Collaborative discussions between pharmacists and general practitioners to optimise patient medication: a qualitative study within a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There has been significant investment in pharmacists working in UK general practice to improve the effective and safe use of medicines. However, evidence of how to optimise collaboration between GPs and pharmacists in the context of polypharmacy (multiple medication) is lacking. AIM: To explore GP and pharmacist views and experiences of in-person, inter-professional collaborative discussions (IPCDs) as part of a complex intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed-method process evaluation embedded within the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial conducted in Bristol and the West Midlands. METHOD: Audio-recordings of IPCDs between GPs and pharmacists, and individual semi-structured interviews exploring their reflections on these discussions. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Fourteen practices took part in the process evaluation (Feb 2021- Sept 2023). Seventeen IPCD meetings were audio recorded discussing 30 patients (range of 1-6 patients per meeting). Six GPs and 13 pharmacists were interviewed. The IPCD was highly valued by GPs and pharmacists who described benefits including: strengthening their working relationship; learning from each other; and gaining in confidence to manage more complex patients. It was often challenging, however, to find time for the IPCDs. CONCLUSION: The model of IPCD studied provided protected time for GPs and pharmacists to work together to deliver whole-patient care, with both professions finding this beneficial. Protected time for inter-professional liaison and collaboration, and structured interventions may facilitate improved patient care.

The Introspective Patient Experience of Mistletoe Therapy in Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: The introspective experience of cancer patients using mistletoe therapy has received little scientific interest, although it is crucial for a holistic understanding of this therapy. This study contributes to patient-centered research and treatment by documenting the subjective experiences of individuals undergoing mistletoe therapy. METHODS: In this qualitative, explorative study, 20 outpatients with a history of various cancer types were recruited from Arlesheim Hospital (Arlesheim, Switzerland). All patients received subcutaneous mistletoe therapy for at least 2 years (median 7.5 years). Data was collected through 2 semi-structured, in-depth interviews per patient. Qualitative content analysis was applied to examine the data. The individual experience of mistletoe therapy was analyzed in relation to 6 predefined levels of human experience: physical, vital, emotional, mental, spiritual and social. In addition, 3 further aspects, considered as cross-dimensional perspectives, emerged out of the material: warmth, immune strengthening, and general wellbeing. RESULTS: Data analysis revealed considerable heterogeneity among patients' experiences with mistletoe therapy. The importance of specific aspects became apparent, such as increased vitality to manage daily life, greater emotional and mental stability, warmth as a multidimensional phenomenon, feelings of safety and protection through mistletoe therapy, heightened self-awareness and improved self-care, as well as sensations of spiritual connectedness. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to this study it had not been shown that cancer patients using mistletoe therapy do have observations on different levels of experience. These results may lead to a deeper understanding of patients receiving mistletoe therapy, enabling them to be supported in a more holistic way both during mistletoe treatment and on their life path. Further investigations into the effects of mistletoe therapy on the emotional, mental, and spiritual level are warranted.

A pilot study of the mistletoe and breast cancer (MAB) trial: a protocol for a randomised double-blind controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A Cochrane review of mistletoe therapy concludes that there is some evidence that mistletoe extracts may offer benefits on measures of quality of life during chemotherapy for breast cancer, but these results need replication. Our aim is to add to this evidence base by initially testing the feasibility of a UK pilot placebo-controlled, double-blind randomised controlled trial of mistletoe therapy in patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy. METHODS/DESIGN: A mixed phase pilot placebo-controlled, double-blind randomised controlled trial of mistletoe therapy in patients with breast cancer (EudraCT number: 2018-000279-34). There will be three arms (groups) in the trial: Iscador M, Iscador P, with physiological saline as the placebo. The aim is to recruit 45 adult patients with a new diagnosis of early or locally advanced breast cancer, up to 12 weeks following definitive breast surgery whose standard treatment plan includes chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy. They will be taught to administer the mistletoe and breast cancer (MAB) therapies subcutaneously. MAB therapy will continue throughout their standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy and 1 month beyond. The main outcome of the MAB study is the feasibility of conducting such a trial within the NHS in order to inform a future fully powered investigative trial. Feasibility will be measured through recruitment, retention and patient experience using clinical research forms, patient diaries, cancer-related questionnaires and qualitative interviews conducted with both patients and oncology staff. DISCUSSION: This trial is the first of its kind in the UK. Currently, mistletoe therapy is mostly available through private practice in the UK. Completion of this feasibility study will support applications for further funding for a fully powered randomised controlled trial which will measure effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this herbal therapy.

