The effectiveness of knowledge-sharing techniques and approaches in research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR), funds, enables and delivers world-leading health and social care research to improve people's health and wellbeing. To achieve this aim, effective knowledge sharing (two-way knowledge sharing between researchers and stakeholders to create new knowledge and enable change in policy and practice) is needed. To date, it is not known which knowledge sharing techniques and approaches are used or how effective these are in creating new knowledge that can lead to changes in policy and practice in NIHR funded studies. METHODS: In this restricted systematic review, electronic databases [MEDLINE, The Health Management Information Consortium (including the Department of Health's Library and Information Services and King's Fund Information and Library Services)] were searched for published NIHR funded studies that described knowledge sharing between researchers and other stakeholders. One researcher performed title and abstract, full paper screening and quality assessment (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist) with a 20% sample independently screened by a second reviewer. A narrative synthesis was adopted. RESULTS: In total 9897 records were identified. After screening, 17 studies were included. Five explicit forms of knowledge sharing studies were identified: embedded models, knowledge brokering, stakeholder engagement and involvement of non-researchers in the research or service design process and organisational collaborative partnerships between universities and healthcare organisations. Collectively, the techniques and approaches included five types of stakeholders and worked with them at all stages of the research cycle, except the stage of formation of the research design and preparation of funding application. Seven studies (using four of the approaches) gave examples of new knowledge creation, but only one study (using an embedded model approach) gave an example of a resulting change in practice. The use of a theory, model or framework to explain the knowledge sharing process was identified in six studies. CONCLUSIONS: Five knowledge sharing techniques and approaches were reported in the included NIHR funded studies, and seven studies identified the creation of new knowledge. However, there was little investigation of the effectiveness of these approaches in influencing change in practice or policy.

Impact of vaccination on the association of COVID-19 with cardiovascular diseases: An OpenSAFELY cohort study.

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombotic events, but the implications of vaccination for this increased risk are uncertain. With the approval of NHS England, we quantified associations between COVID-19 diagnosis and cardiovascular diseases in different vaccination and variant eras using linked electronic health records for ~40% of the English population. We defined a 'pre-vaccination' cohort (18,210,937 people) in the wild-type/Alpha variant eras (January 2020-June 2021), and 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' cohorts (13,572,399 and 3,161,485 people respectively) in the Delta variant era (June-December 2021). We showed that the incidence of each arterial thrombotic, venous thrombotic and other cardiovascular outcomes was substantially elevated during weeks 1-4 after COVID-19, compared with before or without COVID-19, but less markedly elevated in time periods beyond week 4. Hazard ratios were higher after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19 and higher in the pre-vaccination and unvaccinated cohorts than the vaccinated cohort. COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection. People who had COVID-19 before or without being vaccinated are at higher risk of cardiovascular events for at least two years.

Can computer simulation support strategic service planning? Modelling a large integrated mental health system on recovery from COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has had a significant impact on people's mental health and mental health services. During the first year of the pandemic, existing demand was not fully met while new demand was generated, resulting in large numbers of people requiring support. To support mental health services to recover without being overwhelmed, it was important to know where services will experience increased pressure, and what strategies could be implemented to mitigate this. METHODS: We implemented a computer simulation model of patient flow through an integrated mental health service in Southwest England covering General Practice (GP), community-based 'talking therapies' (IAPT), acute hospital care, and specialist care settings. The model was calibrated on data from 1 April 2019 to 1 April 2021. Model parameters included patient demand, service-level length of stay, and probabilities of transitioning to other care settings. We used the model to compare 'do nothing' (baseline) scenarios to 'what if' (mitigation) scenarios, including increasing capacity and reducing length of stay, for two future demand trajectories from 1 April 2021 onwards. RESULTS: The results from the simulation model suggest that, without mitigation, the impact of COVID-19 will be an increase in pressure on GP and specialist community based services by 50% and 50-100% respectively. Simulating the impact of possible mitigation strategies, results show that increasing capacity in lower-acuity services, such as GP, causes a shift in demand to other parts of the mental health system while decreasing length of stay in higher acuity services is insufficient to mitigate the impact of increased demand. CONCLUSION: In capturing the interrelation of patient flow related dynamics between various mental health care settings, we demonstrate the value of computer simulation for assessing the impact of interventions on system flow.

UK research data resources based on primary care electronic health records: review and summary for potential users.

