37 research outputs found

    Primary care challenges in diagnosing and referring patients with suspected rheumatoid arthritis: a national cross-sectional GP survey

    Get PDF
    Objective: National guidelines advocate referring patients with persistent synovitis to rheumatology within 3 working days of presentation to primary care. This occurs infrequently. We aimed to identify modifiable barriers to early referral of suspected RA patients among English general practitioners (GPs). Methods: We carried out a national cross-sectional survey of 1388 English GPs (RA Questionnaire for GPs [RA-QUEST] study). Questions addressed GPs’ confidence in diagnosing RA, clinical factors influencing RA diagnosis/referral, timeliness of referrals and secondary care access. Data were captured using 10-point visual analog scales, five-point Likert scales, yes/no questions or free text, and were analysed descriptively. Results: Small joint swelling and pain were most influential in diagnosing RA (91 and 84% rated the importance of these as 4 or 5 on a five-point Likert scale, respectively); investigations including RF (61% rating 4 or 5) and anti-CCP antibody (72% rating 4 or 5) were less influential. Patient history had the greatest impact on the decision to refer (92% rating this 4 or 5 on a 5-point Likert scale), with acute phase markers (74% rating 4 or 5) and serology (76% rating 4 or 5) less impactful. Despite the importance placed on history and examination, only 26% referred suspected RA immediately without investigations; 95% of GPs organizing further tests opted to test for RF. Conclusion: For suspected RA patients to be referred within 3 days of presentation to primary care there needs to be a paradigm shift in GPs’ approaches to making referral decisions, with a focus on clinical history and examination findings, and not the use of investigations such as RF

    Quality assurance of surgery in the randomized ST03 trial of perioperative chemotherapy in carcinoma of the stomach and gastro‐oesophageal junction

    Get PDF
    Background The UK Medical Research Council ST03 trial compared perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (B) in gastric and oesophagogastric junctional cancer. No difference in survival was noted between the arms of the trial. The present study reviewed the standards and performance of surgery in the context of the protocol‐specified surgical criteria. Methods Surgical and pathological clinical report forms were reviewed to determine adherence to the surgical protocols, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and final histopathological stage for all patients treated in the study. Results Of 1063 patients randomized, 895 (84·2 per cent) underwent resection; surgical details were available for 880 (98·3 per cent). Postoperative assessment data were available for 873 patients; complications occurred in 458 (52·5 per cent) overall, of whom 71 (8·1 per cent) developed complications deemed to be life‐threatening by the responsible clinician. The most common complications were respiratory (211 patients, 24·2 per cent). The anastomotic leak rate was 118 of 873 (13·5 per cent) overall; among those who underwent oesophagogastrectomy, the rate was higher in the group receiving ECX‐B (23·6 per cent versus 9·9 per cent in the ECX group). Pathological assessment data were available for 845 patients. At least 15 nodes were removed in 82·5 per cent of resections and the median lymph node harvest was 24 (i.q.r. 17–34). Twenty‐five or more nodes were removed in 49·0 per cent of patients. Histopathologically, the R1 rate was 24·9 per cent (208 of 834 patients). An R1 resection was more common for proximal tumours. Conclusion In the ST03 trial, the performance of surgery met the protocol‐stipulated criteria. Registration number: NCT00450203 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

    Silent slips, trips and broken hips in the under 60s: a review of the literature

    Get PDF
    This critical review of the literature regarding the recovery experiences and healthcare needs of people under 60 following a fragility hip fracture seeks to identify the associated implications for nursing practice and inform care delivery. Forty papers were included following a structured database, citation and grey literature search and filtering of results in line with specified inclusion criteria. Hip fracture is a common, serious and complex injury and an important cause of morbidity, mortality and rising healthcare costs worldwide. This review indicates that although commonly associated with the elderly, incidence and impact in the under 60s has been under-explored. Current health policy, professional and social norms almost exclusively focus on the elderly, surgical interventions and short-term outcomes, rendering the under 60s an inadvertently marginalised, relatively 'silent' sub-set of the hip fracture population. Nurses must be aware, however, of the different recovery needs of this younger group. The limited evidence available indicates these include work related needs and long term physical and psychosocial limitations in this socially and economically active group. Priorities are identified for research to inform policy and practice. Meanwhile, nurses can address the needs of this group by listening to and involving them and their families as healthcare partners. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

    Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

    Get PDF
    Background Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in mental health research is increasing, especially in early (pre-funding) stages. PPI is less consistent in later stages, including in analysing qualitative data. The aims of this study were to develop a methodology for involving PPI co-researchers in collaboratively analysing qualitative mental health research data with academic researchers, to pilot and refine this methodology, and to create a best practice framework for collaborative data analysis (CDA) of qualitative mental health research. Methods In the context of the RECOLLECT Study of Recovery Colleges, a critical literature review of collaborative data analysis studies was conducted, to identify approaches and recommendations for successful CDA. A CDA methodology was developed and then piloted in RECOLLECT, followed by refinement and development of a best practice framework. Results From 10 included publications, four CDA approaches were identified: (1) consultation, (2) development, (3) application and (4) development and application of coding framework. Four characteristics of successful CDA were found: CDA process is co-produced; CDA process is realistic regarding time and resources; demands of the CDA process are manageable for PPI co-researchers; and group expectations and dynamics are effectively managed. A four-meeting CDA process was piloted to o-produce a coding framework based on qualitative data collected in RECOLLECT and to create a mental health service user-defined change model relevant to Recovery Colleges. Formal and informal feedback demonstrated active involvement. The CDA process involved an extra 80 person-days of time (40 from PPI coresearchers, 40 from academic researchers).The process was refined into a best practice framework comprising Preparation, CDA and Application phases. Conclusions This study has developed a typology of approaches to collaborative analysis of qualitative data in mental health research, identified from available evidence the characteristics of successful involvement, and developed, piloted and refined the first best practice framework for collaborative analysis of qualitative data. This framework has the potential to support meaningful PPI in data analysis in the context of qualitative mental health research studies, a previously neglected yet central part of the research cycle
    corecore