Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care. AIM: To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices. METHOD: Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD. CONCLUSION: The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Facilitators and barriers to community pharmacy PrEP delivery: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective medication to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV. PrEP is available free of charge in the UK from sexual health clinics. Expanding PrEP delivery to community pharmacies holds promise and aligns with UK government goals to eliminate new cases of HIV by 2030. The aim of this scoping review was to describe the existing evidence about the barriers to and facilitators of community pharmacy oral PrEP delivery, for pharmacists and pharmacy clients, as aligned with the Capacity Opportunity, Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) Model. METHODS: Five bibliographic and five review databases were searched from inception to August 2023. Literature of any study design was included if it discussed barriers and facilitators of community pharmacy PrEP delivery. Trial registrations, protocols and news articles were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 649 records were identified, 73 full texts were reviewed and 56 met the inclusion criteria, predominantly from high-income/westernized settings. Most of the included literature was original research (55%), from the United States (77%) conducted during or after the year 2020 (63%). Barriers to PrEP delivery for pharmacists included lack of knowledge, training and skills (capability), not having the necessary facilities (opportunity), concern about the costs of PrEP and believing that PrEP use could lead to risk behaviours and sexually transmitted infections (motivation). Facilitators included staff training (capability), time, the right facilities (opportunity), believing PrEP could be a source of profit and could reduce new HIV acquisitions (motivation). For clients, barriers included a lack of PrEP awareness (capability), pharmacy facilities (opportunity) and not considering pharmacists as healthcare providers (motivation). Facilitators included awareness of PrEP and pharmacist's training to deliver it (capability), the accessibility of pharmacies (opportunity) and having an interest in PrEP (motivation). DISCUSSION: To effectively enhance oral PrEP delivery in UK community pharmacies, the identified barriers and facilitators should be explored for UK relevance, addressed and leveraged at the pharmacy team, client and care pathway level. CONCLUSIONS: By comprehensively considering all aspects of the COM-B framework, community pharmacies could become crucial providers in expanding PrEP accessibility, contributing significantly to HIV prevention efforts.

Acceptability of digital vending machines to access STI and HIV tests in two UK cities.

OBJECTIVES: Prompt HIV and STI diagnosis and treatment is a public health priority and relies on accessible testing. Technology-based approaches to distribute test kits have the potential to increase access to testing. We evaluated the acceptability and uptake of vending machines in publicly available settings in Brighton and Hove (BH) and Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire (BNSSG), to distribute HIV rapid self-test and STI self-sample kits. METHODS: Seven machines were installed in BH and four in BNSSG. User characteristics, proportion of kits returned and test results, taken from the machine database and clinic records, combined with online questionnaires completed by self-recruited users and analysed using Stata and SPSS. RESULTS: 2536 kits were dispensed over 12 months (April 2022 to March 2023). The STI self-sample kits were most popular (74% of vends). 78% of kits dispensed were among users aged 16-35 years and 56% identified as male. 68% and 59% of users had either not tested in the last 12 months or never tested for HIV and STIs, respectively. 51% of STI kits were returned via post, lower than the local online service (65%). 208 users completed questionnaires. Convenience, desire for instant access and increased confidentiality were the most common reasons for using machines. 92% of respondents thought the machines were user-friendly and 97% would recommend the service. Concerns about safety and privacy while using the machine were reported by 42% and 66% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that vending machines are an acceptable and effective means of accessing infrequent or never testers in the general population and can act as a horizontal intervention to tackle HIV and STIs. Research is needed to understand optimal machine locations to assure privacy and safety along with the long-term impact on sexual health services.

Implementation of CHIldren with acute COugh (CHICO) intervention to improve antibiotics management: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are common and can lead to unnecessary antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance. The CHIldren with COugh (CHICO) intervention incorporates a clinician focussed algorithm (STARWAVe) to predict future hospitalisation risk, elicitation of carer concerns, and a carer-focussed personalised leaflet recording treatment decisions and safety netting information. AIM: To examine the intervention implementation by clinicians. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative study with primary care clinicians in England taking part in the CHICO randomised controlled trial. METHOD: Interviews explored the intervention's acceptability and use. Clinicians from a range of practices with high and low antibiotic dispensing rates were recruited. Normalisation Process Theory underpinned data collection and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most clinicians liked the intervention as it was quick and easy to use, it helped elicit carer concerns and reassured clinicians and carers of the appropriateness of treatment decisions. However, clinicians used it as a supportive aid for treatment decisions rather than a tool for behaviour change. The advice leaflet helped explain treatment decisions and support self-care. The intervention did not always align with clinicians' usual processes which could affect usage. Increased familiarisation with the algorithm led to reduced intervention use, which was further reduced due to changes to practice and remote consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Clinicians found the CHICO intervention useful to support decision-making around antibiotic prescribing and helped discussions with carers about concerns and treatment decisions. The intervention may need to be adapted to align more with clinicians' consultation flow and remote consultations.

