Community antibiotic prescribing in patients with COVID-19 across three pandemic waves: a population-based study in Scotland, UK.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine community antibiotic prescribing across a complete geographical area for people with a positive COVID-19 test across three pandemic waves, and to examine health and demographic factors associated with antibiotic prescribing. DESIGN: A population-based study using administrative data. SETTING: A complete geographical region within Scotland, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Residents of two National Health Service Scotland health boards with SARS-CoV-2 virus test results from 1 February 2020 to 31 March 2022 (n=184 954). Individuals with a positive test result (n=16 025) had data linked to prescription and hospital admission data ±28 days of the test, general practice data for high-risk comorbidities and demographic data. OUTCOME MEASURES: The associations between patient factors and the odds of antibiotic prescription in COVID-19 episodes across three pandemic waves from multivariate binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Data included 768 206 tests for 184 954 individuals, identifying 16 240 COVID-19 episodes involving 16 025 individuals. There were 3263 antibiotic prescriptions ±28 days for 2395 episodes. 35.6% of episodes had a prescription only before the test date, 52.3% of episodes after and 12.1% before and after. Antibiotic prescribing reduced over time: 20.4% of episodes in wave 1, 17.7% in wave 2 and 12.0% in wave 3. In multivariate logistic regression, being female (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.45), older (OR 3.02, 95% CI 2.50 to 3.68 75+ vs <25 years), having a high-risk comorbidity (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.61), a hospital admission ±28 days of an episode (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.77) and health board region (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.25, board B vs A) increased the odds of receiving an antibiotic. CONCLUSION: Community antibiotic prescriptions in COVID-19 episodes were uncommon in this population and likelihood was associated with patient factors. The reduction over pandemic waves may represent increased knowledge regarding COVID-19 treatment and/or evolving symptomatology.

Mixed Methods EvAluation of the high-volume low-complexity Surgical hUb pRogrammE (MEASURE): a mixed methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The waiting list for elective surgery in England recently reached over 7.8 million people and waiting time targets have been missed since 2010. The high-volume low complexity (HVLC) surgical hubs programme aims to tackle the backlog of patients awaiting elective surgery treatment in England. This study will evaluate the impact of HVLC surgical hubs on productivity, patient care and the workforce. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This 4-year project consists of six interlinked work packages (WPs) and is informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. WP1: Mapping current and future HVLC provision in England through document analysis, quantitative data sets (eg, Hospital Episodes Statistics) and interviews with national service leaders. WP2: Exploring the effects of HVLC hubs on key performance outcomes, primarily the volume of low-complexity patients treated, using quasi-experimental methods. WP3: Exploring the impact and implementation of HVLC hubs on patients, health professionals and the local NHS through approximately nine longitudinal, multimethod qualitative case studies. WP4: Assessing the productivity of HVLC surgical hubs using the Centre for Health Economics NHS productivity measure and Lord Carter's operational productivity measure. WP5: Conducting a mixed-methods appraisal will assess the influence of HVLC surgical hubs on the workforce using: qualitative data (WP3) and quantitative data (eg, National Health Service (NHS) England's workforce statistics and intelligence from WP2). WP6: Analysing the costs and consequences of HVLC surgical hubs will assess their achievements in relation to their resource use to establish value for money. A patient and public involvement group will contribute to the study design and materials. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the East Midlands-Nottingham Research Ethics Committee 23/EM/0231. Participants will provide informed consent for qualitative study components. Dissemination plans include multiple academic and non-academic outputs (eg, Peer-reviewed journals, conferences, social media) and a continuous, feedback-loop of findings to key stakeholders (eg, NHS England) to influence policy development. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Research registry: Researchregistry9364 (https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry%23home/registrationdetails/64cb6c795cbef8002a46f115/).

"I am in favour of organ donation, but I feel you should opt-in"-qualitative analysis of the #options 2020 survey free-text responses from NHS staff toward opt-out organ donation legislation in England.

