Efficiency versus thoroughness in medication review:A qualitative interview study in UK primary care

Background: Medication reviews may improve the safety of prescribing and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) highlights the importance of involving patients in this process. Aim To explore GP and pharmacist perspectives on how medication reviews were conducted in general practice in the UK. Design and setting Analysis of semi-structured interviews with GPS and pharmacists working in the South West of England, Northern England, and Scotland, sampled for heterogeneity. Interviews took place between January and October 2017.Method: Interviews focused on experience of medication review. Data saturation was achieved when no new insights arose from later interviews. Interviews were analysed thematically.Results: In total, 13 GPS and 10 pharmacists were interviewed. GPS and pharmacists perceived medication review as an opportunity to improve prescribing safety. Although interviewees thought patients should be involved in decisions about their medicines, high workload pressures meant that most medication reviews were conducted with limited or no patient input. For some GPS, a medication review was done 'in the quickest way possible to say that it was done'. Pharmacists were perceived by both professions as being more thorough but less time efficient than GPS, and few pharmacists were routinely involved in medication reviews even in practices employing a pharmacist. Interviewees argued that it was easier to continue medicines than it was to stop them, particularly because stopping medicines required involving the patient and this generated extra work.Conclusion: Practices tended to prioritise being efficient (getting the work done) rather than being thorough (doing it well), so that most medication reviews were carried out with little or no patient involvement, and medicines were rarely stopped or reduced. Time and resource constraints are an important barrier to implementing NICE guidance.</p

Stability of thyroid function in older adults: the Birmingham Elderly Thyroid Study

AbstractBACKGROUND:Thyroid function tests (TFTs) are among the most requested tests internationally. However, testing practice is inconsistent, and potentially suboptimal and overly costly. The natural history of thyroid function remains poorly understood.AIM:To establish the stability of thyroid function over time, and identify predictors of development of overt thyroid dysfunction.DESIGN AND SETTING:Longitudinal follow-up in 19 general practices in the UK.METHOD:A total of 2936 participants from the Birmingham Elderly Thyroid Study (BETS 1) with a baseline TFT result indicating euthyroid or subclinical state were re-tested after approximately 5 years. Change in thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (FT4), and thyroid status between baseline and follow-up was determined. Predictors of progression to overt dysfunction were modelled.RESULTS:Participants contributed 12 919 person-years; 17 cases of overt thyroid dysfunction were identified, 13 having been classified at baseline as euthyroid and four as having subclinical thyroid dysfunction. Individuals with subclinical results at baseline were 10- and 16-fold more likely to develop overt hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism, respectively, compared with euthyroid individuals. TSH and FT4 demonstrated significant stability over time, with 61% of participants having a repeat TSH concentration within 0.5 mIU/L of their original result. Predictors of overt hypothyroidism included new treatment with amiodarone (odds ratio [OR] 92.1), a new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (OR 7.4), or renal disease (OR 4.8).CONCLUSION:High stability of thyroid function demonstrated over the 5-year interval period should discourage repeat testing, especially when a euthyroid result is in the recent clinical record. Reduced repeat TFTs in older individuals is possible without conferring risk, and could result in significant cost savings

An evaluation of a coagulation system (Xprecia Stride) for utilisation in anticoagulation management

Aim: To evaluate the reliability and performance of the Xprecia Stride coagulometer under the conditions in which it is most likely to be used.Methods: The performance of the Xprecia Stride coagulometer was compared with a local laboratory and the CoaguChek systems routinely used for international normalised ratio (INR) estimation within one primary and one secondary care based anticoagulation clinic in Birmingham. Anticoagulation clinic personnel were trained to use the Xprecia Stride. Patients attending the clinics were eligible if aged ≥18 years and had received warfarin for at least 3 months. Consenting participants provided capillary blood samples for parallel testing on the Xprecia Stride and CoaguChek systems. At the secondary care clinic, a venous blood sample was also collected for laboratory INR estimation. INR results were compared using linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots.Results: A total of 102 laboratory and 205 parallel coagulometer INR tests were performed. Linear regression revealed strong correlation between the Xprecia Stride and the laboratory (r=0.83) and between the Xprecia Stride and CoaguChek systems (r=0.92). Within the therapeutic range, agreement between the systems was very good with 87% of the Xprecia Stride and laboratory INR results and 93% of the Xprecia Stride and CoaguChek INR results being within 0.5 INR units of each other.Conclusion: INRs tested using the Xprecia Stride system showed good agreement with the laboratory and CoaguChek systems. Findings indicate that in the hands of the intended users the Xprecia Stride is accurate, reliable and acceptable for use in a routine clinical setting.</p

Development of a model of medication review for use in clinical practice:Bristol Medication Review Model

