Design and intermediate results of the Lower Extremity Arterial Disease Event Reduction (LEADER)* trial of bezafibrate in men with lower extremity arterial disease [ISRCTN41194621]

BACKGROUND: Raised levels of both triglycerides and fibrinogen, each of which are reduced by bezafibrate, may contribute to lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD). This condition is characterized by a particularly high incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, but is little studied thus far in randomised controlled trials. METHOD: Patients were recruited through 85 practices in the British Medical Research Council General Practice Research Framework and through nine hospital vascular clinics. The treatment regimen, which is double-blind and placebo-controlled, is bezafibrate 400 mg/day. The 1568 patients recruited represent 86% of those eligible at screening. RESULTS: None of the anticipated side effects (mainly gastrointestinal) differed between the two groups. Nearly 80% of the total person-years accrued at 3 years were spent on trial treatment. Bezafibrate significantly reduced total cholesterol by approximately 8.0% and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol by approximately 9.0%, and increased high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol by approximately 11.0% initially, falling to about 6.0% at 3 years. Triglycerides were significantly reduced by about 23.0% and fibrinogen by about 14.0%. Plasma creatinine rose by approximately 11% in those on active treatment. All of these effects were highly significant (P < 0.0001). Bezafibrate had no effect on the level of C-reactive protein (CRP). CONCLUSION: The trial recruited an unusually high proportion of eligible patients, ensuring the general applicability of its results. The fibrinogen-lowering and lipid-modifying effects of bezafibrate were confirmed. Although bezafibrate lowers fibrinogen, it has no effect on CRP; this suggests that the reduction in fibrinogen is due to an effect on its metabolism rather than suppression of an inflammatory response

Implementation of Integrated Learning Program in neurosciences during first year of traditional medical course: Perception of students and faculty

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Our college introduced an integrated learning program (ILP) for first year undergraduates with an aim to develop, implement and evaluate a module for CNS in basic sciences and to assess the feasibility of an ILP in phase I of medical education in a college following traditional medical curriculum.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The idea of implementing ILP for Central Nervous System (CNS) in phase one was conceived by curriculum development committee drawn from faculty of all phases. After a series of meetings of curriculum development committee, inputs from basic science and clinical departments, a time table was constructed. Various teaching learning methods, themes for integrated didactic lectures, case based learning and clinical exposure were decided. Basic science faculty were made to participate actively in both case based learning and hospital visits along with clinical experts. The completed program was evaluated based on structured questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Sixty percent students rated the program good to excellent with reference to appreciation, understanding and application of basic science knowledge in health and disease. Seventy eight percent felt that this program will help them perform better in later days of clinical training. However sixty percent students felt that ILP will not help them perform better at the first professional examination. Seventy two per cent of faculty agreed that this program improved understanding and application of basic science knowledge of students. Ninety percent of faculty felt that this program will help them perform better in later days of clinical training.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The adoption of present integrated module for CNS and the use of multiple teaching learning methods have been proven to be useful in acquisition of knowledge from the student satisfaction point of view. Students and faculty expressed an overall satisfaction towards ILP for CNS. The study showed that it is possible to adopt an integrated learning module in the first year of medical course under a conventional curriculum.</p

“Should I stay or should I go now?” : A qualitative study of why UK doctors retire

Funding information Our thanks go to the University of Aberdeen Development Trust and the British Medical Association (Scotland) for funding this work. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Our thanks to all those doctors who participated in the study. Our thanks also to the BMA (Scotland) for distributing the invitation to take part in the study to their members. No patients or any members of the public were involved in this study.Peer reviewedPostprintPostprin

Do people with intellectual disabilities understand their prescription medication? A scoping review

© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Background: People with intellectual disabilities are more likely to experience poor health than the general population and are frequently prescribed multiple medications. Therefore, it is important that people with intellectual disabilities understand their medication and potential adverse effects. Method: A scoping review explored people with intellectual disabilities' knowledge of prescription medications, their risks and how medication understanding can be improved. Results: Ten journal articles were included. People with intellectual disabilities often lacked understanding of their medication, including its name, purpose and when and how to take it. Participants were often confused or unaware of adverse effects associated with their medication. Information was sometimes explained to carers rather than people with intellectual disabilities. Some interventions and accessible information helped to improve knowledge in people with intellectual disabilities. Conclusion: There is a need for accessible and tailored information about medication to be discussed with people with intellectual disabilities in order to meet legal and best practice standards.Peer reviewe

Applying the trigger review method after a brief educational intervention: potential for teaching and improving safety in GP specialty training?

&lt;p&gt;Background: The Trigger Review Method (TRM) is a structured approach to screening clinical records for undetected patient safety incidents (PSIs) and identifying learning and improvement opportunities. In Scotland, TRM participation can inform GP appraisal and has been included as a core component of the national primary care patient safety programme that was launched in March 2013. However, the clinical workforce needs up-skilled and the potential of TRM in GP training has yet to be tested. Current TRM training utilizes a workplace face-to-face session by a GP expert, which is not feasible. A less costly, more sustainable educational intervention is necessary to build capability at scale. We aimed to determine the feasibility and impact of TRM and a related training intervention in GP training.&lt;/p&gt; Methods We recruited 25 west of Scotland GP trainees to attend a 2-hour TRM workshop. Trainees then applied TRM to 25 clinical records and returned findings within 4-weeks. A follow-up feedback workshop was held. &lt;p&gt;Results: 21/25 trainees (84%) completed the task. 520 records yielded 80 undetected PSIs (15.4%). 36/80 were judged potentially preventable (45%) with 35/80 classified as causing moderate to severe harm (44%). Trainees described a range of potential learning and improvement plans. Training was positively received and appeared to be successful given these findings. TRM was valued as a safety improvement tool by most participants.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusion: This small study provides further evidence of TRM utility and how to teach it pragmatically. TRM is of potential value in GP patient safety curriculum delivery and preparing trainees for future safety improvement expectations.&lt;/p&gt

