Barriers and facilitators of self-management of diabetes amongst people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The number of people living with diabetes is rising worldwide and a higher prevalence of diabetes has been linked to those experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Self-management strategies are vital and known to reduce the risks of long-term complications amongst people living with diabetes. Lack of knowledge about self-care activity required to manage diabetes is a key barrier to successful self-management. Self-management interventions can be less effective in socioeconomically deprived populations which can increase the risk of exacerbating health inequalities. The purpose of this review is to identify and synthesise qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators of self-management of diabetes amongst people who are socioeconomically disadvantaged. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO and CINAHL Plus were searched for qualitative studies concerning self-management of multiple long-term conditions amongst socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Relevant papers which focused on diabetes were identified. Data were coded and thematically synthesised using NVivo. FINDINGS: From the search results, 79 qualitative studies were identified after full-text screening and 26 studies were included in the final thematic analysis. Two overarching analytical themes were identified alongside a set of subthemes: (1) Socioeconomic barriers to diabetes self-management; healthcare costs, financial costs of healthy eating, cultural influences, living in areas of deprivation, competing priorities and time constraints, health literacy, (2) facilitators of diabetes self-management; lifestyle and having goals, support from healthcare providers, informal support. DISCUSSION: Self-management of diabetes is challenging for people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation due to barriers associated with living in areas of deprivation and financial barriers surrounding healthcare, medication and healthy food. Support from healthcare providers can facilitate self-management, and it is important that people with diabetes have access to interventions that are designed to be inclusive from a cultural perspective as well as affordable. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A patient advisory group contributed to the research questions and interpretation of the qualitative findings by reflecting on the themes developed.

A qualitative exploration of the barriers and facilitators to self-managing multiple long-term conditions amongst people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation.

BACKGROUND: Globally, it is estimated that one in three adults live with two or more long-term conditions (multiple long-term conditions, MLTCs), that require self-management. People who experience socioeconomic deprivation face significant health inequalities due to a range of interrelated characteristics that lead to a lack of resources and opportunities. Previous research with underserved populations indicate low levels of trust towards primary care providers and potential barriers for developing patient-healthcare professional relationships. The purpose of this paper is to explore the barriers and facilitators to self-managing MLTCs, amongst people who experience socioeconomic deprivation. METHODS: Semistructured one-to-one interviews with adults (n = 28) living in London and Sheffield, United Kingdom with MLTCs who are experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Participants were recruited through general practices, community channels and social media. Data were analysed in NVivo using reflexive thematic analysis methods. FINDINGS: Four analytical themes were developed: (1) challenges in accessing healthcare services, financial assistance, and cultural awareness; (2) empowerment and disempowerment through technology, including digital exclusion, and use of technology; (3) impact and causes of exclusion on self-management, including social isolation, area-based and economic exclusion, and health-related stigma and (4) adapting self-management strategies, including cost-effective, and culturally/lifestyle appropriate strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Future health interventions and services need to be developed with consideration of the combined complexities of managing MLTCs while experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Increased awareness in practitioners and commissioners of the complexities surrounding the lives of people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation, and the need for targeted strategies to promote self-management of MLTCs are of great importa. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A patient advisory group contributed to all stages of the study, including providing important feedback on study documents (topic guides and recruitment materials), as well as providing critical insights surrounding the interpretation of interview data.

Health literacy and gout characteristics in a primary care cohort.

Objectives: To examine the cross-sectional association between health literacy and gout characteristics. Methods: In a primary care cohort of adults living with gout, the prevalence of poor health literacy was defined using the Single-Item Literacy Screener (SILS). Multiple logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the cross-sectional associations between health literacy and individual gout characteristics (frequency of flares, age at gout onset, history of oligo-/polyarticular flares, allopurinol use, allopurinol dose and serum urate level) with 95% CIs and adjustment for age, sex, deprivation and further education. Results: Of 551 participants [mean age 54.4 years (s.d. 11.2), 498 (90.4%) male], 163 (30.1%) reported two or more flares in the previous 12 months. Fifty-one (9.4%) had poor health literacy. Poor health literacy was associated with having two or more flares in the preceding 12 months [adjusted OR 4.10 (95% CI 2.04, 8.19)] and a history of oligo-/polyarticular flares [OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.06, 3.55)]. No associations were identified between health literacy and age at gout onset [OR 0.99 (95% CI 0.96, 1.01)], allopurinol use [OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.46, 1.65)] or dose [OR 1.00 OR (95% CI 1.00, 1.00)] or serum urate [most recent serum urate OR 1.0 (95% CI 1.00, 1.00)]. Conclusions: Frequent flares and a history of oligo-/polyarticular flares were associated with poor health literacy. Since health literacy is an important determinant of health outcomes, it is important to consider health literacy when providing information and education to people with gout.