BACKGROUND: The range and scope of electronic health record (EHR) data assets in the UK has recently increased, which has been mainly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Summarising and comparing the large primary care resources will help researchers to choose the data resources most suited to their needs. AIM: To describe the current landscape of UK EHR databases and considerations of access and use of these resources relevant to researchers. DESIGN & SETTING: Narrative review of EHR databases in the UK. METHOD: Information was collected from the Health Data Research Innovation Gateway, publicly available websites and other published data, and from key informants. The eligibility criteria were population-based open-access databases sampling EHRs across the whole population of one or more countries in the UK. Published database characteristics were extracted and summarised, and these were corroborated with resource providers. Results were synthesised narratively. RESULTS: Nine large national primary care EHR data resources were identified and summarised. These resources are enhanced by linkage to other administrative data to a varying extent. Resources are mainly intended to support observational research, although some can support experimental studies. There is considerable overlap of populations covered. While all resources are accessible to bona fide researchers, access mechanisms, costs, timescales, and other considerations vary across databases. CONCLUSION: Researchers are currently able to access primary care EHR data from several sources. Choice of data resource is likely to be driven by project needs and access considerations. The landscape of data resources based on primary care EHRs in the UK continues to evolve.

A multi-granular stacked regression for forecasting long-term demand in Emergency Departments.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, Emergency Departments (EDs) are under significant pressure due to an ever-increasing number of attendances. Understanding how the capacity of other urgent care services and the health of a population may influence ED attendances is imperative for commissioners and policy makers to develop long-term strategies for reducing this pressure and improving quality and safety. METHODS: We developed a novel multi-granular stacked regression (MGSR) model using publicly available data to predict future mean monthly ED attendances within Clinical Commissioning Group regions in England. The MGSR combines measures of population health and health service capacity in other related settings. We assessed model performance using the R-squared statistic, measuring variance explained, and the Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), measuring forecasting accuracy. We used the MGSR to forecast ED demand over a 4-year period under hypothetical scenarios where service capacity is increased, or population health is improved. RESULTS: Measures of service capacity explain 41 ± 4% of the variance in monthly ED attendances and measures of population health explain 62 ± 22%. The MGSR leads to an overall improvement in performance, with an R-squared of 0.79 ± 0.02 and MAPE of 3% when forecasting mean monthly ED attendances per CCG. Using the MGSR to forecast long-term demand under different scenarios, we found improving population health would reduce peak ED attendances per CCG by approximately 1000 per month after 2 years. CONCLUSION: Combining models of population health and wider urgent care service capacity for predicting monthly ED attendances leads to an improved performance compared to each model individually. Policies designed to improve population health will reduce ED attendances and enhance quality and safety in the long-term.

Association of COVID-19 With Major Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Diseases: A Population-Wide Cohort Study of 48 Million Adults in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induces a prothrombotic state, but long-term effects of COVID-19 on incidence of vascular diseases are unclear. METHODS: We studied vascular diseases after COVID-19 diagnosis in population-wide anonymized linked English and Welsh electronic health records from January 1 to December 7, 2020. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios comparing the incidence of arterial thromboses and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) after diagnosis of COVID-19 with the incidence in people without a COVID-19 diagnosis. We conducted subgroup analyses by COVID-19 severity, demographic characteristics, and previous history. RESULTS: Among 48 million adults, 125 985 were hospitalized and 1 319 789 were not hospitalized within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. In England, there were 260 279 first arterial thromboses and 59 421 first VTEs during 41.6 million person-years of follow-up. Adjusted hazard ratios for first arterial thrombosis after COVID-19 diagnosis compared with no COVID-19 diagnosis declined from 21.7 (95% CI, 21.0-22.4) in week 1 after COVID-19 diagnosis to 1.34 (95% CI, 1.21-1.48) during weeks 27 to 49. Adjusted hazard ratios for first VTE after COVID-19 diagnosis declined from 33.2 (95% CI, 31.3-35.2) in week 1 to 1.80 (95% CI, 1.50-2.17) during weeks 27 to 49. Adjusted hazard ratios were higher, for longer after diagnosis, after hospitalized versus nonhospitalized COVID-19, among Black or Asian versus White people, and among people without versus with a previous event. The estimated whole-population increases in risk of arterial thromboses and VTEs 49 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis were 0.5% and 0.25%, respectively, corresponding to 7200 and 3500 additional events, respectively, after 1.4 million COVID-19 diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: High relative incidence of vascular events soon after COVID-19 diagnosis declines more rapidly for arterial thromboses than VTEs. However, incidence remains elevated up to 49 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis. These results support policies to prevent severe COVID-19 by means of COVID-19 vaccines, early review after discharge, risk factor control, and use of secondary preventive agents in high-risk patients.

