Open Access Tubal aSsessment for the initial management of infertility in general practice (the OATS trial): a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

GPs investigate approximately half of all infertile couples with semen analysis and endocrine blood tests. For assessment of tubal status, hysterosalpingography (HSG) is recommended as a first-line investigation for women not known to have comorbidities.

Aim

To test whether providing GPs with open access to HSG results in infertile couples progressing to a diagnosis and management plan sooner than with usual management.

Design of study

A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

Setting

Seventy-one of 173 general practices in north-east England agreed to participate.

Method

A total of 670 infertile couples presented to 33 intervention practices and 25 control practices over a 2-year period. Practices allocated to the intervention group had access to HSG for those infertile women who fulfilled predefined eligibility criteria. The primary outcome measure was the interval between presentation to the GP and the couple receiving a diagnosis and management plan.

Results

An annual incidence of 0.8 couples per 1000 total population equated to each GP seeing an average of one or two infertile couples each year. Open access HSG was used for 9% of all infertile women who presented to the intervention practices during the study period. The time to reach a diagnosis and management plan for all infertile couples presenting was not affected by the availability of open access HSG (Cox regression hazard ratio = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7 to 1.1). For couples who reached a diagnosis and management plan, there was a non-significant difference in time to primary outcome for intervention versus control practices (32.5 weeks versus 30.5 weeks, mean difference 2.2 weeks, 95% CI = 1.6 to 6.1 weeks, P = 0.1). The intracluster correlation coefficient was 0.03 across all practices.

Conclusion

Providing GPs with open access to HSG had no effect on the time taken to reach a diagnosis and management plan for couples with infertility.     

Weekend opening in primary care: analysis of the General Practice Patient Survey

Background

Seven-day opening in primary care is a key policy for the UK government. However, it is unclear if weekend opening will meet patients’ needs or lead to additional demand.

Aim

To identify patient groups most likely to use weekend opening in primary care.

Design and setting

The General Practice Patient Survey 2014, which sampled from all general practices in England, was used.

Method

Logistic regression was used to measure the associations between perceived benefit from seeing or speaking to someone at the weekend and age, sex, deprivation, health conditions, functioning, work status, rurality, and quality of life.

Results

Out of 881 183 participants who responded to the questionnaire, 712 776 (80.9%) did not report any problems with opening times. Of the 168 407 responders (19.1%) who reported inconvenient opening times, 73.9% stated that Saturday opening, and 35.8% Sunday opening, would make it easier for them to see or speak to someone. Only 2.2% of responders reported that Sunday, but not Saturday, opening would make it easier for them. Younger people, those who work full time, and those who could not get time off work were more likely to report that weekend opening would help. People with Alzheimer’s disease, learning difficulties, or problems with walking, washing, or dressing were less likely to report that weekend opening would help.

Conclusion

Most people do not think they need weekend opening, but it may benefit certain patient groups, such as younger people in full-time work. Sunday opening, in addition to Saturday, is unlikely to improve access.     

Does Advanced Access improve access to primary health care? Questionnaire survey of patients

BACKGROUND: General practices in England have been encouraged to introduce Advanced Access, but there is no robust evidence that this is associated with improved access in ways that matter to patients. AIM: To compare priorities and experiences of patients consulting in practices which do or do not operate Advanced Access. DESIGN OF STUDY: Patient questionnaire survey. SETTING: Forty-seven practices in 12 primary care trust areas of England. METHOD: Questionnaire administered when patients consulted. RESULTS: Of 12,825 eligible patients, 10,821 (84%) responded. Most (70%) were consulting about a problem they had had for at least 'a few weeks'. Patients obtained their current appointment sooner in Advanced Access practices, but were less likely to have been able to book in advance. They could usually see a doctor more quickly than those in control practices, but were no more satisfied overall with the appointment system. The top priority for patients was to be seen on a day of choice rather than to be seen quickly, but different patient groups had different priorities. Patients in Advanced Access practices were no more or less likely to obtain an appointment that matched their priorities than those in control practices. Patients in both types of practice experienced problems making contact by telephone. CONCLUSION: Patients are seen more quickly in Advanced Access practices, but speed of access is less important to patients than choice of appointment; this may be because most consultations are about long-standing problems. Appointment systems need to be flexible to accommodate the different needs of different patient groups.     