Abstract Background Medication review is a core aspect of medicine optimisation, yet existing models of review vary substantially in structure and content and are not necessarily easy to implement in clinical practice. This study aimed to use evidence from the existing literature to identify key medication review components and use this to inform the design of an improved review model. Methods A systematic review was conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42018109788) to identify randomised control trials of stand-alone medication review in adults (18+ years). The review updated that by Huiskes et al. (BMC Fam Pract. 18:5, 2017), using the same search strategy implemented in MEDLINE and Embase. Studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Key review components were identified, alongside relevant clinical and health service outcomes. A working group (patients, doctors and pharmacists) developed the model through an iterative consensus process (appraisal of documents plus group discussions), working from the systematic review findings, brief evidence summaries for core review components and examples of previous models, to agree on the main purpose of the review model, overarching model structure, review components and supporting material. Results We identified 28 unique studies, with moderate bias overall. Consistent medication review components included reconciliation (26 studies), safety assessment (22), suboptimal treatment (19), patient knowledge/preferences (18), adherence (14), over-the-counter therapy (13) and drug monitoring (10). There was limited evidence from studies for improvement in key clinical outcomes. The review structure was underpinned by patient values and preferences, with parallel information gathering and evaluation stages, feeding into the final decision-making and implementation. Most key components identified in the literature were included. The final model was considered to benefit from a patient-centred, holistic approach, which captured both patient-orientated and medication-focused problems, and aligned with traditional consultation methods thus facilitating implementation in practice. Conclusions The Bristol Medication Review Model provides a framework for standardised delivery of structured reviews. The model has the potential for use by all healthcare professionals with relevant clinical experience and is designed to offer flexibility of implementation not limited to a particular healthcare setting

Assessing the utility of an online registry for patients monitoring their own warfarin therapy

Aims: To evaluate the utility of an online self-report registry for patient self-monitoring and self-management (PSM) of warfarin therapy. Methods: A prospective observational study of UK-based patients undertaking PSM and recording their international normalised ratio (INR) data via an online registry. Consenting participants recorded INR test dates, results and warfarin dosages using the online registry for a period of 12 months. Participants reported demographic data, disease characteristics and treatment-related adverse events and provided feedback via a survey. Data accuracy was assessed through comparison of INR results recorded online with results stored on 19 INR testing devices. Percentage time spent within therapeutic time in range (TTR) was also examined. Results: Eighty-seven per cent (39/45) completed the study period. Age ranged from 26 to 83 years, 44% had undertaken PSM for &gt;5 years. Sixty-six per cent (25/38) reported that the registry was easy to navigate and use. Forty-two participants contributed a total of 1669 INR results. Agreement between self-reported INR results and source INR data was high (99%). Mean TTR was 76% (SD 18.58) with 83% having &gt;60% TTR. Conclusions: Findings suggest that an online PSM registry is feasible, accurate and acceptable to patients. These findings require confirmation in a larger cohort of PSM patients. An online self-report registry could provide a valuable resource for gathering real world evidence of clinical effectiveness and safety of these developing models of care. </p

Subclinical thyroid dysfunction symptoms in older adults : cross-sectional study in UK primary care

Background Subclinical thyroid dysfunction — abnormal serum thyrotrophin (thyroid-stimulating hormone; TSH) concentrations with normal free thyroxine (FT4) is common in older people. It remains unclear whether individuals with subclinical serum status experience an increased symptom profile. Aim To compare the prevalence of those symptoms typically associated with overt thyroid dysfunction in older individuals with a subclinical and euthyroid serum profile. Design and setting Cross-sectional study, nested within the Birmingham Elderly Thyroid Study (BETS); from 19 UK general practices. Method Adults living in a community setting (aged ≥65 years), without overt thyroid dysfunction or associated treatment, self-reported the presence or absence of 18 symptoms (while serum result naïve). Serum concentrations of TSH and FT4 were measured to establish thyroid status. Results A total of 2870 individuals were screened: 2703 (94%) were categorised as euthyroid (normal), 29 (1%) subclinically hyperthyroid, and 138 (5%) subclinically hypothyroid. Symptoms were common in all groups. No significant differences in the prevalence of individual symptoms were observed between the euthyroid and subclinically hypothyroid groups nor in comparison with the subclinically hyperthyroid group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis failed to reveal an association between individual or multiple symptoms and subclinical status. Conclusion Findings suggest that subclinical thyroid dysfunction does not confer a symptom burden in older individuals and support adherence to guidelines in the non-treatment of subclinical thyroid dysfunction. GPs may use the findings to reassure older people presenting with symptoms that subclinical thyroid dysfunction is an unlikely explanation. The presence of persistently abnormal TSH concentrations may be linked to long-term risks of cardiovascular disease, especially atrial fibrillation, but whether this should prompt treatment and whether such treatment alters vascular outcomes is unknown

Enhancing adherence in trials promoting change in diet and physical activity in individuals with a diagnosis of colorectal adenoma; a systematic review of behavioural intervention approaches