Implementing Germ Defence digital behaviour change intervention via all primary care practices in England to reduce respiratory infections during the COVID-19 pandemic: an efficient cluster randomised controlled trial using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: Germ Defence ( www.germdefence.org ) is an evidence-based interactive website that promotes behaviour change for infection control within households. To maximise the potential of Germ Defence to effectively reduce the spread of COVID-19, the intervention needed to be implemented at scale rapidly. METHODS: With NHS England approval, we conducted an efficient two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effectiveness of randomising implementation of Germ Defence via general practitioner (GP) practices across England, UK, compared with usual care to disseminate Germ Defence to patients. GP practices randomised to the intervention arm (n = 3292) were emailed and asked to disseminate Germ Defence to all adult patients via mobile phone text, email or social media. Usual care arm GP practices (n = 3287) maintained standard management for the 4-month trial period and then asked to share Germ Defence with their adult patients. The primary outcome was the rate of GP presentations for respiratory tract infections (RTI) per patient. Secondary outcomes comprised rates of acute RTIs, confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses and suspected COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 symptoms, gastrointestinal infection diagnoses, antibiotic usage and hospital admissions. The impact of the intervention on outcome rates was assessed using negative binomial regression modelling within the OpenSAFELY platform. The uptake of the intervention by GP practice and by patients was measured via website analytics. RESULTS: Germ Defence was used 310,731 times. The average website satisfaction score was 7.52 (0-10 not at all to very satisfied, N = 9933). There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of RTIs between intervention and control practices (rate ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70). This was similar to all other eight health outcomes. Patient engagement within intervention arm practices ranged from 0 to 48% of a practice list. CONCLUSIONS: While the RCT did not demonstrate a difference in health outcomes, we demonstrated that rapid large-scale implementation of a digital behavioural intervention is possible and can be evaluated with a novel efficient prospective RCT methodology analysing routinely collected patient data entirely within a trusted research environment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (14602359) on 12 August 2020.

Improving access to general practice for people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a realist review protocol (The Connection Study).

Introduction: Despite having high unmet health need, people with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD, including combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, poor mental health and domestic violence and abuse) have poor access to general practice. This realist review will examine the existing evidence on interventions or aspects of routine care in general practice that are likely to increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD. Methods and analysis: he aim of this review is to identify how these interventions or aspects of routine care increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD, in which contexts and for which patients. This review will involve a process comprising five sequential phases: (1) identifying established theories, (2) conducting an extensive search for proof, (3) selecting appropriate articles, (4) gathering and organising relevant data, and (5) utilising a realist analytical approach to synthesise evidence and make conclusions. Local implementation documents, in addition to published research studies, will be incorporated to enrich the analysis. We will collaborate with a stakeholder group consisting of people with lived experience of SMD and those who support them to advise us throughout. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required. Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and lay summaries and will be used to develop a complex intervention for improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023390495.

Mpox knowledge, behaviours and barriers to public health measures among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in the UK: a qualitative study to inform public health guidance and messaging.