Primary care characteristics and population-orientated health care across Europe: an observational study

Background

The number of patients with chronic diseases is increasing which poses a challenge to healthcare organisations. A proactive, structured, and population-orientated approach is needed: the chronic care model (CCM) provides such a framework.

Aim

To assess organisational conditions for providing structured chronic care according to the CCM across different healthcare systems.

Design of study

International observational study.

Setting

A stratified sample of 315 primary care practices in 10 European countries and Israel in 2008 and 2009.

Method

Practice questionnaires and interviews. Outcome measures were mean practice scores on CCM domains per country, as a percentage of the maximum score, and the influence of practice size and urbanisation on these scores.

Results

Practice size showed large differences with the largest practices in Spain, England, Finland, and Israel. These countries, with a strong primary care orientation, had most physicians and staff involved per practice. The CCM domains ‘clinical information systems’ and ‘decision support’ had total practice means of 90%; other domains scored about 50%. Spain and England scored above average on almost all domains. Practice size and urbanisation had little impact.

Conclusion

Characteristics for chronic care delivery differed for most CCM domains. The most common characteristics related to computerisation, providing a good starting point and high potential everywhere. All countries showed room for improvement. Further research should focus on relations between practice characteristics, organisational features, including health system and primary care orientation, and outcomes. Primary care seems suited for chronic care delivery; however, a stronger primary care was associated with better scores.     

Cardiac rehabilitation uptake following myocardial infarction: cross-sectional study in primary care

Background

Policies suggest that primary care should be more involved in delivering cardiac rehabilitation. However, there is a lack of information about what is known in primary care regarding patients’ invitation or attendance.

Aim

To determine, within primary care, how many patients are invited to and attend rehabilitation after myocardial infarction (MI), examine sociodemographic factors related to invitation, and compare quality of life between those who do and do not attend.

Design of study

Review of primary care paper and computer records; cross-sectional questionnaire.

Setting

Northern Ireland general practices (38); stratified sample, based on practice size and health board area.

Method

Patients, identified from primary care records, 12–16?weeks after a confirmed diagnosis of MI, were posted questionnaires, including a validated MacNew post-MI quality-of-life questionnaire. Practices returned anonymised data for non-responders.

Results

Information about rehabilitation was available for 332 of the 432 patients identified (76.9%): 162 (37.5%) returned questionnaires. Of the total sample, 54.4% (235/432) were invited and 37.0% (160/432) attended; of those invited, 68.1% (160/235) attended. Invited patients were younger than those not invited (mean age 63?years [standard deviation ﹛SD﹜ 16] versus 68.5?years [SD 16]); mean difference 5.5?years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.7 to 9.3). Among questionnaire responders, those who attended were younger and reported better emotional, physical, and social functioning than non-attenders (P = 0.01; mean differences 0.44 (95% CI = 0.11 to 0.77), 0.48 (95% CI = 0.10 to 0.85) and 0.54 (95% CI = 0.15 to 0.94) respectively).

Conclusion

Innovative strategies are needed to improve cardiac rehabilitation uptake, integration of hospital and primary care services, and healthcare professionals’ awareness of patients’ potential for health gain after MI.     

Impact of Advanced Access on access, workload, and continuity: controlled before-and-after and simulated-patient study.

