Prevalence and risk factors for long COVID among adults in Scotland using electronic health records: a national, retrospective, observational cohort study.

Background: Long COVID is a debilitating multisystem condition. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of long COVID in the adult population of Scotland, and to identify risk factors associated with its development. Methods: In this national, retrospective, observational cohort study, we analysed electronic health records (EHRs) for all adults (≥18 years) registered with a general medical practice and resident in Scotland between March 1, 2020, and October 26, 2022 (98-99% of the population). We linked data from primary care, secondary care, laboratory testing and prescribing. Four outcome measures were used to identify long COVID: clinical codes, free text in primary care records, free text on sick notes, and a novel operational definition. The operational definition was developed using Poisson regression to identify clinical encounters indicative of long COVID from a sample of negative and positive COVID-19 cases matched on time-varying propensity to test positive for SARS-CoV-2. Possible risk factors for long COVID were identified by stratifying descriptive statistics by long COVID status. Findings: Of 4,676,390 participants, 81,219 (1.7%) were identified as having long COVID. Clinical codes identified the fewest cases (n = 1,092, 0.02%), followed by free text (n = 8,368, 0.2%), sick notes (n = 14,469, 0.3%), and the operational definition (n = 64,193, 1.4%). There was limited overlap in cases identified by the measures; however, temporal trends and patient characteristics were consistent across measures. Compared with the general population, a higher proportion of people with long COVID were female (65.1% versus 50.4%), aged 38-67 (63.7% versus 48.9%), overweight or obese (45.7% versus 29.4%), had one or more comorbidities (52.7% versus 36.0%), were immunosuppressed (6.9% versus 3.2%), shielding (7.9% versus 3.4%), or hospitalised within 28 days of testing positive (8.8% versus 3.3%%), and had tested positive before Omicron became the dominant variant (44.9% versus 35.9%). The operational definition identified long COVID cases with combinations of clinical encounters (from four symptoms, six investigation types, and seven management strategies) recorded in EHRs within 4-26 weeks of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. These combinations were significantly (p < 0.0001) more prevalent in positive COVID-19 patients than in matched negative controls. In a case-crossover analysis, 16.4% of those identified by the operational definition had similar healthcare patterns recorded before testing positive. Interpretation: The prevalence of long COVID presenting in general practice was estimated to be 0.02-1.7%, depending on the measure used. Due to challenges in diagnosing long COVID and inconsistent recording of information in EHRs, the true prevalence of long COVID is likely to be higher. The operational definition provided a novel approach but relied on a restricted set of symptoms and may misclassify individuals with pre-existing health conditions. Further research is needed to refine and validate this approach. Funding: Chief Scientist Office (Scotland), Medical Research Council, and BREATHE.

IMP2ART: development of a multi-level programme theory integrating the COM-B model and the iPARIHS framework, to enhance implementation of supported self-management of asthma in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Supported asthma self-management, incorporating an asthma action plan and annual clinical review, has been recommended by UK/global guidelines for over three decades. However, implementation remains poor, as only around a third of individuals receive basic asthma care, according to the UKs leading respiratory charity Asthma and Lung UK. A systematic review of implementation studies recommended that a whole systems approach targeting patients, healthcare professional education, and organisations is needed to improve implementation of supported asthma self-management in primary care. The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP2ART) is a national Hybrid-II implementation cluster randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate such an approach. This paper describes the development of the implementation strategy for IMP2ART with particular focus on the integration of multiple level theories. METHODS: The Medical Research Council design and evaluation of complex interventions framework and the Person-Based Approach to intervention development were used as guidance for stages of strategy development. Specifically, we (i) set up a multidisciplinary team (including practicing and academic clinicians, health psychologists, public health and patient colleagues), (ii) reviewed and integrated evidence and theory, (iii) developed guiding principles, (iv) developed prototype materials, and (v) conducted a pre-pilot study before final refinement. RESULTS: The implementation strategy included resources for patients, team-based and individual healthcare professional education, practice audit and feedback, and an asthma review template, as well as a facilitator role accessible to primary care practices for 12 months. The synthesis of the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS) and Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour (COM-B) frameworks led to an evolved framework bringing together important implementation and behaviour change elements which will be used as a basis for the study process evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: A description of rigorous implementation strategy development for the IMP2ART study is provided along with newly theorised integration of implementation and behaviour change science which may be of benefit to others targeting implementation in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15448074. Registered on 2nd December 2019.

IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP2ART) in primary care: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a common long-term condition and major public health problem. Supported self-management for asthma that includes a written personalised asthma action plan, supported by regular professional review, reduces unscheduled consultations and improves asthma outcomes and quality of life. However, despite unequivocal inter/national guideline recommendations, supported self-management is poorly implemented in practice. The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP2ART) implementation strategy has been developed to address this challenge. The aim of this implementation trial is to determine whether facilitated delivery of the IMP2ART strategy increases the provision of asthma action plans and reduces unscheduled care in the context of routine UK primary care. METHODS: IMP2ART is a parallel group, cluster randomised controlled hybrid II implementation trial. One hundred forty-four general practices will be randomly assigned to either the IMP2ART implementation strategy or control group. Following a facilitation workshop, implementation group practices will receive organisational resources to help them prioritise supported self-management (including audit and feedback; an IMP2ART asthma review template), training for professionals and resources to support patients to self-manage their asthma. The control group will continue with usual asthma care. The primary clinical outcome is the between-group difference in unscheduled care in the second year after randomisation (i.e. between 12 and 24 months post-randomisation) assessed from routine data. Additionally, a primary implementation outcome of asthma action plan ownership at 12 months will be assessed by questionnaire to a random sub-group of people with asthma. Secondary outcomes include the number of asthma reviews conducted, prescribing outcomes (reliever medication and oral steroids), asthma symptom control, patients' confidence in self-management and professional support and resource use. A health economic analysis will assess cost-effectiveness, and a mixed methods process evaluation will explore implementation, fidelity and adaptation. DISCUSSION: The evidence for supported asthma self-management is overwhelming. This study will add to the literature regarding strategies that can effectively implement supported self-management in primary care to reduce unscheduled consultations and improve asthma outcomes and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15448074. Registered on 2 December 2019.

Development of a patient-centred electronic review template to support self-management in primary care: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic templates are frequently used in long-term condition (LTC) reviews (for example, asthma) to act as reminders and improve documentation; however, they can restrict patient-centred care and opportunities for patients to discuss concerns and self-management. AIM: The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP2ART) programme aimed to develop a patient-centred asthma review template that encourages supported self-management. DESIGN & SETTING: This was a mixed-methods study, which integrated qualitative and systematic review data, primary care Professional Advisory Group feedback, and qualitative data from clinician interviews. METHOD: Aligned with the Medical Research Council complex intervention framework, a template was developed in the following three phases: (1) development phase, which consisted of a qualitative exploration with clinicians and patients, a systematic review, and prototype template development; (2) feasibility pilot phase, which involved feedback from clinicians (n = 7); and (3) pre-piloting phase, which consisted of delivering the template within the IMP2ART implementation strategy (incorporating the template with patient and professional resources) and eliciting clinician feedback (n = 6). RESULTS: Template development was guided by the preliminary qualitative work and the systematic review. A prototype template was developed with an opening question to establish patient agendas, and a closing prompt to confirm agendas have been addressed and an asthma action plan provided. The feasibility pilot identified refinements needed, including focusing the opening question on asthma. Pre-piloting ensured integration with the IMP2ART strategy. CONCLUSION: Following the multi-stage development process, the implementation strategy, including the asthma review template, is now being tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Asynchronous digital health interventions for reviewing asthma: A mixed-methods systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: People living with asthma require regular reviews to address their concerns and questions, assess control, review medication, and support self-management. However, practical barriers to attending face-to-face consultations might limit routine reviews. Reviewing asthma using asynchronous digital health interventions could be convenient for patients and an efficient way of maintaining communication between patients and healthcare professionals and improving health outcomes. We, therefore, aim to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review to assess the effectiveness of reviewing asthma by asynchronous digital health interventions and explore the views of patients and healthcare professionals about the role of such interventions in delivering asthma care. METHODS: We will search MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from 2001 to present without imposing any language restrictions. We are interested in studies of asynchronous digital health interventions used either as a single intervention or contributing to mixed modes of review. Two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, and retrieve potentially relevant studies for full assessment against the eligibility criteria and extract data. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion with the review team. We will use 'Downs and Black' checklist, 'Critical Appraisal Skills Programme', and 'Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool' to assess methodological quality of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies respectively. After synthesising quantitative (narrative synthesis) and qualitative (thematic synthesis) data separately, we will integrate them following methods outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review will provide insights into the role of asynchronous digital health interventions in the routine care of people living with asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022344224.