BACKGROUND: The 2022-23 mpox epidemic is the first-time sustained community transmission had been reported in countries without epidemiological links to endemic areas. During that period, the outbreak almost exclusively affected sexual networks of gay, bisexual, or other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) and people living with HIV. In efforts to control transmission, multiple public health measures were implemented, including vaccination, contact tracing and isolation. This study examines knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of mpox among a sample of GBMSM during the 2022-23 outbreak in the UK, including facilitators for and barriers to the uptake of public health measures. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 44 GBMSM between May and December 2022. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Positive and negative comments pertaining to public health measures were collated in a modified version of a 'table of changes' to inform optimisations to public health messages and guidance. RESULTS: Most interviewees were well informed about mpox transmission mechanisms and were either willing to or currently adhering to public health measures, despite low perceptions of mpox severity. Measures that aligned with existing sexual health practices and norms were considered most acceptable. Connections to GBMSM networks and social media channels were found to increase exposure to sexual health information and norms influencing protective behaviours. Those excluded or marginalized from these networks found some measures challenging to perform or adhere to. Although social media was a key mode of information sharing, there were preferences for timely information from official sources to dispel exaggerated or misleading information. CONCLUSIONS: There are differential needs, preferences, and experiences of GBMSM that limit the acceptability of some mitigation and prevention measures. Future public health interventions and campaigns should be co-designed in consultation with key groups and communities to ensure greater acceptability and credibility in different contexts and communities.

The Agile Co-production and Evaluation framework for developing public health interventions, messaging and guidance.

A lesson identified from the COVID-19 pandemic is that we need to extend existing best practice for intervention development. In particular, we need to integrate (a) state-of-the-art methods of rapidly coproducing public health interventions and messaging to support all population groups to protect themselves and their communities with (b) methods of rapidly evaluating co-produced interventions to determine which are acceptable and effective. This paper describes the Agile Co-production and Evaluation (ACE) framework, which is intended to provide a focus for investigating new ways of rapidly developing effective interventions and messaging by combining co-production methods with large-scale testing and/or real-world evaluation. We briefly review some of the participatory, qualitative and quantitative methods that could potentially be combined and propose a research agenda to further develop, refine and validate packages of methods in a variety of public health contexts to determine which combinations are feasible, cost-effective and achieve the goal of improving health and reducing health inequalities.

Trauma-informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs.

INTRODUCTION: Health, social care, charitable and justice sectors are increasingly recognising the need for trauma-informed services that seek to recognise signs of trauma, provide appropriate paths to recovery and ensure that services enable people rather than retraumatise. Foundational to the development of trauma-informed services is collaboration with people with lived experience of trauma. Co-production principles may provide a useful framework for this collaboration, due to their emphasis on lived experience, and intent to address power imbalances and promote equity. This article aims to examine trauma-informed and co-production principles to consider the extent to which they overlap and explore how to tailor co-production approaches to support people who have experienced trauma. METHODS: Bridging Gaps is a collaboration between women who have experienced complex trauma, a charity that supports them, primary care clinicians and health researchers to improve access to trauma-informed primary care. Using co-production principles, we aimed to ensure that women who have experienced trauma were key decision-makers throughout the project. Through reflective notes (n = 19), observations of meetings (n = 3), interviews with people involved in the project (n = 9) and reflective group discussions on our experiences, we share learning, successes and failures. Data analysis followed a framework approach, using trauma-informed principles. RESULTS: Co-production processes can require adaptation when working with people who have experienced trauma. We emphasise the need for close partnership working, flexibility and transparency around power dynamics, paying particular attention to aspects of power that are less readily visible. Sharing experiences can retrigger trauma. People conducting co-production work need to understand trauma and how this may impact upon an individual's sense of psychological safety. Long-term funding is vital to enable projects to have enough time for the establishment of trust and delivery of tangible results. CONCLUSIONS: Co-production principles are highly suitable when developing trauma-informed services. Greater consideration needs to be given as to whether and how people share lived experiences, the need for safe spaces, honesty and humility, difficult dynamics between empowerment and safety and whether and when blurring boundaries may be helpful. Our findings have applicability to policy-making, funding and service provision to enable co-production processes to become more trauma-informed. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Bridging Gaps was started by a group of women who have experienced complex trauma, including addiction, homelessness, mental health problems, sexual exploitation, domestic and sexual violence and poverty, with a general practitioner (GP) who provides healthcare to this population, alongside a support worker from the charity One25, a charity that supports some of the most marginalised women in Bristol to heal and thrive. More GPs and healthcare researchers joined the group and they have been meeting fortnightly for a period of 4 years with the aim of improving access to trauma-informed primary care. The group uses co-production principles to work together, and we aim to ensure that women who have experienced trauma are key decision-makers throughout our work together. This article is a summary of our learning, informed by discussion, observations and interviews with members of the group.

Advertisement of unhealthy commodities in Bristol and South Gloucestershire and rationale for a new advertisement policy.

