Postpandemic Sentinel Surveillance of Respiratory Diseases in the Context of the World Health Organization Mosaic Framework: Protocol for a Development and Evaluation Study Involving the English Primary Care Network 2023-2024.

BACKGROUND: Prepandemic sentinel surveillance focused on improved management of winter pressures, with influenza-like illness (ILI) being the key clinical indicator. The World Health Organization (WHO) global standards for influenza surveillance include monitoring acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI. The WHO's mosaic framework recommends that the surveillance strategies of countries include the virological monitoring of respiratory viruses with pandemic potential such as influenza. The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioner Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) in collaboration with the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has provided sentinel surveillance since 1967, including virology since 1993. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe the RSC's plans for sentinel surveillance in the 2023-2024 season and evaluate these plans against the WHO mosaic framework. METHODS: Our approach, which includes patient and public involvement, contributes to surveillance objectives across all 3 domains of the mosaic framework. We will generate an ARI phenotype to enable reporting of this indicator in addition to ILI. These data will support UKHSA's sentinel surveillance, including vaccine effectiveness and burden of disease studies. The panel of virology tests analyzed in UKHSA's reference laboratory will remain unchanged, with additional plans for point-of-care testing, pneumococcus testing, and asymptomatic screening. Our sampling framework for serological surveillance will provide greater representativeness and more samples from younger people. We will create a biomedical resource that enables linkage between clinical data held in the RSC and virology data, including sequencing data, held by the UKHSA. We describe the governance framework for the RSC. RESULTS: We are co-designing our communication about data sharing and sampling, contextualized by the mosaic framework, with national and general practice patient and public involvement groups. We present our ARI digital phenotype and the key data RSC network members are requested to include in computerized medical records. We will share data with the UKHSA to report vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19 and influenza, assess the disease burden of respiratory syncytial virus, and perform syndromic surveillance. Virological surveillance will include COVID-19, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and other common respiratory viruses. We plan to pilot point-of-care testing for group A streptococcus, urine tests for pneumococcus, and asymptomatic testing. We will integrate test requests and results with the laboratory-computerized medical record system. A biomedical resource will enable research linking clinical data to virology data. The legal basis for the RSC's pseudonymized data extract is The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002, and all nonsurveillance uses require research ethics approval. CONCLUSIONS: The RSC extended its surveillance activities to meet more but not all of the mosaic framework's objectives. We have introduced an ARI indicator. We seek to expand our surveillance scope and could do more around transmissibility and the benefits and risks of nonvaccine therapies.

GP access for inclusion health groups: perspectives and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: General practice has seen the widespread adoption of remote consulting and triage systems. There is a lack of evidence exploring how inclusion health populations have been impacted by this transformation. AIM: This study aimed to explore the post-pandemic GP access for inclusion health populations, through the lens of those with lived experience, and identify practical recommendations for improving access for this population. DESIGN & SETTING: A mixed methods study exploring the direct experience of people from inclusion health groups trying to access GP care in 13 practices in east London. METHOD: A mystery shopper exercise involving 39 in-person practice visits and 13 phone-calls were undertaken. The findings were reflected upon by a multidisciplinary stakeholder group which identified recommendations for improvements. RESULTS: Only 31% of the mystery shopper visits (n=8) resulted in registration and the offer of an appointment to see a GP for an urgent problem. None of the mystery shoppers was able to book an appointment over the phone but 10/13 felt that they would be able to register and make an appointment if they followed the receptionist's instructions. Most mystery shoppers felt respected, listened to and understood the information provided to them. Just under half of the practices (46%, n=6) received positive comments on how accessible and supportive their spaces felt.Practice and system-level recommendations were identified by the stakeholder group. CONCLUSION: Ongoing GP access issues persist for inclusion health populations. We identified practice and system level recommendations for improving access for this vulnerable population.

Single-handed versus multiple-handed General practices: A cross-sectional study of quality outcomes in England.