Mixed-methods evaluation of a nurse-led allergy clinic model in primary care: Feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: It is now widely acknowledged that there are serious shortcomings in allergy care provision for patients seen in primary care. We sought to assess the feasibility of delivering and evaluating a new nurse-led allergy service in primary care, measured by recruitment, retention and estimates of the potential impact of the intervention on disease-specific quality of life. METHODS: Mixed-methods evaluation of a nurse-led primary care-based allergy clinic in Edinburgh, UK undertaken during the period 2017-2021 with a focus on suspected food allergy and atopic eczema in young children, allergic rhinitis in children and young people, and suspected anaphylaxis in adults. Prior to March 2020, patients were seen face-to-face (Phase 1). Due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, recruitment was halted between March-August 2020, and a remote clinic was restarted in September 2020 (Phase 2). Disease-specific quality of life was measured at baseline and 6-12 weeks post intervention using validated instruments. Quantitative data were descriptively analysed. We undertook interviews with 16 carers/patients and nine healthcare professionals, which were thematically analysed. RESULTS: During Phase 1, 426/506 (84%) referred patients met the eligibility criteria; 40/46 (87%) of Phase 2 referrals were eligible. Males and females were recruited in approximately equal numbers. The majority (83%) of referrals were for possible food allergy or anaphylaxis. Complete data were available for 338/426 (79%) patients seen in Phase 1 and 30/40 (75%) in Phase 2. Compared with baseline assessments, there were improvements in disease-specific quality of life for most categories of patients. Patients/carers and healthcare professionals reported high levels of satisfaction, this being reinforced by the qualitative interviews in which convenience and speed of access to expert opinion, the quality of the consultation, and patient/care empowerment were particularly emphasised. CONCLUSION: This large feasibility trial has demonstrated that it is possible to recruit, deliver and retain individuals into a nurse-led allergy clinic with both face-to-face and remote consultations. Our data indicate that the intervention was considered acceptable to patients/carers and healthcare professionals. The before-after data of disease-specific quality of life suggest that the intervention may prove effective, but this now needs to be confirmed through a formal randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov reference NCT03826953.

Deriving and validating a risk prediction model for long COVID-19: protocol for an observational cohort study using linked Scottish data.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is commonly experienced as an acute illness, yet some people continue to have symptoms that persist for weeks, or months (commonly referred to as 'long-COVID'). It remains unclear which patients are at highest risk of developing long-COVID. In this protocol, we describe plans to develop a prediction model to identify individuals at risk of developing long-COVID. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the national Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) platform, a population-level linked dataset of routine electronic healthcare data from 5.4 million individuals in Scotland. We will identify potential indicators for long-COVID by identifying patterns in primary care data linked to information from out-of-hours general practitioner encounters, accident and emergency visits, hospital admissions, outpatient visits, medication prescribing/dispensing and mortality. We will investigate the potential indicators of long-COVID by performing a matched analysis between those with a positive reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 infection and two control groups: (1) individuals with at least one negative RT-PCR test and never tested positive; (2) the general population (everyone who did not test positive) of Scotland. Cluster analysis will then be used to determine the final definition of the outcome measure for long-COVID. We will then derive, internally and externally validate a prediction model to identify the epidemiological risk factors associated with long-COVID. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The EAVE II study has obtained approvals from the Research Ethics Committee (reference: 12/SS/0201), and the Public Benefit and Privacy Panel for Health and Social Care (reference: 1920-0279). Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. Understanding the predictors for long-COVID and identifying the patient groups at greatest risk of persisting symptoms will inform future treatments and preventative strategies for long-COVID.