BACKGROUND: Bristol City Council introduced a new advertisement policy in 2021/2022 which included prohibiting the advertising of unhealthy food and drink (HFSS), alcohol, gambling and payday loans across council-owned advertising spaces. This mixed methods study is part of the BEAR study, and aimed to explore the rationale and the barriers and facilitators to implementing the policy, and describe the perceived advertising environment prior to implementation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with seven stakeholders involved in the design and implementation of the advertising policy. A stakeholder topic guide was developed before interviews took place to help standardise the lines of inquiry between interviewees. A resident survey was developed to collect socio-demographic data and, for the purpose of this study, information regarding observations of advertising for HFSS products, alcohol and gambling. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of respondents residing in Bristol and South Gloucestershire reported seeing advertisements for unhealthy commodities in the week prior to completing the survey. This was highest for HFSS products (40%). 16% of residents reported seeing HFSS product advertisements specifically appealing to children. For HFSS products in particular, younger people were more likely to report seeing adverts than older people, as were those who were from more deprived areas. An advertisement policy that restricts the advertisement of such unhealthy commodities, and in particular for HFSS products, has the potential to reduce health inequalities. This rationale directly influenced the development of the advertisement policy in Bristol. Implementation of the policy benefitted from an existing supportive environment following the 'health in all policies' initiative and a focus on reducing health inequalities across the city. CONCLUSIONS: Unhealthy product advertisements, particularly for unhealthy food and drinks, were observed more by younger people and those living in more deprived areas. Policies that specifically restrict such advertisements, therefore, have the potential to reduce health inequalities, as was the hope when this policy was developed. Future evaluation of the policy will provide evidence of any public health impact.

Participant retention in paediatric randomised controlled trials published in six major journals 2015-2019: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The factors which influence participant retention in paediatric randomised controlled trials are under-researched. Retention may be more challenging due to child developmental stages, involving additional participants, and proxy-reporting of outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis explores the factors which may influence retention in paediatric trials. METHODS: Using the MEDLINE database, paediatric randomised controlled trials published between 2015 and 2019 were identified from six general and specialist high-impact factor medical journals. The review outcome was participant retention for each reviewed trial's primary outcome. Context (e.g. population, disease) and design (e.g. length of trial) factors were extracted. Retention was examined for each context and design factor in turn, with evidence for an association being determined by a univariate random-effects meta-regression analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-four trials were included, and the median total retention was 0.92 (inter-quartile range 0.83 to 0.98). Higher estimates of retention were seen for trials with five or more follow-up assessments before the primary outcome, those less than 6 months between randomisation and primary outcome, and those that used an inactive data collection method. Trials involving children aged 11 and over had the higher estimated retention compared with those involving younger children. Those trials which did not involve other participants also had higher retention, than those where they were involved. There was also evidence that a trial which used an active or placebo control treatment had higher estimated retention, than treatment-as-usual. Retention increased if at least one engagement method was used. Unlike reviews of trials including all ages of participants, we did not find any association between retention and the number of treatment groups, size of trial, or type of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Published paediatric RCTs rarely report the use of specific modifiable factors that improve retention. Including multiple, regular follow-ups with participants before the primary outcome may reduce attrition. Retention may be highest when the primary outcome is collected up to 6 months after a participant is recruited. Our findings suggest that qualitative research into improving retention when trials involve multiple participants such as young people, and their caregivers or teachers would be worthwhile. Those designing paediatric trials also need to consider the use of appropriate engagement methods. RESEARCH ON RESEARCH (ROR) REGISTRY: https://ror-hub.org/study/2561.

Integrated working in local authority decision-making about air quality: a qualitative study in Southwest England.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to poor air quality is one of the most significant environmental public health challenges. In the UK, local authorities (LAs) are responsible for monitoring and managing air quality. This article explores the need and mechanisms for cross-departmental working in LAs to make decisions about air quality issues. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with public health, environmental health and transport staff from LAs within the Southwest of UK. Interviews were conducted between April and August 2021 and analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: In sum, 24 staff from 7 LAs participated. Local authority staff in public health, environmental health and transport teams recognized that managing air quality was a cross-departmental issue. To enable effective integrated working staff described four successful mechanisms: (i) policy commitments and political support; (ii) dedicated air quality steering groups; (iii) existing governance and oversight groups; and (iv) networking and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified mechanisms that LA staff have found support cross-departmental and integrated working on air quality issues. These are mechanisms that have helped environmental health staff work towards achieving compliance with pollution limits, and that have helped public health staff get air quality considerations recognized as a wider health issue.