BACKGROUND: In May 2020, England moved to an opt-out organ donation system, meaning adults are presumed to be an organ donor unless within an excluded group or have opted-out. This change aims to improve organ donation rates following brain or circulatory death. Healthcare staff in the UK are supportive of organ donation, however, both healthcare staff and the public have raised concerns and ethical issues regarding the change. The #options survey was completed by NHS organisations with the aim of understanding awareness and support of the change. This paper analyses the free-text responses from the survey. METHODS: The #options survey was registered as a National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) portfolio trial [IRAS 275992] 14 February 2020, and was completed between July and December 2020 across NHS organisations in the North-East and North Cumbria, and North Thames. The survey contained 16 questions of which three were free-text, covering reasons against, additional information required and family discussions. The responses to these questions were thematically analysed. RESULTS: The #options survey received 5789 responses from NHS staff with 1404 individuals leaving 1657 free-text responses for analysis. The family discussion question elicited the largest number of responses (66%), followed by those against the legislation (19%), and those requiring more information (15%). Analysis revealed six main themes with 22 sub-themes. CONCLUSIONS: The overall #options survey indicated NHS staff are supportive of the legislative change. Analysis of the free-text responses indicates that the views of the NHS staff who are against the change reflect the reasons, misconceptions, and misunderstandings of the public. Additional concerns included the rationale for the change, informed decision making, easy access to information and information regarding organ donation processes. Educational materials and interventions need to be developed for NHS staff to address the concepts of autonomy and consent, organ donation processes, and promote family conversations. Wider public awareness campaigns should continue to promote the positives and refute the negatives thus reducing misconceptions and misunderstandings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) [IRAS 275992].

Development of an enhanced scoring system to predict ICU readmission or in-hospital death within 24 hours using routine patient data from two NHS Foundation Trusts.

RATIONALE: Intensive care units (ICUs) admit the most severely ill patients. Once these patients are discharged from the ICU to a step-down ward, they continue to have their vital signs monitored by nursing staff, with Early Warning Score (EWS) systems being used to identify those at risk of deterioration. OBJECTIVES: We report the development and validation of an enhanced continuous scoring system for predicting adverse events, which combines vital signs measured routinely on acute care wards (as used by most EWS systems) with a risk score of a future adverse event calculated on discharge from the ICU. DESIGN: A modified Delphi process identified candidate variables commonly available in electronic records as the basis for a 'static' score of the patient's condition immediately after discharge from the ICU. L1-regularised logistic regression was used to estimate the in-hospital risk of future adverse event. We then constructed a model of physiological normality using vital sign data from the day of hospital discharge. This is combined with the static score and used continuously to quantify and update the patient's risk of deterioration throughout their hospital stay. SETTING: Data from two National Health Service Foundation Trusts (UK) were used to develop and (externally) validate the model. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 12 394 vital sign measurements were acquired from 273 patients after ICU discharge for the development set, and 4831 from 136 patients in the validation cohort. RESULTS: Outcome validation of our model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.724 for predicting ICU readmission or in-hospital death within 24 hours. It showed an improved performance with respect to other competitive risk scoring systems, including the National EWS (0.653). CONCLUSIONS: We showed that a scoring system incorporating data from a patient's stay in the ICU has better performance than commonly used EWS systems based on vital signs alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN32008295.

Operational failures in general practice: a consensus-building study on the priorities for improvement.

BACKGROUND: System problems, known as operational failures, can greatly affect the work of GPs, with negative consequences for patient and professional experience, efficiency, and effectiveness. Many operational failures are tractable to improvement, but which ones should be prioritised is less clear. AIM: To build consensus among GPs and patients on the operational failures that should be prioritised to improve NHS general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Two modified Delphi exercises were conducted online among NHS GPs and patients in several regions across England. METHOD: Between February and October 2021, two modified Delphi exercises were conducted online: one with NHS GPs, and a subsequent exercise with patients. Over two rounds, GPs rated the importance of a list of operational failures (n = 45) that had been compiled using existing evidence. The resulting shortlist was presented to patients for rating over two rounds. Data were analysed using median scores and interquartile ranges. Consensus was defined as 80% of responses falling within one value below and above the median. RESULTS: Sixty-two GPs responded to the first Delphi exercise, and 53.2% (n = 33) were retained through to round two. This exercise yielded consensus on 14 failures as a priority for improvement, which were presented to patients. Thirty-seven patients responded to the first patient Delphi exercise, and 89.2% (n = 33) were retained through to round two. Patients identified 13 failures as priorities. The highest scoring failures included inaccuracies in patients' medical notes, missing test results, and difficulties referring patients to other providers because of problems with referral forms. CONCLUSION: This study identified the highest-priority operational failures in general practice according to GPs and patients, and indicates where improvement efforts relating to operational failures in general practice should be focused.