Effectiveness of self-management interventions for long-term conditions in people experiencing socio-economic deprivation in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Long-term conditions (LTCs) are prevalent in socio-economically deprived populations. Self-management interventions can improve health outcomes, but socio-economically deprived groups have lower participation in them, with potentially lower effectiveness. This review explored whether self-management interventions delivered to people experiencing socio-economic deprivation improve outcomes. METHODS: We searched databases up to November 2022 for randomized trials. We screened, extracted data and assessed the quality of these studies using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2). We narratively synthesized all studies and performed a meta-analysis on eligible articles. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE for articles included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The 51 studies included in this review had mixed findings. For the diabetes meta-analysis, there was a statistically significant pooled reduction in haemoglobin A1c (-0.29%). We had moderate certainty in the evidence. Thirty-eight of the study interventions had specific tailoring for socio-economically deprived populations, including adaptions for low literacy and financial incentives. Each intervention had an average of four self-management components. CONCLUSIONS: Self-management interventions for socio-economically deprived populations show promise, though more evidence is needed. Our review suggests that the number of self-management components may not be important. With the increasing emphasis on self-management, to avoid exacerbating health inequalities, interventions should include tailoring for socio-economically deprived individuals.

Supported self-management for all with musculoskeletal pain: an inclusive approach to intervention development: the EASIER study.

BACKGROUND: Supported self-management interventions for patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions may not adequately support those with limited health literacy, leading to inequalities in care and variable outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a model for inclusive supported self-management intervention(s) for MSK pain that take account of health literacy. METHODS: A mixed methods study with four work-packages was conducted: work package 1: secondary analysis of existing data to identify potential targets for intervention; work package 2: evidence synthesis to assess effective components of self-management interventions taking into account health literacy; work package 3: views of community members and healthcare professionals (HCPs) on essential components; work package 4: triangulation of findings and an online modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on key components of a logic model. FINDINGS: Findings identified targets for intervention as self-efficacy, illness perceptions, and pain catastrophizing. A range of intervention components were identified (e.g. information in diverse formats offered at specific times, action planning and visual demonstrations of exercise). Support should be multi-professional using a combination of delivery modes (e.g. remote, face-to-face). CONCLUSIONS: This research has developed a patient-centred model for a multi-disciplinary, multi-modal approach to supported self-management for patients with MSK pain and varying levels of health literacy. The model is evidence-based and acceptable to both patients and HCPs, with potential for significant impact on the management of MSK pain and for improving patient health outcomes. Further work is needed to establish its efficacy.

Self-management of multiple long-term conditions: A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators amongst people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation.

BACKGROUND: Multiple long-term conditions are rising across all groups but people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation are found to have a higher prevalence. Self-management strategies are a vital part of healthcare for people with long-term conditions and effective strategies are associated with improved health outcomes in a variety of health conditions. The management of multiple long-term conditions are, however, less effective in people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation, leaving them more at risk of health inequalities. The purpose of this review is to identify and synthesise qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators of self-management on long-term conditions in those experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO and CINAHL Plus were searched for qualitative studies concerning self-management of multiple long-term conditions among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Data were coded and thematically synthesised using NVivo. FINDINGS: From the search results, 79 relevant qualitative studies were identified after the full text screening and 11 studies were included in the final thematic synthesis. Three overarching analytical themes were identified alongside a set of sub-themes: (1) Challenges of having multiple long-term conditions; prioritisation of conditions, impact of multiple long-term conditions on mental health and wellbeing, polypharmacy, (2) Socioeconomic barriers to self-management; financial, health literacy, compounding impact of multiple long-term conditions and socioeconomic deprivation, (3) Facilitators of self-management in people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation; maintaining independence, 'meaningful' activities, support networks. DISCUSSION: Self-management of multiple long-term conditions is challenging for people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation due to barriers around financial constraints and health literacy, which can lead to poor mental health and wellbeing. To support targeted interventions, greater awareness is needed among health professionals of the barriers/challenges of self-management among these populations.

How parents share and limit their child's access to information about COVID-19: A mixed methods online survey study.