Assessing exposure to outdoor advertisement for products high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS); is self-reported exposure a useful exposure metric?

BACKGROUND: Exposure to advertising of unhealthy commodities such as fast-food and gambling is recognised as a risk factor for developing non-communicable diseases. Assessment of the impact of such advertisement and the evaluation of the impact of any policies to restrict such advertisements on public health are reliant on the quality of the exposure assessment. A straightforward method for assessing exposure is to ask people whether they noticed any such advertisements in their neighbourhoods. However, the validity of this method is unclear. We assessed the associations between measured exposure to outdoor advertising, self-reported exposure, and self-reported consumption. METHODS: We collected exposure information in January-March 2022 using two methods: (i) through a resident survey investigating advertising and consumption of unhealthy products, distributed across Bristol and neighbouring South Gloucestershire, and (ii) through in-person auditing. Self-reported exposure was obtained from the resident survey (N = 2,560) and measured exposure from photos obtained for all Council owned advertisement sites (N = 973 bus stops). Both data sources were geographically linked at lower-super-output-area level. Reporting ratios (RRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and Cohen's kappas, are presented. RESULTS: 24% of advertisements displayed food and/or drink advertising. Bristol respondents in neighbourhoods displaying food/drink adverts were more likely to also report seeing these adverts compared to those in neighbourhoods without food/drink adverts (59% vs. 51%, RR = 1.15, 95%CI 1.01-1.31). There was no such association in South Gloucestershire (26% vs. 32%, RR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.58-1.14). Respondents in both Bristol and South Gloucestershire who recalled seeing advertising for unhealthy food and drink products were more likely to consume them (e.g. for fast-food: 22% vs. 11%, RR = 2.01, 95%CI 1.68-2.42). There was no such association between measured food and drink adverts in respondents' local areas and self-reported consumption of HFSS product (90.1% vs. 90.7%, RR = 0.99, 95%CI 0.96-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported outdoor advertisement exposure is correlated with measured exposure, making this a useful methodology for population studies. It has the added advantage that it correlates with consumption. However, given that measurement error can be significant and self-reported exposure is known to be susceptible to various biases, inferences from studies using this exposure metric should be made with caution.

Multi-faceted intervention to improve management of antibiotics for children presenting to primary care with acute cough and respiratory tract infection (CHICO): efficient cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether an easy-to-use multifaceted intervention for children presenting to primary care with respiratory tract infections would reduce antibiotic dispensing, without increasing hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection. DESIGN: Two arm randomised controlled trial clustered by general practice, using routine outcome data, with qualitative and economic evaluations. SETTING: English primary care practices using the EMIS electronic medical record system. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 0-9 years presenting with respiratory tract infection at 294 general practices, before and during the covid-19 pandemic. INTERVENTION: Elicitation of parental concerns during consultation; a clinician focused prognostic algorithm to identify children at very low, normal, or elevated 30 day risk of hospital admission accompanied by antibiotic prescribing guidance; and a leaflet for carers including safety netting advice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of dispensed amoxicillin and macrolide antibiotics (superiority comparison) and hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection (non-inferiority comparison) for children aged 0-9 years over 12 months (same age practice list size as denominator). RESULTS: Of 310 practices needed, 294 (95%) were randomised (144 intervention and 150 controls) representing 5% of all registered 0-9 year olds in England. Of these, 12 (4%) subsequently withdrew (six owing to the pandemic). Median intervention use per practice was 70 (by a median of 9 clinicians). No evidence was found that antibiotic dispensing differed between intervention practices (155 (95% confidence interval 138 to 174) items/year/1000 children) and control practices (157 (140 to 176) items/year/1000 children) (rate ratio 1.011, 95% confidence interval 0.992 to 1.029; P=0.25). Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggested reduced dispensing in intervention practices with fewer prescribing nurses, in single site (compared with multisite) practices, and in practices located in areas of lower socioeconomic deprivation, which may warrant future investigation. Pre-specified sensitivity analysis suggested reduced dispensing among older children in the intervention arm (P=0.03). A post hoc sensitivity analysis suggested less dispensing in intervention practices before the pandemic (rate ratio 0.967, 0.946 to 0.989; P=0.003). The rate of hospital admission for respiratory tract infections in the intervention practices (13 (95% confidence interval 10 to 18) admissions/1000 children) was non-inferior compared with control practices (15 (12 to 20) admissions/1000 children) (rate ratio 0.952, 0.905 to 1.003). CONCLUSIONS: This multifaceted antibiotic stewardship intervention for children with respiratory tract infections did not reduce overall antibiotic dispensing or increase respiratory tract infection related hospital admissions. Evidence suggested that in some subgroups and situations (for example, under non-pandemic conditions) the intervention slightly reduced prescribing rates but not in a clinically relevant way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11405239ISRCTN registry ISRCTN11405239.

