Coproducing Health Information Materials With Young People: Reflections and Lessons Learned.

BACKGROUND: This paper describes and critically reflects on how children and young people (CYP) acted as public advisors to coproduce health information materials about Long Covid for younger audiences. This work was underpinned by the Lundy model, a framework which provides guidance on facilitating CYP to actively contribute to matters which affect them. METHODS: Coproduction activity sessions took place with CYP in schools as well as video conferences with a CYP stakeholder group and CYP with Long Covid. Activities encouraged CYP to focus on the content, format, and design of materials and used problem-based and collaborative learning to encourage engagement with the project. Using a range of methods and open discussion, CYP codesigned a series of Long Covid health information materials for younger audiences. RESULTS: Sixty-six CYP (aged 10-18), and two young adults were involved. CYP codesigned specifications for the final materials and provided feedback on early designs. The project led to the development of a series of health information materials targeted at CYP: a short social media campaign with six short videos and a 12-page illustrated leaflet about Long Covid; released on social media and distributed in local area. All the CYP were positive about the project and their involvement. DISCUSSION: Involving CYP led to the development of innovative and engaging information materials (influence). Developing rapport was important when working with CYP and this was facilitated by using approaches and activities to establish an environment (space) where the CYP felt comfortable sharing their views (voice) and being listened to (audience) by the adults in the project. Working with external groups who are willing to share their expertise can help the meaningful involvement of voices 'less heard'. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: One CYP coapplicant contributed to the project design and facilitation of PPIE sessions, 64 CYP were involved in the PPIE sessions to design and feedback on materials. Two young adult media producers worked with CYP to produce these materials, another CYP supported this process. Three public contributors were involved in the preparation of this manuscript.

Musculoskeletal disorders and pain in agricultural workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Agricultural workers constitute two-thirds of the population of Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) and are at increased risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) due to high-risk activities. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to synthesise the prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of musculoskeletal pain amongst agricultural workers to identify priority areas for prevention and development of early interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis included Studies published from the inception of global electronic databases until 30 September 2022 were included. Prevalence estimates for MSDs among agricultural workers aged over 18 years in LMIC were extracted. Narrative synthesis summarized study findings and pooled estimates for 12-month pain prevalence were calculated. 7502 potential studies were identified. 64 studies (68,684 participants from 23 countries) were included in the systematic review; 33 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Low back pain was the most widely investigated symptom. The 12-month pooled prevalence of low back pain was highest in Africa [61.96% (45.69-76.22)] compared to Asia [54.16% (47.76-60.50)] and South/Central America [28.52%(10.91-50.33)]. Narrative synthesis found associations between MSDs, particular activities including heavy lifting and repetitive movements, and outcomes including reduced productivity. MSDs are common in agriculture workers in LMIC. Global prevalence of low back pain in farmers, particularly in Africa, is greater than in previously reported global prevalence in the general population. This may be attributed to environmental factors and high-risk activities which could be targeted for prevention and early intervention strategies to support individuals, prevent disability, and reduce loss of productivity.

Extending the authority for sickness certification beyond the medical profession: the importance of 'boundary work'.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to explore the views of general practitioners (GPs), nurses and physiotherapists towards extending the role of sickness certification beyond the medical profession in primary care. METHODS: Fifteen GPs, seven nurses and six physiotherapists were selected to achieve varied respondent characteristics including sex, geographical location, service duration and post-graduate specialist training. Constant-comparative qualitative analysis of data from 28 semi-structured telephone interviews was undertaken. RESULTS: The majority of respondents supported the extended role concept; however members of each professional group also rejected the notion. Respondents employed four different legitimacy claims to justify their views and define their occupational boundaries in relation to sickness certification practice. Condition-specific legitimacy, the ability to adopt a holistic approach to sickness certification, system efficiency and control-related arguments were used to different degrees by each occupation. Practical suggestions for the extension of the sickness certification role beyond the medical profession are underpinned by the sociological theory of professional identity. CONCLUSIONS: Extending the authority to certify sickness absence beyond the medical profession is not simply a matter of addressing practical and organisational obstacles. There is also a need to consider the impact on, and preferences of, the specific occupations and their respective boundary claims. This paper explores the implications of extending the sick certification role beyond general practice. We conclude that the main policy challenge of such a move is to a) persuade GPs to relinquish this role (or to share it with other professions), and b) to understand the 'boundary work' involved.