Examining the effectiveness of telemonitoring with routinely acquired blood pressure data in primary care: challenges in the statistical analysis.

BACKGROUND: Scale-up BP was a quasi-experimental implementation study, following a successful randomised controlled trial of the roll-out of telemonitoring in primary care across Lothian, Scotland. Our primary objective was to assess the effect of telemonitoring on blood pressure (BP) control using routinely collected data. Telemonitored systolic and diastolic BP were compared with surgery BP measurements from patients not using telemonitoring (comparator patients). The statistical analysis and interpretation of findings was challenging due to the broad range of biases potentially influencing the results, including differences in the frequency of readings, 'white coat effect', end digit preference, and missing data. METHODS: Four different statistical methods were employed in order to minimise the impact of these biases on the comparison between telemonitoring and comparator groups. These methods were "standardisation with stratification", "standardisation with matching", "regression adjustment for propensity score" and "random coefficient modelling". The first three methods standardised the groups so that all participants provided exactly two measurements at baseline and 6-12 months follow-up prior to analysis. The fourth analysis used linear mixed modelling based on all available data. RESULTS: The standardisation with stratification analysis showed a significantly lower systolic BP in telemonitoring patients at 6-12 months follow-up (-4.06, 95% CI -6.30 to -1.82, p < 0.001) for patients with systolic BP below 135 at baseline. For the standardisation with matching and regression adjustment for propensity score analyses, systolic BP was significantly lower overall (- 5.96, 95% CI -8.36 to - 3.55 , p < 0.001) and (- 3.73, 95% CI- 5.34 to - 2.13, p < 0.001) respectively, even after assuming that - 5 of the difference was due to 'white coat effect'. For the random coefficient modelling, the improvement in systolic BP was estimated to be -3.37 (95% CI -5.41 to -1.33 , p < 0.001) after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The four analyses provide additional evidence for the effectiveness of telemonitoring in controlling BP in routine primary care. The random coefficient analysis is particularly recommended due to its ability to utilise all available data. However, adjusting for the complex array of biases was difficult. Researchers should appreciate the potential for bias in implementation studies and seek to acquire a detailed understanding of the study context in order to design appropriate analytical approaches.

Telemonitoring at scale for hypertension in primary care: An implementation study.