Training students as interprofessional learning facilitators: An exploratory study highlighting the need to build confidence

Interprofessional learning (IPL) aims to equip students for future interprofessional and collaborative practice. Involving students as IPL facilitators is becoming increasingly commonplace as an attempt to catalyse the necessary transformation of our workforce needed to deliver truly integrated and person-centred care. Evidence in the literature highlights the key role of trained facilitators in reaching successful IPL outcomes. Some guidelines are available as to how we train staff facilitators, but little evidence is available that describes how to appropriately prepare student IPL facilitators. The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate whether student IPL facilitators felt that they were sufficiently prepared for their role. Data in the form of open-ended text-based responses from student facilitators (n = 9) were collated after an intervention where student facilitators had been given the role of supporting IPL. Data were analysed using principles of thematic analysis. Three main themes emerged: i) building confidence; ii) purpose of IPL; iii) learning moments. Student IPL facilitators who took part in this study felt that they were adequately prepared for their role. Findings show that preparing students for IPL facilitation has similar, yet unique, components compared to the training staff. In particular, this study highlighted a need for student facilitators to receive further preparation to help build their confidence. Involving students as IPL facilitators has great potential in staff and students joining forces to equip students for future interprofessional and collaborative practice that can deliver high-quality care

Do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation decisions : an evidence synthesis

Background: Cardiac arrest is the final common step in the dying process. In the right context, resuscitation can reverse the dying process, yet success rates are low. However, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a highly invasive medical treatment, which, if applied in the wrong setting, can deprive the patient of dignified death. Do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions provide a mechanism to withhold CPR. Recent scientific and lay press reports suggest that the implementation of DNACPR decisions in NHS practice is problematic. Aims and objectives: This project sought to identify reasons why conflict and complaints arise, identify inconsistencies in NHS trusts’ implementation of national guidelines, understand health professionals’ experience in relation to DNACPR, its process and ethical challenges, and explore the literature for evidence to improve DNACPR policy and practice. Methods: A systematic review synthesised evidence of processes, barriers and facilitators related to DNACPR decision-making and implementation. Reports from NHS trusts, the National Reporting and Learning System, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, the Office of the Chief Coroner, trust resuscitation policies and telephone calls to a patient information line were reviewed. Multiple focus groups explored service-provider perspectives on DNACPR decisions. A stakeholder group discussed the research findings and identified priorities for future research. Results: The literature review found evidence that structured discussions at admission to hospital or following deterioration improved patient involvement and decision-making. Linking DNACPR to overall treatment plans improved clarity about goals of care, aided communication and reduced harms. Standardised documentation improved the frequency and quality of recording decisions. Approximately 1500 DNACPR incidents are reported annually. One-third of these report harms, including some instances of death. Problems with communication and variation in trusts’ implementation of national guidelines were common. Members of the public were concerned that their wishes with regard to resuscitation would not be respected. Clinicians felt that DNACPR decisions should be considered within the overall care of individual patients. Some clinicians avoid raising discussions about CPR for fear of conflict or complaint. A key theme across all focus groups, and reinforced by the literature review, was the negative impact on overall patient care of having a DNACPR decision and the conflation of ‘do not resuscitate’ with ‘do not provide active treatment’. Limitations: The variable quality of some data sources allows potential overstatement or understatement of findings. However, data source triangulation identified common issues. Conclusion: There is evidence of variation and suboptimal practice in relation to DNACPR decisions across health-care settings. There were deficiencies in considering, discussing and implementing the decision, as well as unintended consequences of DNACPR decisions being made on other aspects of patient care. Future work: Recommendations supported by the stakeholder group are standardising NHS policies and forms, ensuring cross-boundary recognition of DNACPR decisions, integrating decisions with overall treatment plans and developing tools and training strategies to support clinician and patient decision-making, including improving communication. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002669. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of a Diabetes REcall And Management system: the DREAM trial

BACKGROUND: Following the introduction of a computerised diabetes register in part of the northeast of England, care initially improved but then plateaued. We therefore enhanced the existing diabetes register to address these problems. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an area wide 'extended,' computerised diabetes register incorporating a full structured recall and management system, including individualised patient management prompts to primary care clinicians based on locally-adapted, evidence-based guidelines. METHODS: The study design was a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial, with the general practice as the unit of randomisation. Set in 58 general practices in three Primary Care Trusts in the northeast of England, the study outcomes were the clinical process and outcome variables held on the diabetes register, patient-reported outcomes, and service and patient costs. The effect of the intervention was estimated using generalised linear models with an appropriate error structure. To allow for the clustering of patients within practices, population averaged models were estimated using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Patients in intervention practices were more likely to have at least one diabetes appointment recorded (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.02, 3.91), to have a recording of a foot check (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.09, 3.21), have a recording of receiving dietary advice (OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.22, 6.29), and have a recording of blood pressure (BP) (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.06, 4.36). There was no difference in mean HbA1c or BP levels, but the mean cholesterol level in patients from intervention practices was significantly lower (-0.15 mmol/l, 95% CI -0.25, -0.06). There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes or in patient-reported use of drugs, or uptake of health services. The average cost per patient was not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. Costs incurred in administering the system at the register and in general practice were in addition to these. CONCLUSION: This study has shown benefits from an area-wide, computerised diabetes register incorporating a full structured recall and individualised patient management system. However, these benefits were achieved at a cost. In future, these costs may fall as electronic data exchange becomes a reliable reality. Trial registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Register, ISRCTN32042030