Barriers and facilitators to pharmacists' engagement in response to domestic violence: a qualitative interview study informed by the capability-opportunity-motivation-behaviour model.

BACKGROUND: Domestic and sexual violence and abuse (DSVA) is a global public health problem resulting in health inequalities. Community pharmacies are uniquely placed to help people affected by DSVA. We examined factors that impact pharmacists' engagement in response to DSVA when providing public health services. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with community pharmacists (n = 20) were analyzed thematically, with inductive themes mapped to the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) model. RESULTS: Pharmacists were confident in providing public health services, but a lack of DSVA training meant there is a need to support their 'Capability' to respond to DSVA. Pharmacies were perceived as highly accessible healthcare providers on the high street, with sexual health consultations offering an ideal 'Opportunity' to enquire about DSVA in a private consultation room. Pharmacist's 'Motivation' to enquire about DSVA was driven by potential positive client outcomes and a desire to be more involved in public heath interventions, but organisation- and system-level support and remuneration is needed. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacy offers opportunities for integrating DSVA work in existing public health services. Pharmacists need training on DSVA, ongoing support, allocated funding for DSVA work, and awareness raising campaign for the public on their extended public health role.

Unintended consequences of patient online access to health records: a qualitative study in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are seeking to harness digital tools to promote patient autonomy and increase the efficiency of care worldwide. The NHS Long Term Plan created the right for patients to access 'digital first' primary care by 2023-2024, including online patient access to full medical records. AIM: To identify and understand the unintended consequences of online patient access to medical records. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study in 10 general practices in South West and North West England. METHOD: Semi-structured individual interviews with 13 patients and 16 general practice staff with experience of patient online access to health records. RESULTS: Online access generated unintended consequences that negatively impacted patients' understanding of their health care, with patients finding surprising or difficult to interpret information. Online access impacted GPs' documentation practices, such as when GPs pre-emptively attempted to minimise potential misunderstandings to aid patient understanding of their health care. In other cases, this negatively impacted the quality of the records and patient safety when GPs avoided documenting speculations or concerns. Contrary to assumptions that workload would be reduced, online access introduced extra work, such as managing and monitoring access, and taking measures to prevent possible harm to patients. CONCLUSION: The unintended consequences described by both staff and patients show that, to achieve the intended consequences set out in NHS policy, additional work is necessary to prepare records for sharing and to prepare patients about what to expect. It is crucial that practices are adequately supported and resourced to manage the unintended consequences of online access, now that it is the default position. A table of potential unintended consequences and mitigation measures is provided to aid practice managers and clinicians implementing online access.

A multifaceted intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing among CHIldren with acute COugh and respiratory tract infection: the CHICO cluster RCT.