Does shortage of GPs matter? A cross-sectional study of practice population life expectancy.

BACKGROUND: There are not enough GPs in England. Access to general practice and continuity of care are declining. AIM: To investigate whether practice characteristics are associated with life expectancy of practice populations. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional ecological study of patient life expectancy from 2015-2019. METHOD: Selection of independent variables was based on conceptual frameworks describing general practice's influence on outcomes. Sixteen non-correlated variables were entered into multivariable weighted regression models: population characteristics (Index of Multiple Deprivation, region, % White ethnicity, and % on diabetes register); practice organisation (total NHS payments to practices expressed as payment per registered patient, full-time equivalent fully qualified GPs, GP registrars, advanced nurse practitioners, other nurses, and receptionists per 1000 patients); access (% seen on the same day); clinical performance (% aged ≥45 years with blood pressure checked, % with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease vaccinated against flu, % with diabetes in glycaemic control, and % with coronary heart disease on antiplatelet therapy); and the therapeutic relationship (% continuity). RESULTS: Deprivation was strongly negatively associated with life expectancy. Regions outside London and White ethnicity were associated with lower life expectancy. Higher payment per patient, full-time equivalent fully qualified GPs per 1000 patients, continuity, % with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease having the flu vaccination, and % with diabetes with glycaemic control were associated with higher life expectancy; the % being seen on the same day was associated with higher life expectancy in males only. The variable aged ≥45 years with blood pressure checked was a negative predictor in females. CONCLUSION: The number of GPs, continuity of care, and access in England are declining, and it is worrying that these features of general practice were positively associated with life expectancy.

Accuracy of automated computer-aided risk scoring systems to estimate the risk of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In the UK National Health Service (NHS), the patient's vital signs are monitored and summarised into a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) score. A set of computer-aided risk scoring systems (CARSS) was developed and validated for predicting in-hospital mortality and sepsis in unplanned admission to hospital using NEWS and routine blood tests results. We sought to assess the accuracy of these models to predict the risk of COVID-19 in unplanned admissions during the first phase of the pandemic. METHODS: Adult ( > = 18 years) non-elective admissions discharged (alive/deceased) between 11-March-2020 to 13-June-2020 from two acute hospitals with an index NEWS electronically recorded within ± 24 h of admission. We identified COVID-19 admission based on ICD-10 code 'U071' which was determined by COVID-19 swab test results (hospital or community). We assessed the performance of CARSS (CARS_N, CARS_NB, CARM_N, CARM_NB) for predicting the risk of COVID-19 in terms of discrimination (c-statistic) and calibration (graphically). RESULTS: The risk of in-hospital mortality following emergency medical admission was 8.4% (500/6444) and 9.6% (620/6444) had a diagnosis of COVID-19. For predicting COVID-19 admissions, the CARS_N model had the highest discrimination 0.73 (0.71 to 0.75) and calibration slope 0.81 (0.72 to 0.89) compared to other CARSS models: CARM_N (discrimination:0.68 (0.66 to 0.70) and calibration slope 0.47 (0.41 to 0.54)), CARM_NB (discrimination:0.68 (0.65 to 0.70) and calibration slope 0.37 (0.31 to 0.43)), and CARS_NB (discrimination:0.68 (0.66 to 0.70) and calibration slope 0.56 (0.47 to 0.64)). CONCLUSIONS: The CARS_N model is reasonably accurate for predicting the risk of COVID-19. It may be clinically useful as an early warning system at the time of admission especially to triage large numbers of unplanned admissions because it requires no additional data collection and is readily automated.