BACKGROUND: While evidence from randomised controlled trials shows that telemonitoring for hypertension is associated with improved blood pressure (BP) control, healthcare systems have been slow to implement it, partly because of inadequate integration with existing clinical practices and electronic records. Neither is it clear if trial findings will be replicated in routine clinical practice at scale. We aimed to explore the feasibility and impact of implementing an integrated telemonitoring system for hypertension into routine primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a quasi-experimental implementation study with embedded qualitative process evaluation set in primary care in Lothian, Scotland. We described the overall uptake of telemonitoring and uptake in a subgroup of representative practices, used routinely acquired data for a records-based controlled before-and-after study, and collected qualitative data from staff and patient interviews and practice observation. The main outcome measures were intervention uptake, change in BP, change in clinician appointment use, and participants' views on features that facilitated or impeded uptake of the intervention. Seventy-five primary care practices enrolled 3,200 patients with established hypertension. In an evaluation subgroup of 8 practices (905 patients of whom 427 [47%] were female and with median age of 64 years [IQR 56-70, range 22-89] and median Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2012 decile of 8 [IQR 6-10]), mean systolic BP fell by 6.55 mm Hg (SD 15.17), and mean diastolic BP by 4.23 mm Hg (SD 8.68). Compared with the previous year, participating patients made 19% fewer face-to-face appointments, compared with 11% fewer in patients with hypertension who were not telemonitoring. Total consultation time for participants fell by 15.4 minutes (SD 68.4), compared with 5.5 minutes (SD 84.4) in non-telemonitored patients. The convenience of remote collection of BP readings and integration of these readings into routine clinical care was crucial to the success of the implementation. Limitations include the fact that practices and patient participants were self-selected, and younger and more affluent than non-participating patients, and the possibility that regression to the mean may have contributed to the reduction in BP. Routinely acquired data are limited in terms of completeness and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Telemonitoring for hypertension can be implemented into routine primary care at scale with little impact on clinician workload and results in reductions in BP similar to those in large UK trials. Integrating the telemonitoring readings into routine data handling was crucial to the success of this initiative.

Are self-reported telemonitored blood pressure readings affected by end-digit preference: a prospective cohort study in Scotland.

OBJECTIVE: Simple forms of blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring require patients to text readings to central servers creating an opportunity for both entry error and manipulation. We wished to determine if there was an apparent preference for particular end digits and entries which were just below target BPs which might suggest evidence of data manipulation. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study SETTING: 37 socioeconomically diverse primary care practices from South East Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were recruited with hypertension to a telemonitoring service in which patients submitted home BP readings by manually transcribing the measurements into text messages for transmission ('patient-texted system'). These readings were compared with those from primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension using a system in which readings were automatically transmitted, eliminating the possibility of manipulation of values ('automatic-transmission system'). METHODS: A generalised estimating equations method was used to compare BP readings between the patient-texted and automatic-transmission systems, while taking into account clustering of readings within patients. RESULTS: A total of 44 150 BP readings were analysed on 1068 patients using the patient-texted system compared with 20 705 readings on 199 patients using the automatic-transmission system. Compared with the automatic-transmission data, the patient-texted data showed a significantly higher proportion of occurrences of both systolic and diastolic BP having a zero end digit (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.6) although incidence was <2% of readings. Similarly, there was a preference for systolic 134 and diastolic 84 (the threshold for alerts was 135/85) (134 systolic BP OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.8; 84 diastolic BP OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.9). CONCLUSION: End-digit preference for zero numbers and specific-value preference for readings just below the alert threshold exist among patients in self-reporting their BP using telemonitoring. However, the proportion of readings affected is small and unlikely to be clinically important. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN72614272; Post-results.

Developing and testing search strategies to identify patients with active seasonal allergic rhinitis in general practice.

AIM: We sought to assess the accuracy of different search terms to identify individuals with active seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) in general practice. METHODS: A reference search strategy was developed to identify patients with active SAR. This was applied through inspection of electronic health records of patients aged 15-45 years in a 10% random sample of a general practice database. Searches used Read codes and medication relating to SAR. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: Using the reference search strategy, 54/1092 (4.9%) of 15-45 year-old patients had current SAR. Searching for drugs used in nasal allergy had the highest sensitivity (85%) and good specificity (86%). Searching for a recorded history of SAR (H170) in the last two years was more specific (100%) but this approach only had limited sensitivity (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Electronic searches can be used to identify patients with current SAR, but the accuracy varies widely. Larger numbers of sufferers can be identified using broader search parameters, but with increasing numbers of false positives. In contrast, more focused search strategies give a smaller yield needing less cleaning of data to identify true positives, but there is an associated increase in the number of false negatives.