Background: Clinical uncertainty in primary care regarding the prognosis of children with respiratory tract infections contributes to the unnecessary use of antibiotics. Improved identification of children at low risk of future hospitalisation might reduce clinical uncertainty. A National Institute for Health and Care Research-funded 5-year programme (RP-PG-0608-10018) was used to develop and feasibility test an intervention. Objectives: The aim of the children with acute cough randomised controlled trial was to reduce antibiotic prescribing among children presenting with acute cough and respiratory tract infection without increasing hospital admission. Design: An efficient, pragmatic open-label, two-arm trial (with embedded qualitative and health economic analyses) using practice-level randomisation using routinely collected data as the primary outcome. Setting: General practitioner practices in England. Participants: General practitioner practices using the Egton Medical Information Systems® patient-record system for children aged 0-9 years presenting with a cough or upper respiratory tract infection. Recruited by Clinical Research Networks and Clinical Commissioning Groups. Intervention: Comprised: (1) elicitation of parental concerns during consultation; (2) a clinician-focused prognostic algorithm to identify children with acute cough and respiratory tract infection at low, average or elevated risk of hospitalisation in the next 30 days accompanied by prescribing guidance, (3) provision of a printout for carers including safety-netting advice. Main outcome measures: Co-primaries using the practice list-size for children aged 0-9 years as the denominator: rate of dispensed amoxicillin and macrolide items at each practice (superiority comparison) from NHS Business Services Authority ePACT2 and rate of hospital admission for respiratory tract infection (non-inferiority comparison) from Clinical Commissioning Groups, both routinely collected over 12 months. Results: Of the 310 practices required, 294 (95%) were recruited (144 intervention and 150 controls) with 336,496 registered 0-9-year-olds (5% of all 0-9-year-old children in England) from 47 Clinical Commissioning Groups. Included practices were slightly larger than those not included, had slightly lower baseline dispensing rates and were located in more deprived areas (reflecting the distribution for practice postcodes nationally). Twelve practices (4%) subsequently withdrew (six related to the pandemic). The median number of times the intervention was used was 70 per practice (by a median of 9 clinicians) over 12 months. There was no evidence that the antibiotic dispensing rate in the intervention practices [0.155 (95% confidence interval 0.135 to 0.179)] differed to controls [0.154 (95% confidence interval 0.130 to 0.182), relative risk= 1.011 (95% confidence interval 0.992 to 1.029); p = 0.253]. There was, overall, a reduction in dispensing levels and intervention usage during the pandemic. The rate of hospitalisation for respiratory tract infection in the intervention practices [0.019 (95% confidence interval 0.014 to 0.026)] compared to the controls [0.021 (95% confidence interval 0.014 to 0.029)] was non-inferior [relative risk = 0.952 (95% confidence interval 0.905 to 1.003)]. The qualitative evaluation found the clinicians liked the intervention, used it as a supportive aid, especially with borderline cases but that it, did not always integrate well within the consultation flow and was used less over time. The economic evaluation found no evidence of a difference in mean National Health Service costs between arms; mean difference -£1999 (95% confidence interval -£6627 to 2630). Conclusions: The intervention was feasible and subjectively useful to practitioners, with no evidence of harm in terms of hospitalisations, but did not impact on antibiotic prescribing rates. Future work and limitations: Although the intervention does not appear to change prescribing behaviour, elements of the approach may be used in the design of future interventions. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN11405239 (date assigned 20 April 2018) at www.controlled-trials.com (accessed 5 September 2022). Version 4.0 of the protocol is available at: https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/ (accessed 5 September 2022). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (NIHR award ref: 16/31/98) programme and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 32. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Coughs and colds (also known as respiratory tract infections) are the most common reason that children are taken to family doctors and nurses in primary care. These clinicians are not always sure how best to treat them and often use antibiotics 'just in case'. There are now concerns that clinicians are using antibiotics too often, and that this is increasing the number of resistant bugs (bacteria that cannot be killed by antibiotics). We wanted to see if using a scoring system of symptoms and signs of illness to help clinicians identify children very unlikely to need hospital care as well as listening to parents' concerns and giving them a personalised leaflet with care and safety advice, reduced antibiotic use. We recruited practices rather than patients, so did not need individual patient consent. The two main outcomes were the rate of antibiotics dispensed for children and number of children admitted to hospital for respiratory tract infections, using routinely collected data for 0­9-year-olds. We recruited 294 general practitioner practices, which was 95% of the total needed; 144 were asked to use the intervention and 150 to continue providing usual care (controls); only 12 practices subsequently withdrew (6 related to the pandemic). The average number of times the intervention was used was 70 per practice (by an average of 9 clinicians) over 12 months. There was no evidence that the antibiotic dispensing rate in the intervention practices differed from control practices. Further analyses showed an overall reduction in dispensing levels and intervention usage during the pandemic. The rate of hospitalisation for respiratory tract infection in the intervention practices was similar to the control practices. In the interviews, we found that clinicians liked the intervention and used it as a supportive aid during consultations, especially for borderline cases, rather than a tool to change prescribing behaviour.