OBJECTIVES: As general practice increasingly moves towards large group practices, there is debate about the relative benefits, safety and sustainability of different care delivery models. This study investigates the performance of single-handed practices compared to practices with multiple doctors in England, UK. METHODS: Practices in England with more than 1000 patients were included. Workforce data and a quality control process classified practices as single-handed or multiple-handed. Outcomes were (i) GP patient survey scores measuring access, continuity, confidence in health professional and overall satisfaction; (ii) reported diabetes and hypertension outcomes; and (iii) emergency department presentation rates and cancer detection (percentage of cancers diagnosed by a 2-week wait). Generalised linear models, controlling for patient and practice characteristics, compared outcomes in single and multiple-handed practices and assessed the effect of GP age in single-handed practices. RESULTS: Single-handed practices were more commonly found in areas of high deprivation (41% compared to 20% of multiple-handed practices). Single-handed practices had higher patient-reported access, continuity and overall satisfaction but slightly lower diabetes management and cancer detection rates. Emergency department presentations were higher when controlling for patient characteristics in single-handed practices but not when also controlling for practice rurality and size. Increased deprivation was associated with lower performance in seven out of eight outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found single-handed practices to be associated with high patient satisfaction while performing slightly less well on selected clinical outcomes. Further research is required to better understand the association between practice size, including increasing multidisciplinary working, on patient experience and outcomes.

Thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events following second dose with BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1: self-controlled case series analysis of the English national sentinel cohort.

Background: Thrombosis associated with thrombocytopenia was a matter of concern post first and second doses of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, it is important to investigate the risk of thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events following a second dose of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: We conducted a large-scale self-controlled case series analysis, using routine primary care data linked to hospital data, among 12.3 million individuals (16 years old and above) in England. We used the nationally representative Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) sentinel network database with baseline and risk periods between 8th December 2020 and 11th June 2022. We included individuals who received two vaccine (primary) doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) and two vaccine doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccines in our analyses. We carried out a self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis for each outcome using a conditional Poisson regression model with an offset for the length of risk period. We reported the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic (including arterial and venous events) and haemorrhagic events, in the period of 0-27 days after receiving a second dose of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 vaccines compared to the baseline period (14 or more days prior to first dose, 28 or more days after the second dose and the time between 28 or more days after the first and 14 or more days prior to the second dose). We adjusted for a range of potential confounders, including age, sex, comorbidities and deprivation. Findings: Between December 8, 2020 and February 11, 2022, 6,306,306 individuals were vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 and 6,046,785 individuals were vaccinated with two doses of ChAdOx1. Compared to the baseline, our analysis show no increased risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) for both BNT162b2 (IRR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.65-0.770) and ChAdOx1 (IRR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84-0.98); and similarly there was no increased risk for cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) for both BNT162b2 (IRR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.41-1.85) and ChAdOx1 (IRR 1.73, 95% CI: 0.82-3.68). We additionally report no difference in IRR for pulmonary embolus, and deep vein thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, including idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), and haemorrhagic events post second dose for both BNT162b2. Interpretation: Reassuringly, we found no associations between increased risk of thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events post vaccination with second dose for either of these vaccines. Funding: Data and Connectivity: COVID-19 Vaccines Pharmacovigilance study.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation and death of people in clinical risk groups during the Delta variant period: English primary care network cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be highly effective against hospitalisation and death following COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness estimates against severe endpoints among individuals with clinical conditions that place them at increased risk of critical disease are limited. METHODS: We used English primary care medical record data from the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre sentinel network (N > 18 million). Data were linked to the National Immunisation Management Service database, Second Generation Surveillance System for virology test data, Hospital Episode Statistics, and death registry data. We estimated adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) against COVID-19 infection followed by hospitalisation and death among individuals in specific clinical risk groups using a cohort design during the delta-dominant period. We also report mortality statistics and results from our antibody surveillance in this population. FINDINGS: aVE against severe endpoints was high, 14-69d following a third dose aVE was 96.4% (95.1%-97.4%) and 97.9% (97.2%-98.4%) for clinically vulnerable people given a Vaxzevria and Comirnaty primary course respectively. Lower aVE was observed in the immunosuppressed group: 88.6% (79.1%-93.8%) and 91.9% (85.9%-95.4%) for Vaxzevria and Comirnaty respectively. Antibody levels were significantly lower among the immunosuppressed group than those not in this risk group across all vaccination types and doses. The standardised case fatality rate within 28 days of a positive test was 3.9/1000 in people not in risk groups, compared to 12.8/1000 in clinical risk groups. Waning aVE with time since 2nd dose was also demonstrated, for example, Comirnaty aVE against hospitalisation reduced from 96.0% (95.1-96.7%) 14-69days post-dose 2-82.9% (81.4-84.2%) 182days+ post-dose 2. INTERPRETATION: In all clinical risk groups high levels of vaccine effectiveness against severe endpoints were seen. Reduced vaccine effectiveness was noted among the immunosuppressed group.