This study aimed to understand the role that parents play in sharing or limiting their child's access to information about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A subset of data from an international mixed methods online survey study was analysed to elucidate the findings from Brazil. An online survey, conducted between April and June 2020, gathered closed and open text views from parents of children aged 7-12 years old. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative open text data were analysed using the three stages of the Bardin content analysis framework: pre-analysis (data organisation and initial full-content reading); exploration of the material (thematic coding to identify major motifs and develop thematic categories) and interpretation (treating the data as significant and valid). The sample consisted of 112 (89%) mothers and 14 (11%) fathers. The analysis of the parents open text resulted in two categories: 'How parents share information with their children about COVID-19' and 'How parents limit information to their children about COVID-19'. Some parents reported adopting an honest and open approach on how they shared information with their children, whilst some parents chose to minimise their child's access to information about the pandemic over concerns of the mortality related to COVID-19.

Primary care in the world of integrated care systems: education and training for general practice.

Here, we discuss the required education and training for the emergent and evolving roles of GPs and other healthcare professionals within Integrated Care Systems (ICSs). We underscore the importance of collaborative skills for all medical specialties, and the need for interprofessional education and leadership development in undergraduate and postgraduate medical training. We also argue for a paradigm shift in medical education, away from traditional siloed approaches and toward comprehensive training that prepares practitioners to excel in integrated and multidisciplinary healthcare environments, within which expert generalists (GPs) and specialists collaborate in individual patient care and concurrently co-develop innovative system pathways for chronic medical conditions, including complexity and frailty. We highlight the need to align workforce development with evolving healthcare systems and the existing obstacles hindering this alignment.

Risk-based stratified primary care for common musculoskeletal pain presentations: qualitative findings from the STarT MSK cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The STarT MSK cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigated the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of risk-based stratified primary care versus usual care for patients with back, neck, shoulder, knee or multi-site pain. Trial quantitative results showed risk-based stratified care was not superior to usual care for patients' clinical outcomes, but the intervention led to some changes in GP clinical decision-making. This paper reports a linked qualitative study exploring how risk-based stratified care was perceived and used in the trial, from the perspectives of clinicians and patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 patients, and focus groups and interviews with 20 clinicians (GPs and physiotherapists) in the intervention arm of the trial. Data were analysed thematically and findings explored using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) and the COM-B model. MAIN FINDINGS: Risk-based stratified care (subgrouping and matching treatments) was found to have 'coherence' (i.e. made sense) to several clinicians and patients, in that it was well-integrated in practice, and supported clinical decision-making. However, for some GPs stratified care was less 'meaningful', as the risk-stratification tool did not fit with usual ways of consulting and added to already time-pressured consultations. GPs reported giving more patients written information/advice due to easier access to electronic information leaflets through the trial template and were motivated to refer patients to physiotherapy as they believed the trial resulted in faster physiotherapy access (although this was not the case). Patients and clinicians reported that risk-based stratified care influenced conversations in the consultation, prompting greater attention to psychosocial factors, and facilitating negotiation of treatment options. Physiotherapists saw benefits in receiving information about patients' risk subgroup on referral forms. CONCLUSION: These findings provide context for interpreting some of the trial outcomes, particularly in relation to changes in clinical decision-making when risk-based stratified care was used. Findings also indicate potential reasons for lack of GP engagement with risk-based stratified care. Positive outcomes were identified that were not captured in the quantitative data, specifically that risk-based stratified care positively influenced some GP-patient conversations and facilitated negotiation of treatment options. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15366334 (26/04/2016).

Risk-based stratified primary care for common musculoskeletal pain presentations (STarT MSK): a cluster-randomised, controlled trial.