Association of COVID-19 vaccines ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 with major venous, arterial, or thrombocytopenic events: A population-based cohort study of 46 million adults in England.

BACKGROUND: Thromboses in unusual locations after the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine ChAdOx1-S have been reported, although their frequency with vaccines of different types is uncertain at a population level. The aim of this study was to estimate the population-level risks of hospitalised thrombocytopenia and major arterial and venous thromboses after COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this whole-population cohort study, we analysed linked electronic health records from adults living in England, from 8 December 2020 to 18 March 2021. We estimated incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) for major arterial, venous, and thrombocytopenic outcomes 1 to 28 and >28 days after first vaccination dose for ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 vaccines. Analyses were performed separately for ages <70 and ≥70 years and adjusted for age, age2, sex, ethnicity, and deprivation. We also prespecified adjustment for anticoagulant medication, combined oral contraceptive medication, hormone replacement therapy medication, history of pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis, and history of coronavirus infection in analyses of venous thrombosis; and diabetes, hypertension, smoking, antiplatelet medication, blood pressure lowering medication, lipid lowering medication, anticoagulant medication, history of stroke, and history of myocardial infarction in analyses of arterial thromboses. We selected further covariates with backward selection. Of 46 million adults, 23 million (51%) were women; 39 million (84%) were <70; and 3.7 million (8.1%) Asian or Asian British, 1.6 million (3.5%) Black or Black British, 36 million (79%) White, 0.7 million (1.5%) mixed ethnicity, and 1.5 million (3.2%) were of another ethnicity. Approximately 21 million (46%) adults had their first vaccination between 8 December 2020 and 18 March 2021. The crude incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) of all venous events were as follows: prevaccination, 140 [95% confidence interval (CI): 138 to 142]; ≤28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 294 (281 to 307); >28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 359 (338 to 382), ≤28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 241 (229 to 253); >28 days post-BNT162b2-S 277 (263 to 291). The crude incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) of all arterial events were as follows: prevaccination, 546 (95% CI: 541 to 555); ≤28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 1,211 (1,185 to 1,237); >28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 1678 (1,630 to 1,726), ≤28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 1,242 (1,214 to 1,269); >28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 1,539 (1,507 to 1,572). Adjusted HRs (aHRs) 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S, compared with unvaccinated rates, at ages <70 and ≥70 years, respectively, were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.90 to 1.05) and 0.58 (0.53 to 0.63) for venous thromboses, and 0.90 (0.86 to 0.95) and 0.76 (0.73 to 0.79) for arterial thromboses. Corresponding aHRs for BNT162b2 were 0.81 (0.74 to 0.88) and 0.57 (0.53 to 0.62) for venous thromboses, and 0.94 (0.90 to 0.99) and 0.72 (0.70 to 0.75) for arterial thromboses. aHRs for thrombotic events were higher at younger ages for venous thromboses after ChAdOx1-S, and for arterial thromboses after both vaccines. Rates of intracranial venous thrombosis (ICVT) and of thrombocytopenia in adults aged <70 years were higher 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S (aHRs 2.27, 95% CI: 1.33 to 3.88 and 1.71, 1.35 to 2.16, respectively), but not after BNT162b2 (0.59, 0.24 to 1.45 and 1.00, 0.75 to 1.34) compared with unvaccinated. The corresponding absolute excess risks of ICVT 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S were 0.9 to 3 per million, varying by age and sex. The main limitations of the study are as follows: (i) it relies on the accuracy of coded healthcare data to identify exposures, covariates, and outcomes; (ii) the use of primary reason for hospital admission to measure outcome, which improves the positive predictive value but may lead to an underestimation of incidence; and (iii) potential unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed increases in rates of ICVT and thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1-S vaccination in adults aged <70 years that were small compared with its effect in reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, although more precise estimates for adults aged <40 years are needed. For people aged ≥70 years, rates of arterial or venous thrombotic events were generally lower after either vaccine compared with unvaccinated, suggesting that either vaccine is suitable in this age group.

Cancer incidence in agricultural workers: Findings from an international consortium of agricultural cohort studies (AGRICOH).