Assessment and Treatment of Nocturia in Endocrine Disease in a Primary Care Setting: Systematic Review and Nominal Group Technique Consensus.

CONTEXT: Salt and water homeostasis is regulated hormonally, so polyuria can result from endocrine disease directly or via secondary effects. These mechanisms are not consistently considered in primary care management of nocturia. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review (SR) of nocturia in endocrine disease and reach expert consensus for primary care management. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Four databases were searched from January 2000 to April 2020. A total of 4382 titles and abstracts were screened, 36 studies underwent full-text screening, and 14 studies were included in the analysis. Expert and public consensus was achieved using the nominal group technique (NGT). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twelve studies focused on mechanisms of nocturia, while two evaluated treatment options; none of the studies took place in a primary care setting. NGT consensus identified key clinical evaluation themes, including the presence of thirst, a medical background of diabetes mellitus or insipidus, thyroid disease, oestrogen status, medications (fluid loss or xerostomia), and general examination including body mass index. Proposed investigations include a bladder diary, renal and thyroid function, calcium, and glycated haemoglobin. Morning urine osmolarity should be examined in the context of polyuria of >2.5 l/24 h persisting despite fluid advice, with urine concentration >600 mOsm/l after fluid restriction excluding diabetes insipidus. Treatment should involve education, including adjustment of lifestyle and medication where possible. Any underlying endocrine disorder should be managed according to local guidance. Referral to endocrinology is needed if there is hyperthyroidism, hyperparathyroidism, or morning urine osmolarity <600 mOsm/l after overnight fluid avoidance. CONCLUSIONS: Endocrine disease can result in nocturia via varied salt and water regulation pathways. The aim of management is to identify and treat causative factors, but secondary effects can restrict improvements in nocturia. PATIENT SUMMARY: People with altered hormone function can suffer from severe sleep disturbance because of a need to pass urine caused by problems in controlling water and salt levels. An expert panel recommended the best ways to assess and treat these problems on the basis of the rather small amount of up-to-date published research available.

Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP): Protocol for a multicentre cluster randomised trial comparing a complex intervention for medication optimization against usual care.

Introduction: Polypharmacy is increasingly common, and associated with undesirable consequences. Polypharmacy management necessitates balancing therapeutic benefits and risks, and varying clinical and patient priorities. Current guidance for managing polypharmacy is not supported by high quality evidence. The aim of the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in a general practice setting. Methods: This trial will use a multicentre, open-label, cluster-randomised controlled approach, with two parallel groups. Practices will be randomised to a complex intervention comprising structured medication review (including interprofessional GP/pharmacist treatment planning and patient-facing review) supported by performance feedback, financial incentivisation, clinician training and clinical informatics (intervention), or usual care (control). Patients with polypharmacy and triggering potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) indicators will be recruited in each practice using a computerised search of health records. 37 practices will recruit 50 patients, and review them over a 26-week intervention delivery period. The primary outcome is the mean number of PIP indicators triggered per patient at 26 weeks follow-up, determined objectively from coded GP electronic health records. Secondary outcomes will include patient reported outcome measures, and health and care service use. The main intention-to-treat analysis will use linear mixed effects regression to compare number of PIP indicators triggered at 26 weeks post-review between groups, adjusted for baseline (pre-randomisation) values. A nested process evaluation will explore implementation of the intervention in primary care. Ethics and dissemination: The protocol and associated study materials have been approved by the Wales REC 6, NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 19/WA/0090), host institution and Health Research Authority. Research outputs will be published in peer-reviewed journals and relevant conferences, and additionally disseminated to patients and the public, clinicians, commissioners and policy makers. ISRCTN Registration: 90146150 (28/03/2019).