Background: Risk-based stratified care shows clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness versus usual primary care for non-specific low back pain but is untested for other common musculoskeletal disorders. We aimed to test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care risk stratification (using Keele's STarT MSK Tool and risk-matched treatments) versus usual care for the five most common musculoskeletal presentations (back, neck, knee, shoulder, and multi-site pain). Methods: In this cluster-randomised, controlled trial in UK primary care with embedded qualitative and health economic studies we recruited patients from 24 general practices in the West Midlands region of England. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years or older whose general practitioner (GP) confirmed a consultation for a musculoskeletal presentation. General practices that consented to participate via a representative of the cluster were randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention or usual care, using stratified block randomisation. Researchers involved in data collection, outcome data entry, and statistical analysis were masked at both the cluster and individual participant level. Participating patients were told the study was examining GP treatment of common aches and pains and were not aware they were in a randomised trial. GPs in practices allocated to the intervention group were supported to deliver risk-based stratified care using a bespoke computer-based template, including the risk-stratification tool, and risk-matched treatment options for patients at low, medium, or high risk of poor disability or pain outcomes. There were 15 risk-matched treatment options. In the usual care group, patients with musculoskeletal pain consulting their GP received treatment as usual, typically including advice and education, medication, referral for investigations or tests, or referral to other services. The primary outcome was time-averaged pain intensity over 6 months. All analyses were done by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN15366334. Results: Between May 1, 2018, and April 30, 2019, 104 GPs from 24 practices (12 per study group) identified 2494 patients with musculoskeletal pain. 1211 (49%) participants consented to questionnaires (534 in the intervention group and 677 in the usual care group), with 1070 (88%) completing the follow-up questionnaire at 6 months. We found no significant difference in time-averaged pain intensity (mean(SD) mean 4·4 [SD 2·3] in the intervention group vs 4·6 [2·5] in the control group; adjusted mean difference -0·16, 95% CI -0·65 to 0·34) or in standardised function score (mean -0·06 [SD 0·94] in the intervention group vs 0·05 [1·04]; adjusted mean difference -0·07, 95% CI -0·22 to 0·08). No serious adverse events or adverse events were reported. Risk stratification received positive patient and clinician feedback. Interpretation: Risk stratification for patients in primary care with common musculoskeletal presentations did not lead to significant improvements in pain or function, although some aspects of GP decision making were affected, and GP and patients had positive experiences. The costs of risk-based stratified care were similar to usual care, and such a strategy only offers marginal changes in cost-effectiveness outcomes. The clinical implications from this trial are largely inconclusive. Funding: National Institute for Health Research.

Chronic widespread pain in children and adolescents presenting in primary care: prevalence and associated risk factors.

ABSTRACT: A significant proportion of children/adolescents report chronic widespread pain (CWP), but little is known about clinically relevant CWP or what factors lead to onset in this population. Objectives were to report the primary care consultation prevalence of CWP and investigate risk factors associated with onset. A validated algorithm for identifying CWP status from primary care electronic healthcare records was applied to a child or adolescent population (aged 8-18 years). The algorithm records patients who have recurrent pain consultations (axial skeleton and upper or lower limbs) or those with a nonspecific generalised pain disorder (eg, fibromyalgia). Prevalence was described, and a nested case-control study was established to identify risk factors associated with CWP onset using logistic regression producing odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Two hundred seventy-one children or adolescents were identified with CWP, resulting in a 5-year consultation prevalence of 3.19%. Risk factors significantly associated with CWP onset were as follows: mental health (eg, anxiety/neurosis consultations), neurological (eg, headaches), genitourinary (eg, cystitis), gastrointestinal (eg, abdominal pain), and throat problems (eg, sore throats). Children or adolescents with 1 or 2 risk factors (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.6-2.9) or 3 or more risk factors (OR 9.17, 95% CI 5.9-14.3) were at significantly increased odds of CWP onset compared with those with none. Findings show a significant proportion of the child or adolescent primary care population has CWP. Most risk factors involved pain-related conditions, suggesting potential pathways of pain development. Further work is now needed to better understand the development of CWP in children and adolescents.

How children in Sweden accessed and perceived information during the first phase of the Covid-19 pandemic.

AIM: To describe how children in Sweden accessed and perceived information about SARS-CoV2 and Covid-19 during the first phase of the outbreak. METHODS: This study is a substudy of an international cross-sectional online mixed methods survey examining elements of children's health literacy in relation to Covid-19. The survey included multiple-choice questions, open-ended questions and drawings and collected information from 50 Swedish children (7-12 years). Data were analysed concurrently on a descriptive level using statistics and content analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data, including the drawings, were considered equally important and resulted in six categories, illuminating how children accessed and perceived information about the pandemic. RESULTS: The survey showed that children accessed information mainly from school but also from TV. They preferred information from reliable sources. Children reported the information they accessed as easy to understand and it prompted them to ask new questions. They reported they knew a lot about the pandemic, for example, the potential danger to themselves and others and how to act to protect themselves and others. They perceived the pandemic as an intrusion on their lives. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that Swedish children between 7 and 12 years old were well informed about SARS-CoV2 and Covid-19 during the first phase of the pandemic. School was shown to be an important source of information. The children could explain how to act to protect themselves and others from becoming infected by the virus.

Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments: a protocol for Development of a consultation intervention (iFraP-D).

INTRODUCTION: Prevention of fragility fractures, a source of significant economic and personal burden, is hindered by poor uptake of fracture prevention medicines. Enhancing communication of scientific evidence and elicitation of patient medication-related beliefs has the potential to increase patient commitment to treatment. The Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) programme aims to develop and evaluate a theoretically informed, complex intervention consisting of a computerised web-based decision support tool, training package and information resources, to facilitate informed decision-making about fracture prevention treatment, with a long-term aim of improving informed treatment adherence. This protocol focuses on the iFraP Development (iFraP-D) work. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The approach to iFraP-D is informed by the Medical Research Council complex intervention development and evaluation framework and the three-step implementation of change model. The context for the study is UK fracture liaison services (FLS), which enact secondary fracture prevention. An evidence synthesis of clinical guidelines and Delphi exercise will be conducted to identify content for the intervention. Focus groups with patients, FLS clinicians and general practitioners and a usual care survey will facilitate understanding of current practice, and investigate barriers and facilitators to change. Design of the iFraP intervention will be informed by decision aid development standards and theories of implementation, behaviour change, acceptability and medicines adherence. The principles of co-design will underpin all elements of the study through a dedicated iFraP community of practice including key stakeholders and patient advisory groups. In-practice testing of the prototype intervention will inform revisions ready for further testing in a subsequent pilot and feasibility randomised trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from North West-Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (19/NW/0559). Dissemination and knowledge mobilisation will be facilitated through national bodies and networks, publications and presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: researchregistry5041.

Health literacy and health outcomes in patients with low back pain: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Health literacy has been associated with pain intensity and pain control. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding this association. In the field of low back pain research, inconsistent reporting of outcomes has been highlighted. To address this issue a Core Outcome Set has been developed. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this scoping review were: (1) The health literacy measures currently employed for low back pain and the aspects of health literacy they include. (2) The low back pain health outcomes included in such work. (3) The extent to which these health outcomes reflect the Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials in Non-Specific Low Back Pain. METHODS: The search included thirteen bibliographic databases, using medical subject heading terms for low back pain and health literacy, and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The eligibility criteria were defined by the Joanna Briggs Institute PCC mnemonic. A thematic framework approach was used for analysis. RESULTS: The search yielded ten relevant studies for inclusion, amongst which a total of nine health literacy measures and 50 health outcome measures were used. Most health literacy measures focused on functional health literacy, with few assessing communicative and critical health literacy. The health outcomes assessed by the included studies could be broadly categorised into: Pain, Disability, Behaviour, Knowledge and Beliefs, and Resource Utilisation. Most of these outcome measures studied (36 out of 50) did not directly reflect the Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials in Non-Specific Low Back Pain. CONCLUSIONS: To allow for comparison across findings and the development of a rigorous evidence base, future work should include the Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials in Non-Specific Low Back Pain. There is an urgent need to broaden the evidence-base to include regions where low back pain morbidity is high, but data is lacking. Such work demands the incorporation of comprehensive measures of health literacy that have both generic and culturally sensitive components.

Integrating clinician support with intervention design as part of a programme testing stratified care for musculoskeletal pain in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Stratified care involves subgrouping patients based on key characteristics, e.g. prognostic risk, and matching these subgroups to early treatment options. The STarT-MSK programme developed and tested a new stratified primary care intervention for patients with common musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in general practice. Stratified care involves changing General Practitioners' (GPs) behaviour, away from the current 'stepped' care approach to identifying early treatment options matched to patients' risk of persistent pain. Changing healthcare practice is challenging, and to aid the successful delivery of stratified care, education and support for GPs was required. This paper details the iterative development of a clinician support package throughout the lifespan of the programme, to support GPs in delivering the stratified care intervention. We argue that clinician support is a crucial aspect of the intervention itself, which is often overlooked. METHODS: Qualitative research with patients and GPs identified barriers and facilitators to the adoption of stratified care, which were mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Identified domains were 'translated' into an educational paradigm, and an initial version of the support package developed. This was further refined following a feasibility and pilot RCT, and a finalised support package was developed for the main RCT. RESULTS: The clinician support package comprised face-to-face sessions combining adult-learning principles with behaviour change theory in a multimethod approach, which included group discussion, simulated consultations, patient vignettes and model consultation videos. Structured support for GPs was crucial to facilitate fidelity and, ultimately, a successful trial. Clinician support is a two-way process- the study team can learn from and adapt to specific local factors and issues not previously identified. The support from senior clinicians was required to ensure 'buy in'. Monitoring of GP performance, provision of regular feedback and remedial support are important aspects of effective clinician support. CONCLUSION: Designing effective clinician support from the onset of trial intervention design, in an evidence-based, theory-informed manner, is crucial to encourage active engagement and intervention fidelity within the trial, enabling the delivery of a robust and reliable proof-of-principle trial. We offer practical recommendations for future general practice interventions.