Bone health assessment in adults with fragility fracture risk factors between 2002-2014: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lifetime risk of fragility fractures is 50% in post-menopausal women and 20% in men aged >50 years. Identifying people at high risk facilitates early intervention and reduction of biopsychosocial morbidity associated with these fractures. AIM: To explore if bone health assessment (BHA) rates differ between women and men aged ≥50 years with fragility fracture risk factors. DESIGN & SETTING: A primary care-based cohort study in North Staffordshire, UK. METHOD: Patients were identified from the Consultations in Primary Care Archive (CiPCA) database between 2002 and 2014 with one or more fragility fracture risk factors (previous fractures, falls, and prolonged steroid use). Evaluation of BHA within 12 months of presentation of the first risk factor was carried out by searching for codes for fracture risk assessment tools (FRAX and QFracture), bone density measurement, specialist service referral, or if bone-protection medication was started. RESULTS: A total of 15 581 patients with risk factors were identified; men represented 40.4% of the cohort. The study found 1172 (7.5%) had BHA performed within 1 year of presentation, and 8.9% of women and 5.5% of men had BHAs, which was found with strong statistical evidence (χ2 = 59.88, P = 1 × 10-14). This relationship prevailed after adjusting for other covariates, such as comorbidity and number of consultations, with an odds ratio of 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08 to 1.43). CONCLUSION: This study has shown that rates of BHA were generally low and even lower in men compared with women. Primary care clinicians should be alert to fragility fracture risk factors in both men and women to enable early assessment and intervention.

Experiences and care needs of children with long COVID: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Long COVID, the patient-preferred term, describes symptoms persisting after an acute episode of COVID-19 infection. Symptoms in children and young people (CYP) can affect daily routine, with broader impacts on education, health-related quality of life, and social activities, which may have long-term effects on health and wellbeing. AIM: To explore the lived experiences and care needs of CYP with long COVID from the perspectives of CYP with long COVID, their parents, and professionals associated with the care of children and families living with the condition. DESIGN & SETTING: CYP and their parent or carer were invited for interview following participation in a cohort study, which recruited the sample from a primary care setting. METHOD: Interviews were carried out with four CYP with long COVID (all female, aged 10-17 years); three interviews included a parent. Two focus groups were conducted, which included seven professionals involved with care of CYP or long COVID, from a range of disciplines. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim, and data analysed thematically using constant comparison techniques. RESULTS: The three main themes presented are as follows: living with long COVID; uncertainty surrounding long COVID; and seeking help for symptoms. CONCLUSION: Long COVID can severely impact the lives of CYP and their families. CYP and their families need to be listened to by professionals and have any uncertainties acknowledged. It is imperative that agencies working with them understand the condition and its impact, and are able to offer support where needed.

Summarizing Evidence of Associations of COVID-19 With a Future Diagnosis of Inflammatory Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: A Rapid Review.

OBJECTIVE: Musculoskeletal symptoms are commonly reported following acute COVID-19. It is unclear whether those with musculoskeletal symptoms subsequently develop inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal disease (iRMD). This review seeks to identify evidence for an association between acute COVID-19 and subsequent iRMD diagnosis. METHODS: A rapid review of the literature using a systematic search of Medline, EMBASE and two COVID-19 databases was undertaken until August 2022. Case studies, case series, cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies reporting patients with an incident iRMD following COVID-19 were included. Title and abstract screening were conducted by one reviewer and full text screening by two reviewers. Data extraction and quality appraisal were by one reviewer, with a second verifying. Study-type specific critical appraisal tools were used. RESULTS: Results were narratively synthesized. A total of 80 studies were included (69 case reports, 10 case series and 1 cross-sectional study). Commonly reported iRMDs were "reactive arthropathies" (n = 47), "inflammatory arthropathies unspecified" (n = 18), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 12) and systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 11). The cross-sectional study reported 37% of those with COVID-19 developed "post COVID arthritis." Time from diagnosis of COVID-19 to iRMD presentation ranged from 0 to 120 days. Several mechanisms were proposed to explain the association between COVID-19 and iRMD development: autoimmune processes, aberrant inflammatory responses, colonization of joint spaces, direct damage from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus and genetic predisposition. CONCLUSION: The level of evidence of the studies included in this review was low and the quality generally poor. Prospective observational studies are required to confirm associations and likely impact of post COVID-19 iRMDs at a population level.