"They are saying it's high, but I think it's quite low": exploring cardiovascular disease risk communication in NHS health checks through video-stimulated recall interviews with patients - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: NHS Health Check (NHSHC) is a national cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk identification and management programme. However, evidence suggests a limited understanding of the most used metric to communicate CVD risk with patients (10-year percentage risk). This study used novel application of video-stimulated recall interviews to understand patient perceptions and understanding of CVD risk following an NHSHC that used one of two different CVD risk calculators. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured video-stimulated recall interviews were conducted with patients (n = 40) who had attended an NHSHC using either the QRISK2 10-year risk calculator (n = 19) or JBS3 lifetime CVD risk calculator (n = 21). Interviews were transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis resulted in the development of four themes: variability in understanding, relief about personal risk, perceived changeability of CVD risk, and positive impact of visual displays. The first three themes were evident across the two patient groups, regardless of risk calculator; the latter related to JBS3 only. Patients felt relieved about their CVD risk, yet there were differences in understanding between calculators. Heart age within JBS3 prompted more accessible risk appraisal, yet mixed understanding was evident for both calculators. Event-free survival age also resulted in misunderstanding. QRISK2 patients tended to question the ability for CVD risk to change, while risk manipulation through JBS3 facilitated this understanding. Displaying information visually also appeared to enhance understanding. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication of CVD risk within NHSHC remains challenging, and lifetime risk metrics still lead to mixed levels of understanding in patients. However, visual presentation of information, alongside risk manipulation during NHSHCs can help to increase understanding and prompt risk-reducing lifestyle changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN10443908. Registered 7th February 2017.

Thematic analysis of Prevention of Future Death reports for suicide: January 2021 to October 2022.

BACKGROUND: Suicide prevention remains a high priority topic across government and the National Health Service (NHS). Prevention of Future Death (PFD) reports are produced by coroners to highlight concerns that should be addressed by organisations to prevent future deaths in similar circumstances. OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to understand themes from concerns raised in PFD reports for deaths from suicide to inform future policies and strategies for preventing suicide. METHODS: We employed a retrospective case series design to analyse PFD reports categorised as suicide using qualitative inductive thematic analysis. Primary themes and subthemes were extracted from coroners' concerns. Following theme extraction, the number of concerns coded to these themes across reports and the frequency of recipient organisation being named as addressee on these reports were assessed as primary outcomes. FINDINGS: 12 primary themes and 83 subthemes were identified from 164 reports (4% of all available reports). The NHS was the most frequent recipient of these reports, followed by government departments. Coroners raised issues around processes within or between organisations and difficulties accessing services. The most common concerns fell under the primary theme 'processes' (142 mentions), followed by 'access to services' (84 mentions). The most frequent subthemes were 'current training not adequate' (38 mentions) and 'inadequate communication between services' (35 mentions). CONCLUSIONS: Our results specify areas where review, improvement and policy development are required to prevent future suicide deaths occurring in similar circumstances. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These themes highlight concerns across current care and service provision where reform is required for suicide prevention.

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presumed to be treated with sotrovimab in NHS hospitals in England.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the constantly evolving severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on the effectiveness of early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments is unclear. Here, we report characteristics and acute clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 treated with a monoclonal antibody (mAb; presumed to be sotrovimab) across six distinct periods covering the emergence and predominance of Omicron subvariants (BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5) in England. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using data from the Hospital Episode Statistics database from January 1-July 31, 2022. Included patients received a mAb delivered by a National Health Service (NHS) hospital as a day-case, for which the primary diagnosis was COVID-19. Patients were presumed to have received sotrovimab based on NHS data showing that 99.98% of COVID-19-mAb-treated individuals received sotrovimab during the study period. COVID-19-attributable hospitalizations were reported overall and across six distinct periods of Omicron subvariant prevalence. Subgroup analyses were conducted in patients with severe renal disease and active cancer. RESULTS: Among a total of 10,096 patients, 1.0% (n = 96) had a COVID-19-attributable hospitalization, 4.6% (n = 465) had a hospital visit due to any cause, and 0.3% (n = 27) died due to any cause during the acute period. COVID-19-attributable hospitalization rates were consistent among subgroups, and no significant differences were observed across periods of Omicron subvariant predominance. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of COVID-19-attributable hospitalizations and deaths were low in mAb-treated patients and among subgroups. Similar hospitalization rates were observed whilst Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5 were predominant, despite reported reductions in in vitro neutralization activity of sotrovimab against BA.2 and BA.5.