BACKGROUND: Agricultural work can expose workers to potentially hazardous agents including known and suspected carcinogens. This study aimed to evaluate cancer incidence in male and female agricultural workers in an international consortium, AGRICOH, relative to their respective general populations. METHODS: The analysis included eight cohorts that were linked to their respective cancer registries: France (AGRICAN: n = 128,101), the US (AHS: n = 51,165, MESA: n = 2,177), Norway (CNAP: n = 43,834), Australia (2 cohorts combined, Australian Pesticide Exposed Workers: n = 12,215 and Victorian Grain Farmers: n = 919), Republic of Korea (KMCC: n = 8,432), and Denmark (SUS: n = 1,899). For various cancer sites and all cancers combined, standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each cohort using national or regional rates as reference rates and were combined by random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: During nearly 2,800,000 person-years, a total of 23,188 cancers were observed. Elevated risks were observed for melanoma of the skin (number of cohorts = 3, meta-SIR = 1.18, CI: 1.01-1.38) and multiple myeloma (n = 4, meta-SIR = 1.27, CI: 1.04-1.54) in women and prostate cancer (n = 6, meta-SIR = 1.06, CI: 1.01-1.12), compared to the general population. In contrast, a deficit was observed for the incidence of several cancers, including cancers of the bladder, breast (female), colorectum, esophagus, larynx, lung, and pancreas and all cancers combined (n = 7, meta-SIR for all cancers combined = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.77-0.90). The direction of risk was largely consistent across cohorts although we observed large between-cohort variations in SIR for cancers of the liver and lung in men and women, and stomach, colorectum, and skin in men. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that agricultural workers have a lower risk of various cancers and an elevated risk of prostate cancer, multiple myeloma (female), and melanoma of skin (female) compared to the general population. Those differences and the between-cohort variations may be due to underlying differences in risk factors and warrant further investigation of agricultural exposures.

Maintaining face-to-face contact during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal qualitative investigation in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic required a rapid reconfiguration of UK general practice to minimise face-to-face contact with patients to reduce infection risk. However, some face-to-face contact remained necessary and practices needed to ensure such contact could continue safely. AIM: To examine how practices determined when face-to-face contact was necessary and how face-to-face consultations were reconfigured to reduce COVID-19 infection risk. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative interview study in general practices in Bristol, North Somerset, and South Gloucestershire. METHOD: Longitudinal semi-structured interviews with clinical and managerial practice staff were undertaken at four timepoints between May and July 2020. RESULTS: Practices worked flexibly within general national guidance to determine when face-to-face contact with patients was necessary, influenced by knowledge of the patient, experience, and practice resilience. For example, practices prioritised patients according to clinical need using face-to-face contact to resolve clinician uncertainty or provide adequate reassurance to patients. To make face-to-face contact as safe as possible and keep patients separated, practices introduced a heterogeneous range of measures that exploited features of their indoor and outdoor spaces, and altered their appointment processes. As national restrictions eased in June and July, the number and proportion of patients seen face to face generally increased. However, the reconfiguration of buildings and processes reduced the available capacity and put increased pressure on practices. CONCLUSION: Practices responded rapidly and creatively to the initial lockdown restrictions. The variety of ways practices organised face-to-face contact to minimise infection highlights the need for flexibility in guidance.

Changes in presentations with features potentially indicating cancer in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the number of people aged 50+ years presenting to primary care with features that could potentially indicate cancer, and to explore how reporting differed by patient characteristics and in face-to-face vs remote consultations. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study of general practitioner (GP), nurse and paramedic primary care consultations in 21 practices in South-West England covering 123 947 patients. The models compared potential cancer indicators reported in April-July 2019 with April-July 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Potential indicators of cancer were identified using code lists for symptoms, signs, test results and diagnoses listed in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence suspected cancer referral guidance (NG12). RESULTS: During April-July 2019, 17% of registered patients aged 50+ years reported a potential cancer indicator in a consultation with a GP or nurse. During April-July 2020, this reduced to 11% (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.67, p<0.001). Reductions in potential cancer indicators were stable across age group, sex, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation quintile and shielding status, but less marked in patients with mental health conditions than without (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.79, interaction p<0.001). Proportions of GP consultations with potential indicators of cancer reduced between 2019 and 2020 for face-to-face consultations (IRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.92, p<0.001) and increased for remote consultations (IRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29, p=0.001), although it remained lower in remote consulting than face-to-face in April-July 2020. This difference was greater for nurse/paramedic consultations (face-to-face: IRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83, p=0.002; remote: IRR 1.60, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.333, p=0.014). CONCLUSION: The number of patients consulting with presentations that could potentially indicate cancer reduced during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients should be encouraged to continue contacting primary care for persistent signs and symptoms, and GPs and nurses should be encouraged to probe patients for further information during remote consulting, in the absence of non-verbal cues.