Policies on doctors' declaration of interests in medical organisations: a thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: There has been growing concern about doctors' conflicts of interests (COIs) but it is unclear what processes and tools exist to enable the consistent declaration and management of such interests. This study mapped existing policies across a variety of organisations and settings to better understand the degree of variation and identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Thematic analysis. SETTING: We studied the COI policies of 31 UK and international organisations which set or influence professional standards or engage doctors in healthcare commissioning and provision settings. PARTICIPANTS: 31 UK and international organisations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Organisational policy similarities and differences. RESULTS: Most policies (29/31) referred to the need for individuals to apply judgement when deciding whether an interest is a conflict, with just over half (18/31) advocating a low threshold. Policies differed on the perception of frequency of COI, the timings of declarations, the type of interests that needed to be declared, and how COI and policy breaches should be managed. Just 14/31 policies stated a duty to report concerns in relation to COI. Only 18/31 policies advised COI would be published, while three stated that any disclosures would remain confidential. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of organisational policies revealed wide variation in what interests should be declared, when and how. This variation suggests that the current system may not be adequate to maintain a high level of professional integrity in all settings and that there is a need for better standardisation that reduces the risk of errors while addressing the needs of doctors, organisations and the public.

Effect of resistance exercise dose components for tendinopathy management: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential moderating effects of resistance exercise dose components including intensity, volume and frequency, for the management of common tendinopathies. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regressions. DATA SOURCES: Including but not limited to: MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN Registry. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials investigating resistance exercise as the dominant treatment class, reporting sufficient information regarding ≥2 components of exercise dose. RESULTS: A total of 110 studies were included in meta-analyses (148 treatment arms (TAs), 3953 participants), reporting on five tendinopathy locations (rotator cuff: 48 TAs; Achilles: 43 TAs; lateral elbow: 29 TAs; patellar: 24 TAs; gluteal: 4 TAs). Meta-regressions provided consistent evidence of greater pooled mean effect sizes for higher intensity therapies comprising additional external resistance compared with body mass only (large effect size domains: ß BodyMass: External = 0.50 (95% credible interval (CrI): 0.15 to 0.84; p=0.998); small effect size domains (ß BodyMass: External = 0.04 (95% CrI: -0.21 to 0.31; p=0.619)) when combined across tendinopathy locations or analysed separately. Greater pooled mean effect sizes were also identified for the lowest frequency (less than daily) compared with mid (daily) and high frequencies (more than once per day) for both effect size domains when combined or analysed separately (p≥0.976). Evidence for associations between training volume and pooled mean effect sizes was minimal and inconsistent. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION: Resistance exercise dose is poorly reported within tendinopathy management literature. However, this large meta-analysis identified some consistent patterns indicating greater efficacy on average with therapies prescribing higher intensities (through inclusion of additional loads) and lower frequencies, potentially creating stronger stimuli and facilitating adequate recovery.