Modifications to the delivery of NHS face-to-face general practice consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.

Background: To minimise transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19, delivery of English general practice consultations was modified in March 2020 to enable separation of diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 patients from others. Remote triage and consultations became the default, with adapted face-to-face contact used only when clinically necessary. This study aimed to identify the modified face-to-face delivery models used nationwide in spring/summer 2020. Information was also sought concerning COVID-19 outbreaks linked to English general practice. Methods: In June 2020, a survey was sent by email to the 135 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England to identify local organisation of face-to-face general practice consultations since March 2020. An email was  sent to Public Health England (PHE) requesting data on COVID-19 outbreaks linked to general practice. Results: All CCGs responded. Between March and July 2020, separation of COVID-19 patients from others was achieved using combinations of the following models: zoned surgeries (reported by 47% of CCGs), where COVID-19 and other patients were separated within their own practice;'hot' or 'cold' hubs (reported by 90% of CCGs), separate sites where COVID-19 or other patients registered at one of several collaborating practices were seen;'hot' and 'cold' home visits (reported by 70% of CCGs). One of seven combinations of these models was used across each CCG, with some flexibility shown according to changing demand through hub availability. PHE data indicated 25 possible or confirmed COVID-19 outbreaks or clusters in English general practice to July 31st 2020. Conclusions: Varied, flexible ways of delivering face-to-face general practice consultations were identified.  Analysis of the modified delivery in terms of management of COVID-19 and other conditions, and impacts on staff and patients, together with learning from investigations into confirmed COVID-19 outbreaks, may both aid future pandemic management and identify beneficial elements for practice beyond this.

Novel multi-virus rapid respiratory microbiological point-of-care testing in primary care: a mixed-methods feasibility evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rapid multi-viral respiratory microbiological point-of-care tests (POCTs) have not been evaluated in UK primary care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a multi-viral microbiological POCT for suspected respiratory tract infections (RTIs). METHODS: In this observational, mixed-methods feasibility study practices were provided with a POCT machine for any patient aged ≥3 months with suspected RTI. Dual throat/nose swabs tested for 17 respiratory viruses and three atypical bacteria, 65 minutes per sample. RESULTS: Twenty clinicians recruited 93 patients (estimated 1:3 of all RTI cases). Patient's median age was 29, 57% female, and 44% with co-morbidities. Pre-test diagnoses: upper RTI (48%); lower RTI (30%); viral/influenza-like illness (18%); other (4%). Median set-up time was 2.72 minutes, with 72% swabs processed <4 hours, 90% <24 hours. Tests detected ≥1 virus in 58%, no pathogen 37% and atypical bacteria 2% (3% inconclusive). Antibiotics were prescribed pre-test to 35% of patients with no pathogen detected and 25% with a virus. Post-test diagnoses changed in 20%, and diagnostic certainty increased (P = 0.02), more so when the test was positive rather than negative (P < 0.001). Clinicians predicted decreased antibiotic benefit post-test (P = 0.02). Interviews revealed the POCT has clear potential, was easy to use and well-liked, but limited by time-to-result and the absence of testing for typical respiratory bacteria. CONCLUSIONS: This POCT was acceptable and appeared to influence clinical reasoning. Clinicians wanted faster time-to-results and more information about bacteria. Randomized trials are needed to understand the safety, efficacy and patient perceptions of these POCTs.