Linked electronic health records for research on a nationwide cohort of more than 54 million people in England: data resource.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel England-wide electronic health record (EHR) resource enabling whole population research on covid-19 and cardiovascular disease while ensuring data security and privacy and maintaining public trust. DESIGN: Data resource comprising linked person level records from national healthcare settings for the English population, accessible within NHS Digital's new trusted research environment. SETTING: EHRs from primary care, hospital episodes, death registry, covid-19 laboratory test results, and community dispensing data, with further enrichment planned from specialist intensive care, cardiovascular, and covid-19 vaccination data. PARTICIPANTS: 54.4 million people alive on 1 January 2020 and registered with an NHS general practitioner in England. MAIN MEASURES OF INTEREST: Confirmed and suspected covid-19 diagnoses, exemplar cardiovascular conditions (incident stroke or transient ischaemic attack and incident myocardial infarction) and all cause mortality between 1 January and 31 October 2020. RESULTS: The linked cohort includes more than 96% of the English population. By combining person level data across national healthcare settings, data on age, sex, and ethnicity are complete for around 95% of the population. Among 53.3 million people with no previous diagnosis of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 98 721 had a first ever incident stroke or transient ischaemic attack between 1 January and 31 October 2020, of which 30% were recorded only in primary care and 4% only in death registry records. Among 53.2 million people with no previous diagnosis of myocardial infarction, 62 966 had an incident myocardial infarction during follow-up, of which 8% were recorded only in primary care and 12% only in death registry records. A total of 959 470 people had a confirmed or suspected covid-19 diagnosis (714 162 in primary care data, 126 349 in hospital admission records, 776 503 in covid-19 laboratory test data, and 50 504 in death registry records). Although 58% of these were recorded in both primary care and covid-19 laboratory test data, 15% and 18%, respectively, were recorded in only one. CONCLUSIONS: This population-wide resource shows the importance of linking person level data across health settings to maximise completeness of key characteristics and to ascertain cardiovascular events and covid-19 diagnoses. Although this resource was initially established to support research on covid-19 and cardiovascular disease to benefit clinical care and public health and to inform healthcare policy, it can broaden further to enable a wide range of research.

Primary Care implementation of Germ Defence, a digital behaviour change intervention to improve household infection control during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of randomising dissemination of the Germ Defence behaviour change website via GP practices across England UK. TRIAL DESIGN: A two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial implementing Germ Defence via GP practices compared with usual care. PARTICIPANTS: Setting: All Primary care GP practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: All patients aged 16 years and over who were granted access by participating GP practices. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: We will ask staff at GP practices randomised to the intervention arm to share the weblink to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice during the 4-month trial implementation period and care will otherwise follow current standard management. Germ Defence is an interactive website ( http://GermDefence.org/ ) employing behaviour change techniques and practical advice on how to reduce the spread of infection in the home. The coronavirus version of Germ Defence helps people understand what measures to take and when to take them to avoid infection. This includes hand washing, avoiding sharing rooms and surfaces, dealing with deliveries and ventilating rooms. Using behaviour change techniques, it helps users think through and adopt better home hygiene habits and find ways to solve any barriers, providing personalised goal setting and tailored advice that fits users' personal circumstances and problem solving to overcome barriers. Comparator: Patients at GP practices randomised to the usual care arm will receive current standard management for the 4-month trial period after which we will ask staff to share the link to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the effects of implementing Germ Defence on prevalence of all respiratory tract infection diagnoses during the 4-month trial implementation period. The secondary outcomes are: 1) incidence of COVID-19 diagnoses 2) incidence of COVID-19 symptom presentation 3) incidence of gastrointestinal infections 4) number of primary care consultations 5) antibiotic usage 6) hospital admissions 7) uptake of GP practices disseminating Germ Defence to their patients 8) usage of the Germ Defence website by individuals who were granted access by their GP practice RANDOMISATION: GP practices will be randomised on a 1:1 basis by the independent Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration (BRTC). Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England will be divided into blocks according to region, and equal numbers in each block will be randomly allocated to intervention or usual care. The randomisation schedule will be generated in Stata statistical software by a statistician not otherwise involved in the enrolment of general practices into the study. BLINDING (MASKING): The principal investigators, the statistician and study collaborators will remain blinded from the identity of randomised practices until the end of the study. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): To detect planned effect size (based on PRIMIT trial, Little et al, 2015): 11.1 million respondents from 6822 active GP practices. Assuming 25% of these GP practices will engage, we will contact all GP practices in England spread across 135 Clinical Commissioning Groups. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0, dated 13 January 2021. Implementation is ongoing. The implementation period started on 10 November 2020 and will end on 10 March 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry ( isrctn.com/ ISRCTN14602359 ) on 12 August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Implementation of remote consulting in UK primary care following the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce contagion of COVID-19, in March 2020 UK general practices implemented predominantly remote consulting via telephone, video, or online consultation platforms. AIM: To investigate the rapid implementation of remote consulting and explore impact over the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN AND SETTING: Mixed-methods study in 21 general practices in Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire. METHOD: Longitudinal observational quantitative analysis compared volume and type of consultation in April to July 2020 with April to July 2019. Negative binomial models were used to identify if changes differed among different groups of patients. Qualitative data from 87 longitudinal interviews with practice staff in four rounds investigated practices' experience of the move to remote consulting, challenges faced, and solutions. A thematic analysis utilised Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: There was universal consensus that remote consulting was necessary. This drove a rapid change to 90% remote GP consulting (46% for nurses) by April 2020. Consultation rates reduced in April to July 2020 compared to 2019; GPs and nurses maintained a focus on older patients, shielding patients, and patients with poor mental health. Telephone consulting was sufficient for many patient problems, video consulting was used more rarely, and was less essential as lockdown eased. SMS-messaging increased more than three-fold. GPs were concerned about increased clinical risk and some had difficulties setting thresholds for seeing patients face-to-face as lockdown eased. CONCLUSION: The shift to remote consulting was successful and a focus maintained on vulnerable patients. It was driven by the imperative to reduce contagion and may have risks; post-pandemic, the model will need adjustment.