What are small, medium and large effect sizes for exercise treatments of tendinopathy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: To quantify and describe effect size distributions from exercise therapies across a range of tendinopathies and outcome domains to inform future research and clinical practice through conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis. Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis exploring moderating effects and context-specific small, medium and large thresholds. Eligibility criteria: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials involving any persons with a diagnosis of rotator cuff, lateral elbow, patellar, Achilles or gluteal tendinopathy of any severity or duration. Methods: Common databases, six trial registries and six grey literature databases were searched on 18 January 2021 (PROSPERO: CRD42020168187). Standardised mean difference (SMDpre) effect sizes were used with Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis models to calculate the 0.25 (small), 0.5 (medium) and 0.75 quantiles (large) and compare pooled means across potential moderators. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Results: Data were obtained from 114 studies comprising 171 treatment arms 4104 participants. SMDpre effect sizes were similar across tendinopathies but varied across outcome domains. Greater threshold values were obtained for self-reported measures of pain (small=0.5, medium=0.9 and large=1.4), disability (small=0.6, medium=1.0 and large=1.5) and function (small=0.6, medium=1.1 and large=1.8) and lower threshold values obtained for quality of life (small=-0.2, medium=0.3 and large=0.7) and objective measures of physical function (small=0.2, medium=0.4 and large=0.7). Potential moderating effects of assessment duration, exercise supervision and symptom duration were also identified, with greater pooled mean effect sizes estimated for longer assessment durations, supervised therapies and studies comprising patients with shorter symptom durations. Conclusion: The effect size of exercise on tendinopathy is dependent on the type of outcome measure assessed. Threshold values presented here can be used to guide interpretation and assist with further research better establishing minimal important change.

Inclusion health patient perspectives on remote access to general practice: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to rapid and widespread adoption of remote consultations and triage-first pathways in general practice. However, there is a lack of evidence on how these changes have been perceived by patients from inclusion health groups. AIM: To explore the perspectives of individuals from inclusion health groups on the provision and accessibility of remote general practice services. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study with individuals from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, sex workers, vulnerable migrants, and those experiencing homelessness, recruited by Healthwatch in east London. METHOD: The study materials were co-produced with people with lived experience of social exclusion. Semi-structured interviews with 21 participants were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analysed using the framework method. RESULTS: Analysis identified barriers to access owing to lack of translation availability, digital exclusion, and a complex healthcare system, which is difficult to navigate. The role of triage and general practice in emergencies often seemed unclear to participants. Other themes identified included the importance of trust, face-to-face consultation options for ensuring safety, and the benefits of remote access, particularly in terms of convenience and saving time. Themes on reducing barriers included improving staff capacity and communication, offering tailored options and continuity of care, and simplifying care processes. CONCLUSION: The study highlighted the importance of a tailored approach for addressing the multiple barriers to care for inclusion health groups and the need for clearer and inclusive communication on the available triage and care pathways.

Factors associated with COVID-19 related hospitalisation, critical care admission and mortality using linked primary and secondary care data.

BACKGROUND: It is important that population cohorts at increased risk of hospitalisation and death following a COVID-19 infection are identified and protected. OBJECTIVES: We identified risk factors associated with increased risk of hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality in inner North East London (NEL) during the first UK COVID-19 wave. METHODS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis on linked primary and secondary care data from people aged 16 or older with confirmed COVID-19 infection between 01/02/2020 and 30/06/2020 determined odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals (CI) and P-values for the association between demographic, deprivation and clinical factors with COVID-19 hospitalisation, ICU admission and mortality. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1781 people were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 1195 (67%) were hospitalised, 152 (9%) admitted to ICU and 400 (23%) died. Results confirm previously identified risk factors: being male, or of Black or Asian ethnicity, or aged over 50. Obesity, type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) increased the risk of hospitalisation. Obesity increased the risk of being admitted to ICU. Underlying CKD, stroke and dementia increased the risk of death. Having learning disabilities was strongly associated with increased risk of death (OR = 4.75, 95% CI = [1.91, 11.84], P = .001). Having three or four co-morbidities increased the risk of hospitalisation (OR = 2.34, 95% CI = [1.55, 3.54], P < .001; OR = 2.40, 95% CI = [1.55, 3.73], P < .001 respectively) and death (OR = 2.61, 95% CI = [1.59, 4.28], P < .001; OR = 4.07, 95% CI = [2.48, 6.69], P < .001 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We confirm that age, sex, ethnicity, obesity, CKD and diabetes are important determinants of risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death. For the first time, we also identify people with learning disabilities and multi-morbidity as additional patient cohorts that need to be actively protected during COVID-19 waves.