Sex inequalities in access to care for patients with diabetes in primary care: questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: Health experiences differ between men and women. The health services have focused their attention on gynaecological health problems in women, however women with non-gynaecological health problems could be unintentionally neglected. Given the increased prevalence of diabetes, the healthcare needs and experiences of women with diabetes are increasing. AIM: To determine the extent of sex inequalities in access to care for diabetes in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional population-based questionnaire study. SETTING: Twenty-three general practices spread through 23 different primary care trusts in the former Trent Region, UK. METHOD: The study consisted of a random sample of 1,673 patients with diabetes. Outcomes measured were odds ratios adjusted for age for measures of physical access to the GP's surgery; ease of obtaining appointments; access to primary care professionals; levels of routine diabetes care received; barriers to physical activity, problems eating and psychological distress as measured by the 18 score Diabetes Health Profile. RESULTS: Women were less likely than men to report that they had talked to their GP or practice nurse about their diabetes in the previous 12 months and were less likely to report that they were able to book routine appointments at convenient times. Almost 40% of all patients with diabetes reported difficulty in visiting the GP's surgery for their diabetes care, and women were more likely to report difficulties in visiting the surgery than men. Women were more likely than men to be afraid to go out alone (7.9% versus 3.6%) and more likely to be housebound (6.8% versus 2.4%). Women had significantly higher scores for eating problems and barriers to physical activity than men. CONCLUSIONS: Women report more problems with access to diabetes care than men. If the ambitions of the National Service Framework are to be met, then positive action needs to be taken to improve access to care for women with diabetes.

Does increased use of private health care reduce the demand for NHS care? A prospective survey of general practice referrals.

BACKGROUND: The use of the private sector for health care is increasing, but it is unclear whether this will reduce demand on the NHS. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between private and NHS outpatient referral rates accounting for their association with deprivation. METHODS: This is a prospective survey of general practitioner referrals to private and NHS consultant-led services between 1 January and 31 December 2001 from 10 general practices in the Trent Focus Collaborative Research Network, United Kingdom. Patient referrals were aggregated to give private and NHS referral rates for each electoral ward in each practice. RESULTS: Of 17,137 referrals, 90.4 percent (15,495) were to the NHS and 9.6 percent (1642) to the private sector. Private referral rates were lower in patients from the most deprived fifth of wards compared with the least deprived fifth (rate ratio 0.25, 95 percent CI 0.15 to 0.41, p < 0.001), whereas NHS referral rates were slightly higher in patients in the most deprived fifth of wards (rate ratio 1.18, 95 percent CI 0.98 to 1.42, p = 0.08) both after age standardisation and adjustment for practice. The NHS referral rate was significantly higher (rate ratio 1.40, 95 percent CI 1.15 to 1.71, p = 0.001) in wards with private referral rates in the top fifth compared with the bottom fifth after adjustment for deprivation and practice. CONCLUSIONS: Increased private health care activity does not reduce the demand for NHS care: NHS and private referral rates were positively associated with each other after adjusting for age, deprivation and practice.

Explaining variations in reported diabetes prevalence in general practice: how much variation is explained by differences between practice populations?

There are large variations in reported diabetes prevalence within United Kingdom (UK) populations. Linear regression was used to investigate whether population characteristics could explain the variation in prevalence between 19 practices with relatively complete diagnostic recording. Population obesity and South Asian ethnicity largely explained observed variation in prevalence (adjusted R2 = 0.80). When adjusted for obesity and ethnicity, the deprivation score was no longer a predictor of diabetes prevalence. If true variation in prevalence between practices is largely predicted by population ethnicity and obesity, these population characteristics could be used to predict expected prevalence and to assess the completeness of practice registers.