BACKGROUND: Case studies from the US suggest that Advanced Access appointment systems lead to shorter delays for appointments, reduced workload, and increased continuity of care. AIM: To determine whether implementation of Advanced Access in general practice is associated with the above benefits in the UK. DESIGN OF STUDY: Controlled before-and-after and simulated-patient study. SETTING: Twenty-four practices that had implemented Advanced Access and 24 that had not. METHOD: Anonymous telephone calls were made monthly to request an appointment. Numbers of appointments and patients consulting were calculated from practice records. Continuity was determined from anonymised patient records. RESULTS: The wait for an appointment with any doctor was slightly shorter at Advanced Access practices than control practices (mean 1.00 day and 1.87 days respectively, adjusted difference -0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.51 to 0.004 days). Advanced Access practices met the NHS Plan 48-hour access target on 71% of occasions and control practices on 60% of occasions (adjusted odds ratio 1.61; 95% CI = 0.78 to 3.31; P = 0.200). The number of appointments offered, and patients seen, increased at both Advanced Access and control practices over the period studied, with no evidence of differences between them. There was no difference between Advanced Access and control practices in continuity of care (adjusted difference 0.003; 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.07). CONCLUSION: Advanced Access practices provided slightly shorter waits for an appointment compared with control practices, but performance against NHS access targets was considerably poorer than officially reported for both types of practice. Advanced Access practices did not have reduced workload or increased continuity of care.     

Introducing genetic testing for cardiovascular disease in primary care: a qualitative study

Background

While primary care systematically offers conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, genetic tests for coronary heart disease (CHD) are increasingly commercially available to patients. It is unclear how individuals may respond to these new sources of risk information.

Aim

To explore how patients who have had a recent conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, perceive additional information from genetic testing for CHD.

Design and setting

Qualitative interview study in 12 practices in Nottinghamshire from both urban and rural settings.

Method

Interviews were conducted with 29 adults, who consented to genetic testing after having had a conventional cardiovascular risk assessment.

Results

Individuals’ principal motivation for genetic testing was their family history of CHD and a desire to convey the results to their children. After testing, however, there was limited recall of genetic test results and scepticism about the value of informing their children. Participants dealt with conflicting findings from the genetic test, family history, and conventional assessment by either focusing on genetic risk or environmental lifestyle factors. In some participants, genetic test results appeared to reinforce healthy behaviour but others were falsely reassured, despite having an ‘above-average’ conventional cardiovascular risk score.

Conclusion

Although genetic testing was acceptable, participants were unclear how to interpret genetic risk results. To facilitate healthy behaviour, health professionals should explore patients’ understanding of genetic test results in light of their family history and conventional risk assessment.     

Antenatal needs of couples following fertility treatment: a qualitative study in primary care

Background

It is known that couples may experience emotional distress while undergoing infertility treatment, but less is known about their experience of pregnancy following successful conception. Typically, couples are discharged from the fertility clinic to receive standard antenatal care. Recent research has raised questions about whether this care adequately meets their needs.

Aim

To explore the antenatal experiences of females and males who have successfully conceived through infertility treatment.

Design and setting

An exploratory qualitative approach was undertaken, using individual, in-depth interviews with females and males who had successfully undergone infertility treatment in one of three fertility clinics in the south of England.

Method

Twenty participants were interviewed (12 females and eight male partners) when their pregnancy had reached 28 weeks’ gestation. Participants were asked about their experiences of infertility treatment, pregnancy, and antenatal care. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.

Results

Analysis of the interviews suggested females and males experienced a ‘gap’ in their care, in terms of time and intensity, when discharged from the fertility clinic to standard antenatal care. This gap, combined with their previous experience of infertility treatment, heightened their fear of pregnancy loss and increased their need for support from their health professionals. Participants’ previous experience of infertility treatment also appeared to deter them from preparing for the birth and parenthood, and disclosing negative feelings to others about the pregnancy.

Conclusion

Females and males who have successfully undergone infertility treatment may require additional support in primary care to address anxiety during pregnancy, enable disclosure of negative feelings, and to help them prepare for childbirth and parenthood.     

Impact of same-day appointments on patient satisfaction with general practice appointment systems

Following recent concerns about patients' inability to book appointments in advance, this study examined the relationship between the proportion of GP appointments reserved for same-day booking, and patient satisfaction with appointment systems. In a survey of 12,825 patients in 47 practices, it was found that a 10% increase in the proportion of same-day appointments was associated with an 8% reduction in the proportion of patients satisfied. Practices should be wary of increasing the level of same-day appointments to meet access targets.     