Trends in consultations and prescribing for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: an electronic primary care records study.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) are common and generally managed in primary care through supported self-care, physiotherapy, analgesia, and specialist referral where indicated. The COVID-19 pandemic led to abrupt changes in primary care delivery, including moves to remote consulting, pauses on group-based self-care, and restricted referrals. AIM: To describe how patterns of UK primary healthcare consultations and analgesic prescribing relating to RMDs changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational study using routinely collected national primary care electronic health record data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 1 April 2017 and 1 October 2021. METHOD: RMD and analgesic SNOMED-CT codes were derived through consensus and published work. Prevalent and incident RMD-related consultations were determined, and RMD consultations matched to prevalent and incident analgesia prescriptions. Joinpoint regression was used to describe trends over time. RESULTS: Prevalent and incident RMD consultations steadily increased until March 2020 when a substantial drop occurred as pandemic- related restrictions were introduced; levels had not recovered to pre-pandemic highs by October 2021. While incident and prevalent analgesic prescribing also reduced around March 2020, the proportion of patients with an RMD consultation prescribed any analgesic increased from 27.72% in February 2020 to 38.15% in April 2020, with increases across all analgesic groups. A higher proportion of strong opioid prescriptions was seen in the most deprived areas. CONCLUSION: Pandemic-associated restrictions led to fewer primary care consultations and relative increases in analgesic prescribing, including strong opioids, for RMDs in the UK. Policymakers must consider the impact of these changes in future healthcare resource planning.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referrals to musculoskeletal services from primary care and subsequent incidence of inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal disease: an observational study.

Objective: The aim was to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon referral patterns and incident diagnosis of inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (iRMDs). Methods: UK primary care data were used to describe referral patterns for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Trends in referrals to musculoskeletal services and incident diagnoses of iRMDs (specifically, RA and JIA) were described using Joinpoint Regression and comparisons made between key pandemic time periods. Results: The incidence of RA and JIA reduced by -13.3 and -17.4% per month, respectively, between January 2020 and April 2020, then increased by 1.9 and 3.7% per month, respectively, between April 2020 and October 2021. The incidence of all diagnosed iRMDs was stable until October 2021. Referrals decreased between February 2020 and May 2020 by -16.8% per month from 4.8 to 2.4% in patients presenting with a musculoskeletal condition. After May 2020, referrals increased significantly (16.8% per month) to 4.5% in July 2020. The time from first musculoskeletal consultation to RA diagnosis and from referral to RA diagnosis increased in the early pandemic period [rate ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 1.07, 1.15 and RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17, 1.30, respectively] and remained consistently higher in the late pandemic period (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11, 1.16 and RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23, 1.32, respectively), compared with the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period. Conclusion: Patients with underlying RA and JIA that developed during the pandemic might be yet to present or might be in the referral and/or diagnostic process. Clinicians should remain alert to this possibility, and commissioners should be aware of these findings, enabling the appropriate planning and commissioning of services.