The electronic patient record in primary care--regression or progression? A cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether paperless medical records contained less information than paper based medical records and whether that information was harder to retrieve. DESIGN: Cross sectional study with review of medical records and interviews with general practitioners. SETTING: 25 general practices in Trent region. PARTICIPANTS: 53 British general practitioners (25 using paperless records and 28 using paper based records) who each provided records of 10 consultations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Content of a sample of records and doctor recall of consultations for which paperless or paper based records had been made. RESULTS: Compared with paper based records, more paperless records were fully understandable (89.2% v 69.9%, P=0.0001) and fully legible (100% v 64.3%, P < 0.0001). Paperless records were significantly more likely to have at least one diagnosis recorded (48.2% v 33.2%, P=0.05), to record that advice had been given (23.7% vs 10.7%, P=0.017), and, when a referral had been made, were more likely to contain details of the specialty (77.4% v 59.5%, P=0.03). When a prescription had been issued, paperless records were more likely to specify the drug dose (86.6% v 66.2%, P=0.005). Paperless records contained significantly more words, abbreviations, and symbols (P < 0.01 for all). At doctor interview, there was no difference between the groups for the proportion of patients or consultations that could be recalled. Doctors using paperless records were able to recall more advice given to patients (38.6% v 26.8%, P=0.03). CONCLUSION: We found no evidence to support our hypotheses that paperless records would be truncated and contain more local abbreviations; and that the absence of writing would decrease subsequent recall. Conversely we found that the paperless records compared favourably with manual records.

Married couples' risk of same disease: cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether people whose marital partners have depression, diabetes, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, hyperlipidaemia, peptic ulcer disease, or asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are at increased risk of the same disease. DESIGN: Cross sectional study. SETTING: 10 practices from the Trent Focus Collaborative Research Practice Network. PARTICIPANTS: 8386 married couples (16 772 individuals) from a population of 29 014 participants aged 30-74 years. OUTCOMES: Risk of disease in participants whose marital partner had that disease compared with those whose partner did not. RESULTS: After both partners' age, smoking, and obesity and which general practice they attend were adjusted for, participants whose marital partner had asthma, depression, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, and peptic ulcer disease were at increased risk of having the same disease. The adjusted odds ratios were 1.69 (95% confidence interval 1.43 to 2.98) for asthma, 2.08 (1.71 to 2.54) for depression, 1.32 (1.04 to 1.67) for hypertension, 1.44 (1.19 to 1.75) for hyperlipidaemia, and 2.01 (1.48 to 2.73) for peptic ulcer disease. CONCLUSION: Partners of people with specific diseases are at increased risk of the disease themselves-at least 70% increased risk for asthma, depression, and peptic ulcer disease. This implicates shared environmental causes in some diseases in addition to any genetic or distant exposure or shared behaviours with respect to seeking health care.

A comparison of research general practices and their patients with other practices--a cross-sectional survey in Trent.

BACKGROUND: When interpreting results of studies undertaken by research networks we need to know how representative volunteer practices and their registered patients are of the total population of practices and patients in their locality. AIM: To compare the following in research and non-research general practices in one region: practice and population demography, morbidity and mortality, selected performance indicators, and health outcomes. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Sixty-six Trent Focus Collaborative Research Network general practices and 749 other general practices in Trent, United Kingdom. METHOD: Practice characteristics and GP contract data were obtained from the NHS Executive, Quarry House, Leeds. The Trent Regional NHS Hospital Admission Database was searched to identify all relevant admissions to hospital from all practices between 1 April 1993 and 31 March 1997. Ward-linked data on cancer were obtained from the Trent Cancer Registry. RESULTS: Of the 815 general practices in Trent Region in the study period, 66 (8%) were in the Trent Focus network. They were more likely to be involved in training GPs and to have a female partner. They tended to be larger, with fewer single-handed doctors and younger GPs. Network practices prescribed a higher proportion of generics (median % prescribed/practice = 70%, versus 51%, Mann-Whitney U = 1615, P<0.0001). There were no clinically important differences between hospital admission rates between the two groups or waiting times for surgical procedures. There was no difference in the incidence of cancer and standardised mortality ratios related to the electoral wards of the GP surgery. CONCLUSION: Although there were differences in practice structure and some aspects of performance, we found no important differences in the demography of registered patients, nor in morbidity, mortality, or access to or use of secondary care.