Influenza and Respiratory Virus Surveillance, Vaccine Uptake, and Effectiveness at a Time of Cocirculating COVID-19: Protocol for the English Primary Care Sentinel System for 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) and Public Health England (PHE) are commencing their 54th season of collaboration at a time when SARS-CoV-2 infections are likely to be cocirculating with the usual winter infections. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to conduct surveillance of influenza and other monitored respiratory conditions and to report on vaccine uptake and effectiveness using nationally representative surveillance data extracted from primary care computerized medical records systems. We also aim to have general practices collect virology and serology specimens and to participate in trials and other interventional research. METHODS: The RCGP RSC network comprises over 1700 general practices in England and Wales. We will extract pseudonymized data twice weekly and are migrating to a system of daily extracts. First, we will collect pseudonymized, routine, coded clinical data for the surveillance of monitored and unexpected conditions; data on vaccine exposure and adverse events of interest; and data on approved research study outcomes. Second, we will provide dashboards to give general practices feedback about levels of care and data quality, as compared to other network practices. We will focus on collecting data on influenza-like illness, upper and lower respiratory tract infections, and suspected COVID-19. Third, approximately 300 practices will participate in the 2020-2021 virology and serology surveillance; this will include responsive surveillance and long-term follow-up of previous SARS-CoV-2 infections. Fourth, member practices will be able to recruit volunteer patients to trials, including early interventions to improve COVID-19 outcomes and point-of-care testing. Lastly, the legal basis for our surveillance with PHE is Regulation 3 of the Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002; other studies require appropriate ethical approval. RESULTS: The RCGP RSC network has tripled in size; there were previously 100 virology practices and 500 practices overall in the network and we now have 322 and 1724, respectively. The Oxford-RCGP Clinical Informatics Digital Hub (ORCHID) secure networks enable the daily analysis of the extended network; currently, 1076 practices are uploaded. We are implementing a central swab distribution system for patients self-swabbing at home in addition to in-practice sampling. We have converted all our primary care coding to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) coding. Throughout spring and summer 2020, the network has continued to collect specimens in preparation for the winter or for any second wave of COVID-19 cases. We have collected 5404 swabs and detected 623 cases of COVID-19 through extended virological sampling, and 19,341 samples have been collected for serology. This shows our preparedness for the winter season. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a groundswell of general practices joining our network. It has also created a permissive environment in which we have developed the capacity and capability of the national primary care surveillance systems and our unique public health institute, the RCGP and University of Oxford collaboration.