A multi-stakeholder approach to the co-production of the research agenda for medicines optimisation.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of medicines are not used as intended, resulting in poor health and economic outcomes. Medicines optimisation is 'a person-centred approach to safe and effective medicines use, to ensure people obtain the best possible outcomes from their medicines'. The purpose of this exercise was to co-produce a prioritised research agenda for medicines optimisation using a multi-stakeholder (patient, researcher, public and health professionals) approach. METHODS: A three-stage, multiple method process was used including: generation of preliminary research questions (Stage 1) using a modified Nominal Group Technique; electronic consultation and ranking with a wider multi-stakeholder group (Stage 2); a face-to-face, one-day consensus meeting involving representatives from all stakeholder groups (Stage 3). RESULTS: In total, 92 research questions were identified during Stages 1 and 2 and ranked in order of priority during stage 3. Questions were categorised into four areas: 'Patient Concerns' [e.g. is there a shared decision (with patients) about using each medicine?], 'Polypharmacy' [e.g. how to design health services to cope with the challenge of multiple medicines use?], 'Non-Medical Prescribing' [e.g. how can the contribution of non-medical prescribers be optimised in primary care?], and 'Deprescribing' [e.g. what support is needed by prescribers to deprescribe?]. A significant number of the 92 questions were generated by Patient and Public Involvement representatives, which demonstrates the importance of including this stakeholder group when identifying research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of research questions was generated reflecting concerns which affect patients, practitioners, the health service, as well the ethical and philosophical aspects of the prescribing and deprescribing of medicines. These questions should be used to set future research agendas and funding commissions.

International prescribing patterns and polypharmacy in older people with advanced chronic kidney disease: results from the European Quality study.

BACKGROUND: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at high risk of polypharmacy. However, no previous study has investigated international prescribing patterns in this group. This article aims to examine prescribing and polypharmacy patterns among older people with advanced CKD across the countries involved in the European Quality (EQUAL) study. METHODS: The EQUAL study is an international prospective cohort study of patients ≥65 years of age with advanced CKD. Baseline demographic, clinical and medication data were analysed and reported descriptively. Polypharmacy was defined as ≥5 medications and hyperpolypharmacy as ≥10. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were used to determine associations between country and the number of prescribed medications. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine associations between country and hyperpolypharmacy. RESULTS: Of the 1317 participants from five European countries, 91% were experiencing polypharmacy and 43% were experiencing hyperpolypharmacy. Cardiovascular medications were the most prescribed medications (mean 3.5 per person). There were international differences in prescribing, with significantly greater hyperpolypharmacy in Germany {odds ratio (OR) 2.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73-4.37]; P < 0.001, reference group UK}, the Netherlands [OR 1.91 (95% CI 1.32-2.76); P = 0.001] and Italy [OR 1.57 (95% CI 1.15-2.15); P = 0.004]. People in Poland experienced the least hyperpolypharmacy [OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.17-0.87); P = 0.021]. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperpolypharmacy is common among older people with advanced CKD, with significant international differences in the number of medications prescribed. Practice variation may represent a lack of consensus regarding appropriate prescribing for this high-risk group for whom pharmacological treatment has great potential for harm as well as benefit.