Refinement and validation of a tool for stratifying patients with musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: Patients with musculoskeletal pain in different body sites share common prognostic factors. Using prognosis to stratify and treatment match can be clinically and cost-effective. We aimed to refine and validate the Keele STarT MSK Tool for prognostic stratification of musculoskeletal pain patients. METHODS: Tool refinement and validity was tested in a prospective cohort study, and external validity examined in a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT). Study population comprised 2,414 adults visiting U.K. primary care with back, neck, knee, shoulder or multisite pain returning postal questionnaires (cohort: 1,890 [40% response]; trial: 524). Cohort baseline questionnaires included a draft tool plus refinement items. Trial baseline questionnaires included the Keele STarT MSK Tool. Physical health (SF-36 Physical Component Score [PCS]) and pain intensity were assessed at 2- and 6-month cohort follow-up; pain intensity was measured at 6-month trial follow-up. RESULTS: The tool was refined by replacing (3), adding (3) and removing (2) items, resulting in a 10-item tool. Model fit (R2 ) was 0.422 and 0.430 and discrimination (c statistic) 0.839 and 0.822 for predicting 6-month cohort PCS and pain (respectively). The tool classified 24.9% of cohort participants at low, 41.7% medium and 33.4% high risk, clearly discriminating between subgroups. The tool demonstrated model fit of 0.224 and discrimination 0.73 in trial participants. Multiple imputation confirmed robustness of findings. CONCLUSIONS: The Keele STarT MSK Tool demonstrates good validity and acceptable predictive performance and clearly identifies groups of musculoskeletal pain patients with different characteristics and prognosis. Using prognostic information for stratification and treatment matching may be clinically/cost-effective. SIGNIFICANCE: The paper presents the first musculoskeletal pain prognostic stratification tool specifically for use among all primary care patients with the five most common musculoskeletal pain presentations (back, neck, knee, shoulder or multisite pain). The Keele STarT MSK Tool identifies groups of musculoskeletal pain patients with clearly different characteristics and prognosis. Using this tool for stratification and treatment matching may be clinically and cost-effective.

Survey of young people in one region of the UK on accessing COVID-19 information (SOCIAL).

COVID-19 has significantly impacted young people's lives yet little is known about the COVID-19 related sources of information they access. We performed a cross-sectional survey of pupils (11-16 years) in North Staffordshire, UK. 408 (23%) pupils responded to an online survey emailed to them by their school. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the data. Social media, accessed by 68%, played a significant role in the provision of information, despite it not being considered trustworthy. 89% felt that COVID-19 had negatively affected their education. Gaps in the provision of information on COVID-19 have been identified.

'I'm just ringing to get a repeat prescription for my contraceptive pill, doctor': developing authentic simulated telephone consultations for medical students.

Within normal surgery hours telephone consultations have been previously shown to make up between 10-20% of patient contacts with General Practitioners (GPs) and to comprise a large proportion of a GP's daily workload. Although obviously very useful, such doctor-patient interactions can be fraught with risk. The General Medical Council (GMC) requires that newly graduated doctors should be adaptable to the challenge of delivering treatment advice and management remotely. Yet, currently, there is limited specific training in telephone consultation skills in both undergraduate and postgraduate curricula.Authentic and properly supervised exposure of medical students to GP telephone consultations can be difficult to achieve in clinical placements. Therefore, we have developed emergency telephone consultations within our primary care Safe and Effective Clinical Outcomes (SECO) clinics which are simulated GP surgeries organised for our final year students. We have expanded the range of patients presenting in these clinics by including trained, simulated patients requesting an urgent telephone consultation with a GP. In doing so we aim to enhance our student's skills and confidence in conducting telephone consultations.This teaching exchange paper aims to describe the ideas behind the construction of simulated patient telephone scripts together with the difficulties and successes encountered in introducing telephone consultations into our GP SECO clinic. We hope these ideas and processes will stimulate and enable others to help students prepare for this challenging area of clinical medicine made increasingly significant by the Covid-19 pandemic.