Factors affecting patients' trust and confidence in GPs: evidence from the English national GP patient survey.

OBJECTIVES: Patients' trust in general practitioners (GPs) is fundamental to effective clinical encounters. Associations between patients' trust and their perceptions of communication within the consultation have been identified, but the influence of patients' demographic characteristics on these associations is unknown. We aimed to investigate the relative contribution of the patient's age, gender and ethnicity in any association between patients' ratings of interpersonal aspects of the consultation and their confidence and trust in the doctor. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of English national GP patient survey data (2009). SETTING: Primary Care, England, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Data from year 3 of the GP patient survey: 5 660 217 questionnaires sent to patients aged 18 and over, registered with a GP in England for at least 6 months; overall response rate was 42% after adjustment for sampling design. OUTCOME MEASURES: We used binary logistic regression analysis to investigate patients' reported confidence and trust in the GP, analysing ratings of 7 interpersonal aspects of the consultation, controlling for patients' sociodemographic characteristics. Further modelling examined moderating effects of age, gender and ethnicity on the relative importance of these 7 predictors. RESULTS: Among 1.5 million respondents (adjusted response rate 42%), the sense of 'being taken seriously' had the strongest association with confidence and trust. The relative importance of the 7 interpersonal aspects of care was similar for men and women. Non-white patients accorded higher priority to being given enough time than did white patients. Involvement in decisions regarding their care was more strongly associated with reports of confidence and trust for older patients than for younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between patients' ratings of interpersonal aspects of care and their confidence and trust in their GP are influenced by patients' demographic characteristics. Taking account of these findings could inform patient-centred service design and delivery and potentially enhance patients' confidence and trust in their doctor

A randomised controlled trial is not a pilot trial simply because it uses a surrogate endpoint.

Background: It has been argued that true endpoints (or 'hard' endpoints) for clinical trials, which are meaningful to clinicians, researchers and patients alike, are limited to those that measure health status, survival and cost. Other endpoints are termed 'surrogate' endpoints and are intended to substitute and predict the true endpoint.  A number of trials that describe using surrogate endpoints use the term 'pilot' in the title of the paper but the reason for this, as related by the authors, is the use of these surrogate endpoints in the trial. The conduct and reporting of such a trial may follow the traditional pattern for a conventional randomised controlled trial (RCT) as defined by the original CONSORT statement, with power-based sample size calculations, and significance tests of the results. However, this is contrary to the guidelines of the CONSORT extension for the reporting of pilot trials. Main body: We review the definition of a surrogate endpoint and the use of surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. We consider to what extent a trial could be considered a pilot trial if it uses a surrogate endpoint and discuss two examples that illustrate current practice. Conclusion: Trials which use surrogate endpoints should only be described as 'pilot' when a definitive trial is a distinct possibility and the authors consider conditions which would indicate whether the definitive main trial was worthwhile and feasible. Simply because a trial uses a surrogate endpoint is not justification for calling it a pilot trial

Comment on Hogas et al. Salt, Not Always a Cardiovascular Enemy? A Mini-Review and Modern Perspective. Medicina 2022, 58, 1175

Hogas et al. recently published their perspective on dietary salt in a mini review [...

Why do patients with multimorbidity in England report worse experiences in primary care? Evidence from the General Practice Patient Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and explain the primary care experiences of people with multiple long-term conditions in England. DESIGN AND METHODS: Using questionnaire data from 906,578 responders to the English 2012 General Practice Patient Survey, we describe the primary care experiences of patients with long-term conditions, including 583,143 patients who reported one or more long-term conditions. We employed mixed effect logistic regressions to analyse data on six items covering three care domains (access, continuity and communication) and a single item on overall primary care experience. We controlled for sociodemographic characteristics, and for general practice using a random effect, and further, controlled for, and explored the importance of, health-related quality of life measured using the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) scale. RESULTS: Most patients with long-term conditions report a positive experience of care at their general practice (after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and general practice, range 74.0-93.1% reporting positive experience of care across seven questions) with only modest variation by type of condition. For all three domains of patient experience, an increasing number of comorbid conditions is associated with a reducing percentage of patients reporting a positive experience of care. For example, compared with respondents with no long-term condition, the OR for reporting a positive experience is 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.87) for respondents with four or more long-term conditions. However, this relationship is no longer observed after adjusting for health-related quality of life (OR (95% CI) single condition=1.23 (1.21 to 1.26); four or more conditions=1.31 (1.25 to 1.37)), with pain making the greatest difference among five quality of life variables included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with multiple long-term conditions more frequently report worse experiences in primary care. However, patient-centred measures of health-related quality of life, especially pain, are more important than the number of conditions in explaining why patients with multiple long-term conditions report worse experiences of care