Symptom patterns and life with post-acute COVID-19 in children aged 8-17 years: a mixed-methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: While there is a substantial body of knowledge about acute COVID-19, less is known about long-COVID, where symptoms continue beyond 4 weeks. AIM: To describe longer-term effects of COVID-19 infection in children and young people (CYP) and identify their needs in relation to long-COVID. DESIGN & SETTING: This study comprises an observational prospective cohort study and a linked qualitative study, identifying participants aged 8-17 years in the West Midlands of England. METHOD: CYP will be invited to complete online questionnaires to monitor incidences and symptoms of COVID-19 over a 12-month period. CYP who have experienced long-term effects of COVID will be invited to interview, and those currently experiencing symptoms will be asked to document their experiences in a diary. Professionals who work with CYP will be invited to explore the impact of long-COVID on the wider experiences of CYP, in a focus group. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe the incidence and rates of resolution of symptoms, and comparisons will be made between exposed and non-exposed groups. Logistic regression models will be used to estimate associations between candidate predictors and the development of long-COVID, and linear regression will be used to estimate associations between candidate predictors. Qualitative data will be analysed thematically using the constant comparison method. CONCLUSION: This study will describe features and symptoms of long-COVID and explore the impact of long-COVID within the lives of CYP and their families, to provide better understanding of long-COVID and inform clinical practice.

Readmission after index hospital discharge among patients with COVID-19: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hospital readmissions among COVID-19 patients have increased the load on the healthcare systems and added more pressure to hospital capacity. This affects the ability to accommodate newly diagnosed COVID-19 patients and other non-COVID-19 patients who require hospitalization. Therefore, this systematic review aims to understand the rates of and risk factors for hospital readmissions and all-cause mortality among COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized after being discharged following index hospitalization. METHODS: Our systematic review protocol is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021232324) and prepared in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), MedRxiv, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), ProQuest Coronavirus research database, Cochrane Covid-19 study register, and WHO COVID-19: Global literature on coronavirus disease will be identified from December 31, 2019, to May 31, 2021. Two investigators will independently screen titles and abstracts and select studies reporting hospital readmissions among COVID-19 patients. Further, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be carried out separately by these independent reviewers. We will extract data on demographics, readmissions, all-cause mortality, emergency department visits, comorbidities, and factors associated with hospitalization among COVID-19 patients. Random-effect meta-analysis will be performed if homogeneous groups of studies are found. The combined evidence will be further stratified according to important background characteristics if the data allow. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will summarize the available epidemiological evidence regarding rates of hospital readmissions, comorbidities, and related factors among COVID-19 patients who were readmitted after index hospitalization. A better understanding of the relationship between patient profiles and the rate of hospitalization will be helpful in the development of guidelines for patient management.

Misdiagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of tests to diagnose acute myocardial infarction (AMI), cases are still missed. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature to determine how missed AMI has been defined, the reported rates of misdiagnosed AMI, the outcomes patients with misdiagnosed AMI have, what diagnosis was initially suspected in missed AMI cases, and what factors are associated with misdiagnosed AMI. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE in September 2020 for studies that evaluated missed AMI. Data were extracted from studies that met the inclusion criteria and the results were narratively synthesized. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies were included in this review. The number of patients with missed AMI in individual studies ranged from 64 to 4707. There was no consistently used definition for misdiagnosed AMI, but most studies reported rates of approximately 1%-2%. Compared with AMI that was recognized, 1 study found no difference in mortality for misdiagnosed AMI at 30 days and 1 year. The common initial misdiagnoses that subsequently had AMI were ischemic heart disease, nonspecific chest pain, gastrointestinal disease, musculoskeletal pain, and arrhythmias. Reasons for missed AMI include incorrect electrocardiogram interpretation and failure to order appropriate diagnostic tests. Hospitals in rural areas and those with a low proportion of classical chest pain patients that turned out to have AMI were at greater risk of missed AMI. CONCLUSIONS: Misdiagnosed AMI is an unfortunate part of everyday clinical practice and better training in electrocardiogram interpretation, and education about atypical presentations of AMI may reduce the number of misdiagnosed AMIs.