Use and impact of social prescribing: a mixed-methods feasibility study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Social prescribing aims to address social determinants of health, which account for 80%-90% of health outcomes, but the evidence base behind it is limited due to a lack of data linkingsocial prescribing activity and outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The objective of the quantitative component of this feasibility studyisto identify the characteristics of individuals who receive social prescriptions and describe the use and estimate the impact of social prescribing; the latter will be done on a homeless subgroup. We will use the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) primary care sentinel network, whose general practicescover a population of over 4 000 000 patients. Social prescribing data will be extracted onall recorded patients for 5 years up to 31 January 2020. The objective for the qualitative component of the study isto explore approaches to understand the contextual factors that will have influenced our quantitative findings to identify mechanisms to encourage adoption of social prescribing in primary care while improving data quality. Itwill comprise up to three 90-120 minute advisory group meetings for six to eight participants. Participants will be recruited based on their experience of delivering primary care within Oxfordshire and Surrey. The advisory group outputs will be analysed using framework analysis and will be used to create a survey instrument consisting of statements that surveyees, who will consist of primary care practitioners within the RCGP RSC, can agree or disagree with. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All RCGP RSC data are pseudonymised at the point of data extraction. No personally identifiable data are required for this investigation. This protocol follows the Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study checklist. The study results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and the dataset will be available to other researchers.

Disparities in the excess risk of mortality in the first wave of COVID-19: Cross sectional study of the English sentinel network.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies report contributors to the excess mortality in England during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We report the absolute excess risk (AER) of mortality and excess mortality rate (EMR) from a nationally representative COVID-19 sentinel surveillance network including known COVID-19 risk factors in people aged 45 years and above. METHODS: Pseudonymised, coded clinical data were uploaded from contributing primary care providers (N = 1,970,314, ≥45years). We calculated the AER in mortality by comparing mortality for weeks 2 to 20 this year with mortality data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) from 2018 for the same weeks. We conducted univariate and multivariate analysis including preselected variables. We report AER and EMR, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: The AER of mortality was 197.8/10,000 person years (95%CI:194.30-201.40). The EMR for male gender, compared with female, was 1.4 (95%CI:1.35-1.44, p<0.00); for our oldest age band (≥75 years) 10.09 (95%CI:9.46-10.75, p<0.00) compared to 45-64 year olds; Black ethnicity's EMR was 1.17 (95%CI: 1.03-1.33, p<0.02), reference white; and for dwellings with ≥9 occupants 8.01 (95%CI: 9.46-10.75, p<0.00). Presence of all included comorbidities significantly increased EMR. Ranked from lowest to highest these were: hypertension, chronic kidney disease, chronic respiratory and heart disease, and cancer or immunocompromised. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute excess mortality was approximately 2 deaths per 100 person years in the first wave of COVID-19. More personalised shielding advice for any second wave should include ethnicity, comorbidity and household size as predictors of risk.

Improving the management of musculoskeletal conditions: can an alternative approach to referral management underpinned by quality improvement and behavioural change theories offer a solution and a better patient experience? A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether a quality improvement-based approach to referral management can result in better musculoskeletal care within general practice. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using mixed methodology including random-effects meta-analysis and interrupted time series. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 36 general practices in East London. INTERVENTION: Informed by the results of a Cochrane review on educational interventions to improve general practitioners' (GPs) musculoskeletal care, we developed a multifaceted intervention, underpinned by quality improvement and behavioural change theories. It combined locally agreed clinical pathways, feedback on referral rates, clinical audit and peer review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Referral letter content, pathway adherence, referral rates, inter-practice variability and patient experience were evaluated before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Referral letter content on suspected diagnosis and prior management improved from a pooled preintervention proportion of 59% (95% CI 53% to 65%) and 67% (95% CI 61% to 73%), respectively, to 77% (95% CI 70% to 84%) and 81% (95% CI 74% to 88%). Pathway adherence improved from a pooled preintervention percentage of 42% (95% CI 35% to 48%) to 66% (95% CI 57% to 76%). The effect was greater across all quality outcomes for practices with baseline performance below or equal to the pooled baseline performance. There were reductions in the variability and rates of orthopaedic referrals at 6, 12 and 18 months (referral rate relative effect 32% (95% CI 14% to 48%), 30% (95% CI 7% to 53%) and 30% (95% CI 0% to 59%), respectively). Patient rating of how well GPs explained the musculoskeletal condition improved by 29% (95% CI 14% to 43%) and patient perception on the usefulness of the GP appointment improved by 24% (95% CI 9% to 38%). CONCLUSIONS: A quality improvement-based approach to referral management which values GPs' professionalism can result in improvements across a range of outcomes including referral quality, patient experience, referral rates and variability.