Observational Constraints to the Evolution of Massive Stars

We consider some aspects of the evolution of massive stars which can only be elucidated by means of "indirect" observations, i.e. measurements of the effects of massive stars on their environments. We discuss in detail the early evolution of massive stars formed in high metallicity regions as inferred from studies of HII regions in external galaxies.Comment: 6 pages, 1 figure; Invited Paper presented at the Roma-Trieste Workshop 1999 "The Chemical Evolution of the Milky Way: Stars versus Clusters", Vulcano Island (ME, Italy), 20-24 September, 1999, eds. F. Giovannelli & F. Matteucci, Kluwer-Holland (in press

Drivers of overall satisfaction with primary care: Evidence from the English General Practice Patient Survey

This is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.Background/objectives: To determine which aspects of primary care matter most to patients, we aim to identify those aspects of patient experience that show the strongest relationship with overall satisfaction and examine the extent to which these relationships vary by socio-demographic and health characteristics. Design/setting: Data from the 2009/10 English General Practice Patient Survey including 2 169 718 respondents registered with 8362 primary care practices. Measures/analyses: Linear mixed-effects regression models (fixed effects adjusting for age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, self-reported health, self-reported mental health condition and random practice effect) predicting overall satisfaction from six items covering four domains of care: access, helpfulness of receptionists, doctor communication and nurse communication. Additional models using interactions tested whether associations between patient experience and satisfaction varied by socio-demographic group. Results: Doctor communication showed the strongest relationship with overall satisfaction (standardized coefficient 0.48, 95% CI = 0.48, 0.48), followed by the helpfulness of reception staff (standardized coefficient 0.22, 95% CI = 0.22, 0.22). Among six measures of patient experience, obtaining appointments in advance showed the weakest relationship with overall satisfaction (standardized coefficient 0.06, 95% CI = 0.05, 0.06). Interactions showed statistically significant but small variation in the importance of drivers across different patient groups. Conclusions: For all patient groups, communication with the doctor is the most important driver of overall satisfaction with primary care in England, along with the helpfulness of receptionists. In contrast, and despite being a policy priority for government, measures of access, including the ability to obtain appointments, were poorly related to overall satisfaction.UK Department of HealthNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Cholangiographic findings in hepatic artery occlusion after liver transplantation

Because the hepatic artery provides the only blood supply to the biliary tree of a liver allograft, posttransplantation arterial occlusion may result in a biliary complication. Cholangiograms were revieweed retrospectively in 31 transplant patients who had proved complete or partial occlusions of the hepatic artery (thrombosis in 29 and marked stenosis in two). Cholangiograms were abnormal in 26 (84%). The most common abnormality, seen in 16 patients, was nonanastomotic contrast leakage from the donor intra- or extrahepatic bile ducts. Strictures of the donor biliary tree ocurred in 14 patients, four of whom also had a nonanastomotic bile leak. In 12 of the 14, the strictures were nonanastomotic. Other findings included poor filling of the intrahepatic bile ducts, generalized donor ductal dilatation and irregularity, and intraductal filling defects. Sixteen (89%) of 18 transplants with nonanastomotic contrast leakage had occlusions of the hepatic artery. Of 21 transplants with nonanastomotic strictures, 12 (57%) had occlusions of the hepatic artery. Only two (10%) of 20 transplants with biliary anastomotic strictures had arterial occlusion. We conclude that liver transplant recipients who exhibit nonanastomotic contrast leakage or nonanastomotic strictures on cholangiography should be evaluated for occlusion of the hepatic artery as the probable cause