Interstitial lung disease is a risk factor for ischaemic heart disease and myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: Despite many shared risk factors and pathophysiological pathways, the risk of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and myocardial infarction (MI) in interstitial lung disease (ILD) remains poorly understood. This lack of data could be preventing patients who may benefit from screening for these cardiovascular diseases from receiving it. METHODS: A population-based cohort study used electronic patient records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and linked Hospital Episode Statistics to identify 68 572 patients (11 688 ILD exposed (mean follow-up: 3.8 years); 56 884 unexposed controls (mean follow-up: 4.0 years), with 349 067 person-years of follow-up. ILD-exposed patients (pulmonary sarcoidosis (PS) or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (PF)) were matched (by age, sex, registered general practice and available follow-up time) to patients without ILD or IHD/MI. Rates of incident MI and IHD were estimated. HRs were modelled using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression accounting for potential confounders. RESULTS: ILD was independently associated with IHD (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.18) and MI (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.11). In all disease categories, risk of both IHD and MI peaked between ages 60 and 69 years, except for the risk of MI in PS which was greatest <50 years. Men with PF were at greatest risk of IHD, while women with PF were at greatest risk of MI. CONCLUSIONS: ILD, particularly PF, is independently associated with MI and IHD after adjustment for established cardiovascular risk factors. Our results suggest clinicians should prioritise targeted assessment of cardiovascular risk in patients with ILD, particularly those aged 60-69 years. Further research is needed to understand the impact of such an approach to risk management.

Investigating multisite pain as a predictor of self-reported falls and falls requiring health care use in an older population: A prospective cohort study.

Older people are continuing to fall despite fall prevention guidelines targeting known falls' risk factors. Multisite pain is a potential novel falls' risk factor requiring further exploration. This study hypothesises that: (1) an increasing number of pain sites and widespread pain predicts self-reported falls and falls recorded in primary and secondary healthcare records; (2) those relationships are independent of known falls' risk factors and putative confounders. This prospective cohort study linked data from self-completed questionnaires, primary care electronic health records, secondary care admission statistics and national mortality data. Between 2002-2005, self-completion questionnaires were mailed to community-dwelling individuals aged 50 years and older registered with one of eight general practices in North Staffordshire, UK(n = 26,129) yielding 18,497 respondents. 11,375 respondents entered the study; 4386 completed six year follow-up. Self-reported falls were extracted from three and six year follow-up questionnaires. Falls requiring healthcare were extracted from routinely collected primary and secondary healthcare data. Increasing number of pain sites increased odds of future 3 year (odds ratio 1.12 (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.24)) and 6 year self-reported fall (odds ratio 1.02 (1.00-1.03)) and increased hazard of future fall requiring primary healthcare (hazard ratio 1.01 (1.00-1.03)). The presence of widespread pain increased odds of future 3 year (odds ratio 1.27 (0.92-1.75)) and 6 year fall (odds ratio 1.43(1.06-1.95)) and increased hazard of future fall requiring primary healthcare (hazard ratio 1.27(0.98-1.65)). Multisite pain was not associated with future fall requiring secondary care admission. Multisite pain must be included as a falls' risk factor in guidelines to ensure clinicians identify their older patients at risk of falls and employ timely implementation of current falls prevention strategies.

Multisite pain and self-reported falls in older people: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multisite pain and falls are common in older people, and isolated studies have identified multisite pain as a potential falls risk factor. This study aims to synthesise published literature to further explore the relationship between multisite pain and falls and to quantify associated risks. METHODS: Bibliographic databases were searched from inception to December 2017. Studies of community-dwelling adults aged 50 years and older with a multisite pain measurement and a falls outcome were included. Two reviewers screened articles, undertook quality assessment and extracted data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the effect estimate (odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI)). Heterogeneity was assessed by I2; sensitivity analyses used adjusted risk estimates and exclusively longitudinal studies. RESULTS: The search identified 49,577 articles, 3145 underwent abstract review, 22 articles were included in the systematic review and 18 were included in the meta-analysis. The unadjusted pooled OR of 1.82 (95%CI 1.55-2.13), demonstrating that those reporting multisite pain are at increased risk of falls, is supported by the adjusted pooled OR of 1.56 (95%CI 1.39-1.74). Multisite pain predicts future falls risk (OR = 1.74 (95%CI 1.57-1.93)). For high-quality studies, those reporting multisite pain have double the odds of a future fall compared to their pain-free counterparts. CONCLUSION: Multisite pain is associated with an increased future falls risk in community-dwelling older people. Increasing public awareness of multisite pain as a falls risk factor and advising health and social care professionals to identify older people with multisite pain to signpost accordingly will enable timely falls prevention strategies to be implemented.