Primary care access and its relationship with emergency department utilisation: an observational, cross-sectional, ecological study

Background

Recent health service policies in the UK have focused on improving primary care access in order to reduce the use of costly emergency department services, even though the relationship between the two is based on weak or little evidence. Research is required to establish whether improving primary care access can influence emergency department attendance.

Aim

To ascertain whether a relationship exists between the degree of access to GP practices and avoidable emergency department attendances in an inner-London primary care trust (PCT).

Design and setting

Observational, cross-sectional ecological study in 68 general practices in Brent Primary Care Trust, north London, UK.

Method

GP practices were used as the unit of analysis and avoidable emergency department attendance as the dependent variable. Routinely collected data from GP practices, Hospital Episode Statistics, and census data for the period covering 2007–2009 were used across three broad domains: GP access characteristics, population characteristics, and health status aggregated to the level of the GP practice. Multiple linear regression was used to ascertain which variables account for the variation in emergency department attendance experienced by patients registered to each GP practice.

Results

None of the GP access variables accounted for the variation in emergency department attendance. The only variable that explained this variance was the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). For every unit increase in IMD score of the GP practice, there would be an increase of 6.13 (95% CI = 4.56, 7.70) per 1000 patients per year in emergency department attendances. This accounted for 47.9% of the variance in emergency department attendances in Brent.

Conclusion

Avoidable emergency department attendance appears to be mostly driven by underlying deprivation rather than by the degree of access to primary care.     

Practitioners' views on managing childhood obesity in primary care: a qualitative study

Background

In 2006 the Department of Health and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) published guidance on the management of childhood obesity, for use by primary care practitioners. Little is known, however, about practitioners'' views and experiences of managing childhood obesity in primary care.

Aim

To explore practitioners'' views of primary care as a setting in which to treat childhood obesity.

Design of study

Qualitative interview study.

Setting

Primary care and other community settings based in Bristol, England.

Method

Interviews explored practitioners'' views and experiences of managing childhood obesity and their knowledge of the recent guidance provided by the Department of Health and NICE. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Analysis was thematic and comparisons made both within and across the interviews.

Results

Thirty practitioners were interviewed: 12 GPs, 10 practice nurses, four school nurses, and four health visitors. Participants varied in their views about whether primary care is an appropriate treatment setting for childhood obesity. However, all described factors that limited the extent to which they could intervene effectively: a lack of expertise, resources, and contact with primary school children; the causes of childhood obesity; and the need to work with parents. It was also apparent that very few participants had knowledge of the recent guidance.

Conclusion

Practitioners do not currently view primary care as an effective treatment setting for childhood obesity and it is unlikely that the guidance from the Department of Health and NICE will have a meaningful impact on their management of this condition.     

Primary care consultation behaviours of long-term, adult survivors of cancer in the UK

The population of cancer survivors is growing, and GPs have an increasing role in their care. The General Practice Research Database was used to compare consultation rates between cancer survivors and controls. Breast and colorectal cancer survivors had one more consultation per year compared with controls up to 5 years after diagnosis; rates then converged at 10 years post-diagnosis. Prostate cancer survivors consistently consulted up to three more times per year than controls. These increased consultation rates are leading to an impact on service capacity.     

Exploring preferences for symptom management in primary care: a discrete choice experiment using a questionnaire survey