The UK government has called for the introduction of rapid diagnostics to curb overuse of antibiotics for common infections. Multi-viral respiratory 'point-of-care' tests (POCTs) are available but have not been used in UK primary care before. These POCTs use samples from the nose or back of the throat and give results quickly, to see if viruses or bacteria are there. In this study, four GP practices were given POCT machines for 6 weeks to see how they were used. Of the 93 patient samples tested, 3% were inconclusive, 37% tested negative, 58% had at least one virus and only 2% had a bacterial infection. Clinicians were more certain of patient diagnoses after testing especially when a virus or bacterium was detected and they were also less likely to predict the patient would benefit from antibiotics. Clinical diagnoses changed in 20% of patients after testing but less than 10% were contacted to change their treatment plan. During interviews, clinicians revealed they liked the test finding it easy-to-use but wanted faster time-to-results and testing for more bacteria. Clinical trials are needed to see if these POCTs can safely and cost-effectively reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care.

Public perception of NHS general practice during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic in England.

Background: In March 2020, the delivery of NHS general practice consultations was rapidly modified to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Remote triage and consultations became the default, with adapted models for face-to-face contact if clinically required. This study aimed to gain insight into public perception of these adaptations. Methods: Two online surveys were developed, and conducted in August and September 2020. Survey A, open to adults (>18 years) receiving the link to it, considered respondents' perspectives on healthcare contacts since March 2020, and their understanding of the adapted delivery. Survey B, open to survey A respondents only, then considered how healthcare communication had been received and individual preferences for this. Survey participation was voluntary. Results: The perceptions of 150 members of the public were obtained. 105 had considered contacting general practice, although half avoided this or delayed doing so for longer than usual. While some patients did so 'to help the NHS', others experienced reduced access for reasons including concerns about telephone consultations and about COVID-19 safety. Some however reported benefitting from remote consultation availability and regular texts/emails from their practice. 68% (102/150) of respondents were unaware that patients with COVID-19 were seen separately from other patients during general practice appointments. 27% in survey B who had avoided or delayed contact said they would have felt more comfortable contacting general practice had they known this. Conclusions: Experience and use of the adapted general practice models varied. Some patients felt their access to healthcare was reduced, often due to technological requirements. For some who found attending face-to-face appointments difficult however, remote contact was advantageous. Most of those surveyed were unaware of the COVID-19 control measures in place during face-to-face general practice consultations. Assessment of adapted delivery model accessibility and clearer public messaging about the changes may help reduce inequalities.

Antibiotic-induced changes in the human gut microbiota for the most commonly prescribed antibiotics in primary care in the UK: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The gut microbiota influences many aspects of human health. We investigated the magnitude and duration of changes in gut microbiota in response to antibiotics commonly prescribed in UK primary care. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and AMED, all years up to May 2020 including all study designs, collecting and analysing data on the effect of antibiotics prescribed for respiratory and urinary tract infections. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane standard methods. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Narrative synthesis was used to report the themes emerging from the data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were antibiotic-induced changes in the composition and/or diversity of the gut microbiota. Secondary outcome was the time for the microbiota to return to baseline. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles with low or unclear risk of bias showed that antibiotics impact the gut microbiota by causing rapid and diminished levels of bacterial diversity and changes in relative abundances. After cessation of treatment, gut bacteria recover, in most individuals, to their baseline state within a few weeks. Some studies suggested longer term effects from 2 to 6 months. Considerable heterogeneity in methodology makes the studies prone to biases and other confounding factors. Doxycycline was associated with a marked short-term decrease in Bifidobacterium diversity. Clarithromycin decreased the populations of Enterobacteria, and the anaerobic bacteria Bifidobacterium sp and Lactobacillus sp in numbers and diversity for up to 5 weeks. Phenoxymethylpenicillin, nitrofurantoin and amoxicillin had very little effect on the gut microbiome. CONCLUSIONS: Despite substantial heterogeneity of the studies and small sample sizes, there is evidence that antibiotics commonly used in primary care influence the composition of the gastrointestinal microbiota. Larger population-based studies are needed to fully understand how antibiotics modulate the microbiota, and to determine if these are associated with (longer term) health consequences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017073750.

How do they measure up? Differences in stakeholder perceptions of quality measures used in English community nursing.

