusions:  Research evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal behaviour is accumulating rapidly. This living review provides a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide risk as the longer term impacts of the pandemic on suicide risk are researched.

Occupied with classification: Which occupational classification scheme better predicts health outcomes?

Health inequalities continue to grow despite continuous policy intervention. Work, one domain of health inequalities, is often included as a component of social class rather than as a determinant in its own right. Many social class classifications are derived from occupation types, but there are other components within them that mean they may not be useful as proxies for occupation. This paper develops the exposome, a life-course exposure model developed by Wild (2005), into the worksome, allowing for the explicit consideration of both physical and psychosocial exposures and effects derived from work and working conditions. The interactions between and within temporal and geographical scales are strongly emphasised, and the interwoven nature of both psychosocial and physical exposures is highlighted. Individuals within an occupational type can be both affected by and effect upon occupation level characteristics and health measures. By using the worksome, occupation types are separated from value-laden social classifications. This paper will empirically examine whether occupation better predicts health measures from the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS). Logistic regression models using Bayesian MCMC estimation were run for each classification system, for each health measure. Health measures included, for example, whether the respondent felt their work affected their health, their self-rated health, pain in upper or lower limbs, and headaches. Using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), a measure of predictive accuracy penalised for model complexity, the models were assessed against one another. The DIC shows empirically which classification system is most suitable for use in modelling. The 2-digit International Standard Classification of Occupations showed the best predictive accuracy for all measures. Therefore, examining the relationship between health and work should be done with classifications specific to occupation or industry rather than socio-economic class classifications. This justifies the worksome, allowing for a conceptual framework to link many forms of work-health research.

A narrative systematic review of factors affecting diabetes prevention in primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is impacting millions of people globally; however, many future cases can be prevented through lifestyle changes and interventions. Primary care is an important setting for diabetes prevention, for at-risk populations, because it is a patient's primary point of contact with the health care system and professionals can provide lifestyle counselling and support, as well as monitoring health outcomes. These are all essential elements for diabetes prevention for at-risk adults. AIM: To understand the factors related to the delivery and uptake of type 2 diabetes prevention interventions within primary care in higher income countries. METHODS: For this narrative systematic review, we combined qualitative and quantitative studies of diabetes prevention within a primary care setting for patients at-risk of developing the condition. We used an iterative approach for evidence collection, which included using several databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Pysch info, BNI, SSCI, CINAHL, ASSIA), where we combined diabetes terms with primary care terms. Narrative and thematic synthesis were utilised to identify the prominent themes emerging from the data. RESULTS: A database of 6646 records was screened by the research team, and 18 papers were included. Three major themes were identified in this review. The first theme of context and setting of diabetes progression includes the risk and progression of diabetes, primary care as a setting, and where the responsibility for change is thought to lie. This review also found mixed views on the value of preventative services within primary care. The second theme focused on the various patient factors associated with diabetes prevention such as a patient's motivation to modify their current lifestyle, perceptions and knowledge (or lack thereof) of the impacts of diabetes, lack of follow-up in healthcare settings, and trust in healthcare professionals. The third theme was centred on professional factors impacting on diabetes prevention which included workload, time constraints, resources, self-efficacy and knowledge as well as professionals' perception of patient motivations towards change. CONCLUSION: This review explored the factors influencing diabetes prevention in primary care, and identified the context of prevention, as well as patient and professional factors related to preventative services being offered in primary care. This systematic review complements previous reviews of real-world settings by exploring the significant factors in prevention, and the findings are relevant to academics, policymakers, patients and practitioners interested in understanding the factors associated with the delivery and uptake of diabetes prevention interventions.