Inflammatory arthritis: case review and primary care perspectives.

Inflammatory arthritis (IA) has significant physical, psychosocial and economic consequences. Delays in diagnosis and initiation of treatment significantly impact on prognosis. The infrequent, variable, non-specific and, sometimes, indolent presentation make recognition of IA by primary care physicians (PCPs) challenging. To undertake an in-depth case review assessing the diagnostic trajectory of patients diagnosed with IA to inform development of practical recommendations to facilitate timely recognition and referral of suspected IA to specialist services, a case review was undertaken in one UK general practice using a proforma to collect information on patient demographics, diagnostic activities (presentation to PCP, specialist referral and final diagnosis) and documentation of disease-specific features for all patients diagnosed with IA between January 2000 and February 2011. Cases were excluded if consultation notes, a definitive diagnosis or evidence of specialist assessment were absent. Twenty-four cases were included in the final analysis. Duration from first primary care presentation to specialist rheumatological referral ranged from 4 to 2,165 days. Undertaking radiographs significantly lengthened delays from presentation to referral. Patients with IA attended between 2 and 41 primary care appointments before being referred. None of the cases identified had a comprehensive record of symptoms documented in the medical record. Once patients present to primary care, specialist referral is not always in accordance with the urgency necessitated in current guidelines. Improving PCPs' knowledge and awareness of IA, development of screening tools and improvement in record keeping are proposed to facilitate early recognition and referral of IA and subsequently reduce the disease burden of IA.

Exploration of GPs' views and use of the fit note: a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Sickness certification constitutes daily clinical practice for GPs. In April 2010, the UK sickness certification system changed to reflect the evidence that work is generally good for health and a new Statement of Fitness for Work - the 'fit note' - was introduced. Sickness certification is a contentious topic among GPs and the proposed fit note generated mixed reviews. AIM: To explore GPs' views and use of the fit note during its first year of operation. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study of GPs based in different geographical locations across the UK. METHOD: GPs (n = 15), who were recruited from a national sample, participated in semi-structured telephone interviews which were subject to constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: Overall, the fit note was well received. GPs recognised that work is generally good for health and felt the fit note facilitated using an earlier return to work as a negotiation tool. GPs perceive employers as the major obstacle to early return to work. There were reports of scepticism towards the system that negatively impacted on some GPs' operation of sickness certification. Feedback over the fit note's impact on employer behaviour and the return of a mechanism that enables GPs to request early independent assessments would be welcomed. CONCLUSION: A revised approach is needed to address the scepticism towards the sickness certification system that persists among some GPs. New strategies need to be designed to engage employers in facilitating an early return to work and to enable the objectives of the medical statement reforms to be achieved.

Rates of sickness certification in European primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are responsible for assessing a patient's capacity for work and issuing a sickness certificate, enabling a patient to receive statutory sick pay and take time away from the workplace. The management of sickness absence across Europe varies considerably, and there is a need for comparable rates of certification to facilitate appropriate health and economic planning. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature reporting rates of sickness certification in general practice settings. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from their inception to November 2007. Inclusion criteria were reporting a measure of sickness certification, conducted in European primary care. RESULTS: 298 citations were identified from the literature search, of which 11 met the inclusion criteria. These studies demonstrated that the rates of sickness certification are not routinely recorded. The certified rates were subject to wide variation, ranging from 18 per 100 person years in Norway to 239 per 100 person years in Malta. CONCLUSION: There is large variability in sickness certification policy and hence sickness certification rates across Europe. A system that enables comparisons across countries would be beneficial in ensuring health and economic planning. To enable a baseline rate of certification to be established and compared across countries, standardized reporting of sickness certification is needed.