BackgroundLittle is known about colorectal adenoma patients’ ability to adhere to behavioural interventions promoting a change in diet and physical activity. This review aimed to examine health behaviour intervention programmes promoting change in diet and/or physical activity in adenoma patients and characterise interventions to which this patient group are most likely to adhere.MethodsSearches of eight databases were restricted to English language publications 2000–2014. Reference lists of relevant articles were also reviewed. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of diet and physical activity interventions in colorectal adenoma patients were included. Eligibility and quality were assessed and data were extracted by two reviewers. Data extraction comprised type, intensity, provider, mode and location of delivery of the intervention and data to enable calculation of four adherence outcomes. Data were subject to narrative analysis.ResultsFive RCTs with a total of 1932 participants met the inclusion criteria. Adherence to the goals of the intervention ranged from 18 to 86 % for diet and 13 to 47 % for physical activity. Diet interventions achieving ≥ 50 % adherence to the goals of the intervention were clinic based, grounded in cognitive theory, delivered one to one and encouraged social support.ConclusionsThe findings of this review indicate that behavioural interventions can encourage colorectal adenoma patients to improve their diet. This review was not however able to clearly characterise effective interventions promoting increased physical activity in this patient group. Further research is required to establish effective interventions to promote adherence to physical activity in this population

Collaborative discussions between pharmacists and general practitioners to optimise patient medication:a qualitative study within a clinical trial

Background: There has been significant investment in pharmacists working in UK general practice to improve the effective and safe use of medicines. However, evidence of how to optimise collaboration between GPs and pharmacists in the context of polypharmacy (multiple medication) is lacking. Aim: To explore GP and pharmacist views and experiences of in-person, inter-professional collaborative discussions (IPCDs) as part of a complex intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in general practice. Design and setting: A mixed-method process evaluation embedded within the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial conducted in Bristol and the West Midlands. Method: Audio-recordings of IPCDs between GPs and pharmacists, and individual semi-structured interviews exploring their reflections on these discussions. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Results: Fourteen practices took part in the process evaluation (Feb 2021- Sept 2023). Seventeen IPCD meetings were audio recorded discussing 30 patients (range of 1-6 patients per meeting). Six GPs and 13 pharmacists were interviewed. The IPCD was highly valued by GPs and pharmacists who described benefits including: strengthening their working relationship; learning from each other; and gaining in confidence to manage more complex patients. It was often challenging, however, to find time for the IPCDs. Conclusion: The model of IPCD studied provided protected time for GPs and pharmacists to work together to deliver whole-patient care, with both professions finding this beneficial. Protected time for inter-professional liaison and collaboration, and structured interventions may facilitate improved patient care

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

© The Author(s) 2021. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), and indicate if changes were made.BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of medicines are not used as intended, resulting in poor health and economic outcomes. Medicines optimisation is 'a person-centred approach to safe and effective medicines use, to ensure people obtain the best possible outcomes from their medicines'. The purpose of this exercise was to co-produce a prioritised research agenda for medicines optimisation using a multi-stakeholder (patient, researcher, public and health professionals) approach. METHODS: A three-stage, multiple method process was used including: generation of preliminary research questions (Stage 1) using a modified Nominal Group Technique; electronic consultation and ranking with a wider multi-stakeholder group (Stage 2); a face-to-face, one-day consensus meeting involving representatives from all stakeholder groups (Stage 3). RESULTS: In total, 92 research questions were identified during Stages 1 and 2 and ranked in order of priority during stage 3. Questions were categorised into four areas: 'Patient Concerns' [e.g. is there a shared decision (with patients) about using each medicine?], 'Polypharmacy' [e.g. how to design health services to cope with the challenge of multiple medicines use?], 'Non-Medical Prescribing' [e.g. how can the contribution of non-medical prescribers be optimised in primary care?], and 'Deprescribing' [e.g. what support is needed by prescribers to deprescribe?]. A significant number of the 92 questions were generated by Patient and Public Involvement representatives, which demonstrates the importance of including this stakeholder group when identifying research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of research questions was generated reflecting concerns which affect patients, practitioners, the health service, as well the ethical and philosophical aspects of the prescribing and deprescribing of medicines. These questions should be used to set future research agendas and funding commissions.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Collaborative discussions between pharmacists and general practitioners to optimise patient medication: a qualitative study within a clinical trial.

There has been significant investment in pharmacists working in UK general practice to improve the effective and safe use of medicines. However, evidence of how to optimise collaboration between GPs and pharmacists in the context of polypharmacy (multiple medication) is lacking. To explore GP and pharmacist views and experiences of in-person, inter-professional collaborative discussions (IPCDs) as part of a complex intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in general practice. A mixed-method process evaluation embedded within the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial conducted in Bristol and the West Midlands. Audio-recordings of IPCDs between GPs and pharmacists, and individual semi-structured interviews exploring their reflections on these discussions. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Fourteen practices took part in the process evaluation (Feb 2021- Sept 2023). Seventeen IPCD meetings were audio recorded discussing 30 patients (range of 1-6 patients per meeting). Six GPs and 13 pharmacists were interviewed. The IPCD was highly valued by GPs and pharmacists who described benefits including: strengthening their working relationship; learning from each other; and gaining in confidence to manage more complex patients. It was often challenging, however, to find time for the IPCDs. The model of IPCD studied provided protected time for GPs and pharmacists to work together to deliver whole-patient care, with both professions finding this beneficial. Protected time for inter-professional liaison and collaboration, and structured interventions may facilitate improved patient care. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2024, The Authors.