Evaluating case studies of community-oriented integrated care.

This paper summarises a ten-year conversation within London Journal of Primary Care about the nature of community-oriented integrated care (COIC) and how to develop and evaluate it. COIC means integration of efforts for combined disease-treatment and health-enhancement at local, community level. COIC is similar to the World Health Organisation concept of a Community-Based Coordinating Hub - both require a local geographic area where different organisations align their activities for whole system integration and develop local communities for health. COIC is a necessary part of an integrated system for health and care because it enables multiple insights into 'wicked problems', and multiple services to integrate their activities for people with complex conditions, at the same time helping everyone to collaborate for the health of the local population. The conversation concludes seven aspects of COIC that warrant further attention.

New ways of working; delivering better care for people with long-term conditions.

BACKGROUND: The cost-effectiveness of the traditional outpatient model for specialist care provision is increasingly being questioned in view of the changing patient needs, workforce challenges and technological advances. SETTING: This report summarises two RCGP London events showcasing new ways of delivering care for long-term conditions. QUESTIONS: What are the alternative approaches to the traditional outpatient model and do they have common themes? What are the challenges and opportunities of these new models of care? METHODS: Presentation of examples of new ways of long-term condition care delivery and round-table facilitative discussion and reflection on the challenges and solutions around service re-design and implementation, the commissioning and funding of new models of care, the facilitation of system-wide learning and the collection of data for evaluation. RESULTS: Different ways of delivering care for people with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) were presented. Most of the interventions included virtual clinics (during which patient care was reviewed by a specialist remotely without the need for a face-to-face consultation), improved communication between primary and secondary care clinicians, an element of referral triage/prioritisation, the use of trigger tools to identify people at risk of deterioration, patient education and a multi-disciplinary approach. DISCUSSION-CONCLUSIONS: Different models to the traditional outpatient long-term condition care are feasible and can result in improvements in the quality of care and staff satisfaction. However, such initiatives require careful planning, close collaboration between health care professionals and allocation of appropriate resources and training within primary care. There is also a need for systematic evaluation of such pilots to assess their cost-effectiveness and their acceptability to clinicians and patients. This requires systematic collection of population level data, agreement on the key outcomes for evaluation and a commitment of all stakeholders to sharing learning and resources to enable continuous improvement.