Comorbidities and their association with COVID-19 mortality in Mexico between January 2020 and August 2021.

By August 17, 2021, 4.3 million people had died globally as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection. While data collection is ongoing, it is abundantly obvious that this is one of the most significant public health crises in modern history. Consequently, global efforts are being made to attain a greater understanding of this disease and to identify risk factors associated with more severe outcomes. The goal of this study is to identify clinical characteristics and risk factors associated with COVID-19 mortality in Mexico. The dataset used in this study was released by Sistema Nacional de Vigilancia Epidemiologica de Enfermedades Respiratorias (SISVER) de la Secretaría de Salud and contains 2.9 million COVID-19 cases. The effects of risk factors on COVID-19 mortality were estimated using multivariable logistic regression models with generalized estimation equation and Kaplan-Meier curves. Case fatality rates, case hospitalization rates are also reported using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) USA death-to-case ratio method. In general, older males with pre-existing conditions had higher odds of death. Age greater than 40, male sex, hypertension, diabetes, and obesity are associated with higher COVID-19 mortality. End-stage renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and immunosuppression are all linked with COVID-19 patient fatalities. Smoking and Asthma are associated with lower COVID-19 mortality which is consistent with findings from the article published in Nature based on National Health Service (NHS) of UK dataset (17 million cases). Intensive care unit (ICU), patient intubation, and pneumonia diagnosis are shown to substantially increase mortality risk for COVID-19 patients.

Taking a reading on NHS patient safety: views from the ombudsman.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discusses several reports where the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman addresses some critical NHS patient safety issues.

An exploration of service use pattern changes and cost analysis following implementation of community perinatal mental health teams in pregnant women with a history of specialist mental healthcare in England: a national population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service in England pledged >£365 million to improve access to mental healthcare services via Community Perinatal Mental Health Teams (CPMHTs) and reduce the rate of perinatal relapse in women with severe mental illness. This study aimed to explore changes in service use patterns following the implementation of CPMHTs in pregnant women with a history of specialist mental healthcare in England, and conduct a cost-analysis on these changes. METHODS: This study used a longitudinal cohort design based on existing routine administrative data. The study population was all women residing in England with an onset of pregnancy on or after 1st April 2016 and who gave birth on or before 31st March 2018 with pre-existing mental illness (N = 70,323). Resource use and costs were compared before and after the implementation of CPMHTs. The economic perspective was limited to secondary mental health services, and the time horizon was the perinatal period (from the start of pregnancy to 1-year post-birth, ~ 21 months). RESULTS: The percentage of women using community mental healthcare services over the perinatal period was higher for areas with CPMHTs (30.96%, n=9,653) compared to areas without CPMHTs (24.72%, n=9,615). The overall percentage of women using acute care services (inpatient and crisis resolution teams) over the perinatal period was lower for areas with CPMHTs (4.94%, n=1,540 vs. 5.58%, n=2,171), comprising reduced crisis resolution team contacts (4.41%, n=1,375 vs. 5.23%, n=2,035) but increased psychiatric admissions (1.43%, n=445 vs. 1.13%, n=441). Total mental healthcare costs over the perinatal period were significantly higher for areas with CPMHTs (fully adjusted incremental cost £111, 95% CI £29 to £192, p-value 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Following implementation of CPMHTs, the percentage of women using acute care decreased while the percentage of women using community care increased. However, the greater use of inpatient admissions alongside greater use of community care resulted in a significantly higher mean cost of secondary mental health service use for women in the CPMHT group compared with no CPMHT. Increased costs must be considered with caution as no data was available on relevant outcomes such as quality of life or satisfaction with services.