Uptake of direct oral anticoagulants in primary care: an ecological and economic study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials indicate that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are as effective as warfarin at preventing ischaemic stroke. It is unclear, however, whether relative changes in DOAC uptake have affected clinical and economic outcomes in practice. AIM: To investigate variations in DOAC uptake and the relationship with hospital admissions and cost. DESIGN & SETTING: An ecological study using electronic administrative records from England, April 2012 to March 2017. METHOD: Multivariable regression was used to model practice variation in DOAC prescribing, and the relationship with clinical and economic outcomes. RESULTS: In quarter 1 of 2017, 55.0% of the 2 695 262 patients dispensed an anticoagulant were given a DOAC. There was a two-fold difference in odds of dispensing DOACs between clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) between those with the highest and lowest usage of these drugs. Increases in the relative uptake of DOACs were not associated with hospital admissions for ischaemic stroke (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.00; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.999 to 1.001), nor gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeds (IRR = 1.001; 95% CI = 1.000 to 1.002). In 2017, quarter 1, CCGs spent £9247 (inter-quartile range £7751 to £10 853) per 1000 patients on anticoagulants. The marginal effect of a 5% increase in DOAC uptake was associated with a £17.95 (£8.75 to £27.15) increase in total costs, per 1000 patient population. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the relative uptake of DOACs across practices, with greater costs but no reduction in hospital admissions in those with higher levels of dispensing. Findings indicate that clinical and economic benefits of DOACs identified by clinical trials are not realised in practice.

Impact of emergency hospital admissions on patterns of primary care prescribing: a retrospective cohort analysis of electronic records in England.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the impact of hospitalisation on prescribing in UK clinical practice. AIM: To investigate whether an emergency hospital admission drives increases in polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs). DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort analysis set in primary and secondary care in England. METHOD: Changes in number of prescriptions and PIPs following an emergency hospital admission in 2014 (at admission and 4 weeks post-discharge), and 6 months post-discharge were calculated among 37 761 adult patients. Regression models were used to investigate changes in prescribing following an admission. RESULTS: Emergency attendees surviving 6 months (N = 32 657) had a mean of 4.4 (standard deviation [SD] = 4.6) prescriptions before admission, and a mean of 4.7 (SD = 4.7; P<0.001) 4 weeks after discharge. Small increases (<0.5) in the number of prescriptions at 4 weeks were observed across most hospital specialties, except for surgery (-0.02; SD = 0.65) and cardiology (2.1; SD = 2.6). The amount of PIPs increased after hospitalisation; 4.0% of patients had ≥1 PIP immediately before pre-admission, increasing to 8.0% 4 weeks post-discharge. Across hospital specialties, increases in the proportion of patients with a PIP ranged from 2.1% in obstetrics and gynaecology to 8.0% in cardiology. Patients were, on average, prescribed fewer medicines at 6 months compared with 4 weeks post-discharge (mean = 4.1; SD = 4.6; P<0.001). PIPs decreased to 5.4% (n = 1751) of patients. CONCLUSION: Perceptions that hospitalisation is a consistent factor driving rises in polypharmacy are unfounded. Increases in prescribing post-hospitalisation reflect appropriate clinical response to acute illness, whereas decreases are more likely in patients who are multimorbid, reflecting a focus on deprescribing and medicines optimisation in these individuals. Increases in PIPs remain a concern.