BackgroundSymptoms are important drivers for the use of primary care services. Strategies aimed at shifting the focus away from the GP have broadened the range of primary healthcare available.AimTo explore preferences for managing symptoms and investigate trade-offs that the public are willing to make when deciding between different primary care services.MethodA discrete choice experiment examined management preferences for three symptoms of differing seriousness (diarrhoea, dizziness, and chest pain). Willingness-to-pay estimates compared preferences between symptoms, and by sex, age, and income.ResultsPreferences differed significantly between symptoms. ‘Self-care’ was the preferred action for diarrhoea and ‘consulting a GP’ for dizziness and chest pain. ‘Waiting time’ and ‘chance of a satisfactory outcome’ were important factors for all three symptoms, although their relative importance differed. Broadly, people were more prepared to wait longer and less prepared to trade a good chance of a satisfactory outcome for symptoms rated as more serious. Generally, preferences within subgroups followed similar patterns as for the whole sample, although there were differences in the relative strength of preferences.ConclusionDespite increased choices in primary care, ‘traditional’ actions of ‘self-care’ for minor symptoms and ‘GP consultation’ for more serious symptoms were preferred. The present findings suggest, however, that people may be willing to trade between different health services, particularly for less serious symptoms. Understanding the relative importance of different factors may help inform interventions aimed at changing management behaviour or improving services.     

Texas physicians' perceptions of genomic medicine as an innovation

Primary care providers (PCPs) are believed to be the professionals who, in the near future, will be responsible for incorporating genomic medicine (GM) into primary care. Given the dearth of empirical data describing PCPs' beliefs about GM and the relationship between beliefs and the incorporation of GM into practice, this study assessed whether (and to what extent) PCPs' perceptions of GM as an innovation influence their likelihood of adopting this innovation into primary care. The study utilized diffusion of innovations theory as a framework. A state-wide representative sample of PCPs practicing in Texas responded to a mailed survey. The survey measured PCPs' perceptions of five characteristics of GM as an innovation. Findings suggest that among the five characteristics examined GM's relative advantage, compatibility with current practice, its complexity, and observability were the strongest predictors of likelihood to adopt GM tasks into primary care practice.     

Graduate mental health worker case management of depression in UK primary care: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Based on data from large multicentre US trials, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is advocating a stepped-care model for the management of depression, with 'case management' or 'collaborative care' for selected patients in primary care. AIM: To conduct a pilot study examining the use of graduate mental health workers case managing depressed primary care NHS patients. DESIGN OF STUDY: A randomised controlled trial comparing usual GP care with or without case management over 16 weeks of acute antidepressant drug treatment. SETTING: Three primary care practices in the North East of England. METHOD: Patients with depression, aged 18-65 years, who had failed to adequately respond to antidepressant treatment, were randomised to the two treatments. Assessments were made at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks using a combination of observer and self ratings. RESULTS: Randomisation of 62 patients required screening of 1073 potential patients. There was little difference in outcome between the two treatment arms but a gradual improvement in symptoms over time was seen. Client satisfaction was assessed as high across both treatments. CONCLUSION: While this pilot study confirmed the integrity of the study protocol and the suitability of the outcome measures and randomisation procedure, it raises questions regarding the practicality of recruitment and feasibility of the intervention. It would be crucial to address these issues prior to the implementation of a large multi-centre randomised controlled trial.     

The strength of primary care in Europe: an international comparative study

Background

A suitable definition of primary care to capture the variety of prevailing international organisation and service-delivery models is lacking.

Aim

Evaluation of strength of primary care in Europe.

Design and setting

International comparative cross-sectional study performed in 2009–2010, involving 27 EU member states, plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey.

Method

Outcome measures covered three dimensions of primary care structure: primary care governance, economic conditions of primary care, and primary care workforce development; and four dimensions of primary care service-delivery process: accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care. The primary care dimensions were operationalised by a total of 77 indicators for which data were collected in 31 countries. Data sources included national and international literature, governmental publications, statistical databases, and experts’ consultations.

Results

Countries with relatively strong primary care are Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK. Countries either have many primary care policies and regulations in place, combined with good financial coverage and resources, and adequate primary care workforce conditions, or have consistently only few of these primary care structures in place. There is no correlation between the access, continuity, coordination, and comprehensiveness of primary care of countries.

Conclusion

Variation is shown in the strength of primary care across Europe, indicating a discrepancy in the responsibility given to primary care in national and international policy initiatives and the needed investments in primary care to solve, for example, future shortages of workforce. Countries are consistent in their primary care focus on all important structure dimensions. Countries need to improve their primary care information infrastructure to facilitate primary care performance management.