Patient perceptions and experiences of medication review: qualitative study in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Clinical medication reviews are a recognised strategy to address polypharmacy, a key part of general practice and positively associated with patient safety and clinical effectiveness. To date there has been little investigation of the patient perspective of medication reviews. OBJECTIVE: To explore patient experiences of medication review including the processes and activities that led up to and shaped the review. METHODS: Qualitative interview study within 10 general practices in Bristol. Participants were adults with polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) and ≥ 2 long-term conditions who had a record of medication review with either a GP or pharmacist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a data driven approach. Co-design work was undertaken with four patient and public involvement advisers to design and develop resources to support patient preparation for medication review. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were interviewed (10 female, mean age 73 years, range 59-88 years). Medication review was viewed as an opportunity to assess the effectiveness and need for medications. Participants expected the review to focus upon medication related concerns, side-effects and symptoms. Those who were newer to review, were uncertain of the intended purpose, and described their review as a box-ticking exercise. Some participants were unfamiliar with the role of the pharmacist and expressed a lack of confidence in their clinical skills and knowledge. Face-to-face consultation and relationship continuity were considered important for efficient and effective medication review. Results informed co-production of a patient information leaflet to facilitate greater patient engagement and involvement in medication review. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of understanding of the rationale for medication review can limit the value patients attach to these healthcare encounters. Improved prior communication and information around the intended purpose and potential benefits of medication review may enhance patient engagement and improve patient experience and outcomes.

The experience of conducting collaborative and intensive pragmatic qualitative (CLIP-Q) research to support rapid public health and healthcare innovation.

A key challenge for qualitative methods in applied health research is the fast pace that can characterize the public health and health and care service landscape, where there is a need for research informed by immediate pragmatic questions and relevant findings are required quickly to inform decision-making. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the pace at which evidence was needed to inform urgent public health and healthcare decision-making. This required qualitative researchers to step up to the challenge of conducting research at speed whilst maintaining rigor and ensuring the findings are credible. This article illustrates how working with multidisciplinary, collaborative teams and the tailoring of qualitative methods to be more pragmatic and efficient can provide timely and credible results. Using time-limited case studies of applied qualitative health research drawn from the work of the Behavioral and Qualitative Science Team from the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), we illustrate our collaborative and intensive pragmatic qualitative (CLIP-Q) approach. CLIP-Q involves (i) collaboration at all stages of the design, conduct and implementation of projects and, where possible, co-production with people with lived experience, (ii) an intensive team-based approach to data collection and analysis at pace, and (iii) pragmatic study design and efficient strategies at each stage of the research process. The case studies include projects conducted pre COVID-19 and during the first wave of the pandemic, where urgent evidence was required in weeks rather than months to inform rapid public health and healthcare decision making.

Can primary care research be conducted more efficiently using routinely reported practice-level data: a cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in England?

OBJECTIVES: Conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in primary care is challenging; recruiting patients during time-limited or remote consultations can increase selection bias and physical access to patients' notes is costly and time-consuming. We investigated barriers and facilitators to running a more efficient design. DESIGN: An RCT aiming to reduce antibiotic prescribing among children presenting with acute cough and a respiratory tract infection (RTI) with a clinician-focused intervention, embedded at the practice level. By using aggregate level, routinely collected data for the coprimary outcomes, we removed the need to recruit individual participants. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Baseline data from general practitioner practices and interviews with individuals from Clinical Research Networks (CRNs) in England who helped recruit practices and Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) who collected outcome data. INTERVENTION: The intervention included: (1) explicit elicitation of parental concerns, (2) a prognostic algorithm to identify children at low risk of hospitalisation and (3) provision of a printout for carers including safety-netting advice. COPRIMARY OUTCOMES: For 0-9 years old-(1) Dispensing data for amoxicillin and macrolide antibiotics and (2) hospital admission rate for RTI. RESULTS: We recruited 294 of the intended 310 practices (95%) representing 336 496 registered 0-9 years old (5% of all 0-9 years old children). Included practices were slightly larger, had slightly lower baseline prescribing rates and were located in more deprived areas reflecting the national distribution. Engagement with CCGs and their understanding of their role in this research was variable. Engagement with CRNs and installation of the intervention was straight-forward although the impact of updates to practice IT systems and lack of familiarity required extended support in some practices. Data on the coprimary outcomes were almost 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The infrastructure for trials at the practice level using routinely collected data for primary outcomes is viable in England and should be promoted for primary care research where appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11405239.