Use of antibiotics and asthma medication for acute lower respiratory tract infections in people with and without asthma: retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are overused in patients with acute lower respiratory tract infections (ALRTIs), but less is known about their use in patients with asthma, or the use of asthma medication for ALRTI in patients without asthma. Our aim was to describe the frequency, variation and drivers in antibiotic and asthma medication prescribing for ALRTI in adults with and without asthma in primary care. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged ≥12 years, diagnosed with an ALRTI in primary care in 2014-15 was conducted using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Current asthma status, asthma medication and oral antibiotic use within 3 days of ALRTI infection was determined. Treatment frequency was calculated by asthma status. Mixed-effect regression models were used to explore between-practice variation and treatment determinants. RESULTS: There were 127,976 ALRTIs reported among 110,418 patients during the study period, of whom 17,952 (16%) had asthma. Respectively, 81 and 79% of patients with and without asthma received antibiotics, and 41 and 15% asthma medication. There were significant differences in between-practice prescribing for all treatments, with greatest differences seen for oral steroids (odds ratio (OR) 18; 95% CI 7-82 and OR = 94; 33-363, with and without asthma) and asthma medication only (OR 7; 4-18 and OR = 17; 10-33, with and without asthma). Independent predictors of antibiotic prescribing among patients with asthma included fewer previous ALRTI presentations (≥2 vs. 0 previous ALRTI: OR = 0.25; 0.16-0.39), higher practice (OR = 1.47; 1.35-1.60 per SD) and prior antibiotic prescribing (3+ vs. 1 prescriptions OR = 1.28; 1.04-1.57) and concurrent asthma medication (OR = 1.44; 1.32-1.57). Independent predictors of asthma medication in patients without asthma included higher prior asthma medication prescribing (≥7 vs. 0 prescriptions OR = 2.31; 1.83-2.91) and concurrent antibiotic prescribing (OR = 3.59; 3.22-4.01). CONCLUSION: Findings from the study indicate that antibiotics are over-used for ALRTI, irrespective of asthma status, and asthma medication is over-used in patients without asthma, with between-practice variation suggesting considerable clinical uncertainty. Further research is urgently needed to clarify the role of these medications for ALRTI.

Ethnic and age differences in right-left breast asymmetry in a large population-based screening population.

OBJECTIVE: Exposure to sex hormones is important in the pathogenesis of breast cancer and inability to tolerate such exposure may be reflected in increased asymmetrical growth of the breasts. This study aims to characterize, for the first time, asymmetry in breast volume (BV) and radiodense volume (DV) in a large ethnically diverse population. METHODS: Automated measurements from digital raw mammographic images of 54,591 cancer-free participants (aged 47-73) in a UK breast screening programme were used to calculate absolute (cm3) and relative asymmetry in BV and DV. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess asymmetry associations with age and ethnicity. RESULTS: BV and DV absolute asymmetry were positively correlated with the corresponding volumetric dimension (BV or DV). BV absolute asymmetry increased, whilst DV absolute asymmetry decreased, with increasing age (P-for-linear-trend <0.001 for both). Relative to Whites, Blacks had statistically significantly higher, and Chinese lower, BV and DV absolute asymmetries. However, after adjustment for the corresponding underlying volumetric dimension the age and ethnic differences were greatly attenuated. Median relative (fluctuating) BV and DV asymmetry were 2.34 and 3.28% respectively. CONCLUSION: After adjusting for the relevant volumetric dimension (BV or DV), age and ethnic differences in absolute breast asymmetry were largely resolved. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Previous small studies have reported breast asymmetry-breast cancer associations. Automated measurements of asymmetry allow the conduct of large-scale studies to further investigate these associations.

Completeness and validity of alcohol recording in general practice within the UK: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010 the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended screening adults for excessive alcohol consumption to try and help prevent alcohol-use disorders. Little is known about the extent to which these recommendations are followed, and the resulting completeness and validity of alcohol-related data recording in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the completeness and accuracy of recording of alcohol use within primary care records in the UK. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. PARTICIPANTS: We included all adult patients registered on 1st January 2018 with ≥1 year of follow-up. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We calculated prevalence of alcohol consumption recording overall and within patient groups. We then validated alcohol consumption data against recommended screening tools (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)) as the gold standard. We also calculated how prevalence of alcohol recording changed over the preceding decade. RESULTS: In 2018, among 1.8 million registered adult patients, just over half (51.9%) had a record for a code related to alcohol in the previous 5 years. Recording of alcohol consumption was more common among women, older people, ex-smokers and those from more deprived areas, who were overweight/obese, or with comorbidities. A quarter of patients had units per week recorded in the last 5 years, but <10% had an AUDIT or Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) alcohol screening test score. The recorded alcohol measures corresponded to results from gold standard AUDIT scores. The distribution of consumption among current drinkers was similar to the Health Survey for England. CONCLUSIONS: Half of adults in UK primary care have no recorded alcohol consumption data. When consumption is recorded, we have demonstrated internal and external validity of the data, suggesting greater recording may help identify opportunities for interventions to reduce harms.