Professional interventions for general practitioners on the management of musculoskeletal conditions.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal conditions require particular management skills. Identification of interventions which are effective in equipping general practitioners (GPs) with such necessary skills could translate to improved health outcomes for patients and reduced healthcare and societal costs. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of professional interventions for GPs that aim to improve the management of musculoskeletal conditions in primary care.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2010, Issue 2; MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 - October 2013); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 - Ocotber 2013); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980 - November 2013), and the EPOC Specialised Register. We conducted cited reference searches using ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar; and handsearched selected issues of Arthritis and Rheumatism and Primary Care-Clinics in Office Practice. The latest search was conducted in November 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of professional interventions for GPs, taking place in a community setting, aiming to improve the management (including diagnosis and treatment) of musculoskeletal conditions and reporting any objective measure of GP behaviour, patient or economic outcomes. We considered professional interventions of any length, duration, intensity and complexity compared with active or inactive controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted all data. We calculated the risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR) of compliance with desired practice for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes. We investigated whether the direction of the targeted behavioural change affects the effectiveness of interventions. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty studies met our inclusion criteria.From 11 studies on osteoporosis, meta-analysis of five studies (high-certainty evidence) showed that a combination of a GP alerting system on a patient's increased risk of osteoporosis and a patient-directed intervention (including patient education and a reminder to see their GP) improves GP behaviour with regard to diagnostic bone mineral density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis medication prescribing (RR 4.44; (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.54 to 5.55; 3 studies; 3,386 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.71 (95% CI 1.50 to 1.94; 5 studies; 4,223 participants) for osteoporosis medication. Meta-analysis of two studies showed that GP alerting on its own also probably improves osteoporosis guideline-consistent GP behaviour (RR 4.75 (95% CI 3.62 to 6.24; 3,047 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.52 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.84; 3.047 participants) for osteoporosis medication) and that adding the patient-directed component probably does not lead to a greater effect (RR 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 2,995 participants)) for BMD and RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.10; 2,995 participants) for osteoporosis medication.Of the 10 studies on low back pain, seven showed that guideline dissemination and educational opportunities for GPs may lead to little or no improvement with regard to guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Two studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP feedback on the total number of investigations requested may have an effect on GP behaviour and result in a slight reduction in the number of tests, while one of these studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP reminders attached to radiology reports may result in a small but sustained reduction in the number of investigation requests.Of the four studies on osteoarthritis, one study showed that using educationally influential physicians may result in improvement in guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Another study showed slight improvements in patient outcomes (pain control) after training GPs on pain management.Of three studies on shoulder pain, one study reported that there may be little or no improvement in patient outcomes (functional capacity) after GP education on shoulder pain and injection training.Of two studies on other musculoskeletal conditions, one study on pain management showed that there may be worse patient outcomes (pain control) after GP training on the use of validated assessment scales.The 12 remaining studies across all musculoskeletal conditions showed little or no improvement in GP behaviour and patient outcomes.The direction of the targeted behaviour (i.e. increasing or decreasing a behaviour) does not seem to affect the effectiveness of an intervention. The majority of the studies did not investigate the potential adverse effects of the interventions and only three studies included a cost-effectiveness analysis.Overall, there were important methodological limitations in the body of evidence, with just a third of the studies reporting adequate allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessments. While our confidence in the pooled effect estimate of interventions for improving diagnostic testing and medication prescribing in osteoporosis is high, our confidence in the reported effect estimates in the remaining studies is low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is good-quality evidence that a GP alerting system with or without patient-directed education on osteoporosis improves guideline-consistent GP behaviour, resulting in better diagnosis and treatment rates.Interventions such as GP reminder messages and GP feedback on performance combined with guideline dissemination may lead to small improvements in guideline-consistent GP behaviour with regard to low back pain, while GP education on osteoarthritis pain and the use of educationally influential physicians may lead to slight improvement in patient outcomes and guideline-consistent behaviour respectively. However, further studies are needed to ascertain the effectiveness of such interventions in improving GP behaviour and patient outcomes.

Hydration strategies of runners in the London Marathon.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the hydration strategies of marathon runners, their sources of information and knowledge about fluid intake in the marathon, and their understanding of exercise-associated hyponatremia (EAH). DESIGN: Anonymized questionnaire. SETTING: London Marathon. PARTICIPANTS: Marathon race participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses regarding planned fluid consumption, volume to be consumed, volume of water and sports drink bottles, and the number of stations from which planning to take a drink. In addition, sources of information about appropriate drinking and understanding of hyponatremia. RESULTS: In total, 93.1% of the runners had read or been told about drinking fluids on marathon day and 95.8% of competitors had a plan regarding fluid intake. However, 12% planned to drink a volume large enough to put them at higher risk of EAH. Only 21.7% knew the volumes of water and sports drink bottles available on the course; 20.7% were planning to take a drink from all 24 water stations. Only 25.3% planned to drink according to thirst. Although 68.0% of the runners had heard of hyponatremia or low sodium levels, only 35.5% had a basic understanding of its cause and effects. CONCLUSIONS: Marathon runners lack knowledge about appropriate fluid intake to prevent hyponatremia on race day. Twelve percent reported drinking strategies that put them at risk of EAH. Effective educational interventions are still necessary to prevent overdrinking during marathons.