OBJECTIVES: To establish how quality indicators used in English community nursing are selected and applied, and their perceived usefulness to service users, commissioners and service providers. METHODS: A qualitative multi-site case study was conducted with five commissioning organizations and their service providers. Participants included commissioners, provider organization managers, nurses and service users. RESULTS: Indicator selection and application often entail complex processes influenced by wider health system and cross-organizational factors. All participants felt that current indicators, while useful for accountability and management purposes, fail to reflect the true quality of community nursing care and may sometimes indirectly compromise care. CONCLUSIONS: Valuable resources may be better used for comprehensive system redesign, to ensure that patient, carer and nurse priorities are given equivalence with those of other stakeholders.

Do NHS GP surgeries employing GPs additionally trained in integrative or complementary medicine have lower antibiotic prescribing rates? Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of national primary care prescribing data in England in 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in antibiotic prescription rates between conventional General Practice (GP) surgeries and GP surgeries employing general practitioners (GPs) additionally trained in integrative medicine (IM) or complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) (referred to as IM GPs) working within National Health Service (NHS) England. DESIGN: Retrospective study on antibiotic prescription rates per STAR-PU (Specific Therapeutic group Age-sex weighting Related Prescribing Unit) using NHS Digital data over 2016. Publicly available data were used on prevalence of relevant comorbidities, demographics of patient populations and deprivation scores. SETTING: Primary Care. PARTICIPANTS: 7283 NHS GP surgeries in England. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The association between IM GPs and antibiotic prescribing rates per STAR-PU with the number of antibiotic prescriptions (total, and for respiratory tract infection (RTI) and urinary tract infection (UTI) separately) as outcome. RESULTS: IM GP surgeries (n=9) were comparable to conventional GP surgeries in terms of list sizes, demographics, deprivation scores and comorbidity prevalence. Negative binomial regression models showed that statistically significant fewer total antibiotics (relative risk (RR) 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.97) and RTI antibiotics (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.94) were prescribed at NHS IM GP surgeries compared with conventional NHS GP surgeries. In contrast, the number of antibiotics prescribed for UTI were similar between both practices. CONCLUSION: NHS England GP surgeries employing GPs additionally trained in IM/CAM have lower antibiotic prescribing rates. Accessibility of IM/CAM within NHS England primary care is limited. Main study limitation is the lack of consultation data. Future research should include the differences in consultation behaviour of patients self-selecting to consult an IM GP or conventional surgery, and its effect on antibiotic prescription. Additional treatment strategies for common primary care infections used by IM GPs should be explored to see if they could be used to assist in the fight against antimicrobial resistance.

What works in 'real life' to facilitate home deaths and fewer hospital admissions for those at end of life?: results from a realist evaluation of new palliative care services in two English counties.

BACKGROUND: WE EVALUATED END OF LIFE CARE SERVICES IN TWO ENGLISH COUNTIES INCLUDING: coordination centres, telephone advice line, 'Discharge in Reach' nurses, a specialist community personal care team and community nurse educators. Elsewhere, we published findings detailing high family carer satisfaction and fewer hospital admissions, Accident and Emergency attendances and hospital deaths for service users compared to controls. The aim of this paper is to discuss what contributed to those outcomes. METHODS: Using realist evaluation, data collection included documentation (e.g. referral databases), 15 observations of services and interviews with 43 family carers and 105 professionals. Data were analysed using framework analysis, applying realist evaluation concepts. Findings were discussed at successive team meetings and further data was collected until team consensus was reached. RESULTS: Services 'worked' primarily for those with cancer with 'fast track' funding who were close to death. Factors contributing to success included services staffed with experienced palliative care professionals with dedicated (and sufficient) time for difficult conversations with family carers, patients and/or clinical colleagues about death and the practicalities of caring for the dying. Using their formal and informal knowledge of the local healthcare system, they accessed community resources to support homecare and delivered excellent services. This engendered confidence and reassurance for staff, family carers and patients, possibly contributing to less hospital admissions and A&E attendances and more home deaths. CONCLUSIONS: With demand for 24-hour end of life care growing and care provision fragmented across health and social care boundaries, services like these that cut across organisational sectors may become more important. They offer an overview to help navigate those desiring a home death through the system.