Using computers to identify non-compliant people at increased risk of osteoporotic fractures in general practice: a cross-sectional study.

National guidelines recommend bisphosphonates for secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures; however, poor compliance may result in sub-optimal prevention

Bariatric Surgery in Obese Women of Reproductive Age Improves Conditions That Underlie Fertility and Pregnancy Outcomes: Retrospective Cohort Study of UK National Bariatric Surgery Registry (NBSR)

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study are the following: to describe the female population of reproductive age having bariatric surgery in the UK, to assess the age and ethnicity of women accessing surgery, and to assess the effect of bariatric surgery on factors that underlie fertility and pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: Demographic details, comorbidities, and operative type of women aged 18-45 years were extracted from the National Bariatric Surgery Registry (NBSR). A comparison was made with non-operative cases (aged 18-45 and BMI ≥40 kg/m(2)) from the Health Survey for England (HSE, 2007-2013). Analyses were performed using "R" software. RESULTS: Data were extracted on 15,222 women from NBSR and 1073 from HSE. Women aged 18-45 comprised 53 % of operations. Non-Caucasians were under-represented in NBSR compared to HSE (10 vs 16 % respectively, p < 0.0001). The NBSR group was older than the HSE group-median 38 (IQR 32-42) vs 36 (IQR 30-41) years (Wilcoxon test p < 0.0001). Almost one third of women in NBSR had menstrual dysfunction at baseline (33.0 %). BMI fell in the first year postoperatively from 48.2 ± 8.3 to 37.4 ± 7.5 kg/m(2) (t test, p < 0.001). From NBSR, in the postoperative period, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes fell by 54 %, polycystic ovarian syndrome by 15 %, and any menstrual dysfunction by 12 %. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of all bariatric procedures are carried out on women of reproductive age. More work is required to provide prompt and equal access across ethnic groups. At least one in three women suffers from menstrual dysfunction at baseline. Bariatric surgery improves factors that underlie fertility and pregnancy outcomes. A prospective study is required to verify these effects

Identification of people with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease using routine data: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) causes progressive renal damage and is a leading cause of end-stage renal failure. With emerging therapies it is important to devise a method for early detection. We aimed to identify factors from routine clinical data which can be used to distinguish people with a high likelihood of having ADPKD in a primary health care setting. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was undertaken using data from the Quality Intervention in Chronic Kidney Disease trial extracted from 127 primary care practices in England. The health records of 255 people with ADPKD were compared to the general population. Logistic regression was used to identify clinical features which distinguish ADPKD. These clinical features were used to stratify individual risk using a risk score tool. RESULTS: Renal impairment, proteinuria, haematuria, a diastolic blood pressure over 90 mmHg and multiple antihypertensive medications were more common in ADPKD than the general population and were used to build a regression model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; 0.79). Age, gender, haemoglobin and urinary tract infections were not associated with ADPKD. A risk score (range -3 to +10) of ≥0 gave a sensitivity of 70.2% and specificity 74.9% of for detection. CONCLUSIONS: Stratification of ADPKD likelihood from routine data may be possible. This approach could be a valuable component of future screening programs although further longitudinal analyses are needed

Confidence and quality in managing CKD compared with other cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus: a linked study of questionnaire and routine primary care data

Background: Much of chronic disease is managed in primary care and chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a recent addition. We are conducting a cluster randomised study of quality improvement interventions in CKD (QICKD) - Clinical Trials Registration: ISRCTN56023731. CKD registers have a lower than expected prevalence and an initial focus group study suggested variable levels of confidence in managing CKD. Our objective is to compare practitioner confidence and achievement of quality indicators for CKD with hypertension and diabetes. Method: We validated a new questionnaire to test confidence. We compared confidence with achievement of pay-for-performance indicators (P4P) and implementation of evidence-based guidance. We achieved a 74% (148/ 201) response rate. Results: 87% (n = 128) of respondents are confident in managing hypertension (HT) compared with 59% (n = 87) in managing HT in CKD (HT+CKD); and with 61% (n = 90) in HT, CKD and diabetes (CKD+HT+DM). 85.2% (P4P) and 62.5% (National targets) of patients with hypertension are at target; in patients with HT and CKD 65.1% and 53.3%; in patients with HT, CKD and DM 67.8% and 29.6%. Confidence in managing proteinuria in CKD is low (42%, n = 62). 87% of respondents knew BP treatment thresholds in CKD, but only 53% when proteinuria is factored in. Male GPs, younger ( 54 yrs) clinicians are more confident than females and 35 to 54 year olds in managing CKD. 84% of patients with hypertension treated with angiotensin modulating drugs achieve achieved P4P targets compared to 67% of patients with CKD. Conclusions: Practitioners are less likely to achieve management targets where their confidence is low

The QICKD study protocol: a cluster randomised trial to compare quality improvement interventions to lower systolic BP in chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a relatively newly recognised but common long-term condition affecting 5 to 10% of the population. Effective management of CKD, with emphasis on strict blood pressure (BP) control, reduces cardiovascular risk and slows the progression of CKD. There is currently an unprecedented rise in referral to specialist renal services, which are often located in tertiary centres, inconvenient for patients, and wasteful of resources. National and international CKD guidelines include quality targets for primary care. However, there have been no rigorous evaluations of strategies to implement these guidelines. This study aims to test whether quality improvement interventions improve primary care management of elevated BP in CKD, reduce cardiovascular risk, and slow renal disease progression DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) METHODS: This three-armed CRT compares two well-established quality improvement interventions with usual practice. The two interventions comprise: provision of clinical practice guidelines with prompts and audit-based education. The study population will be all individuals with CKD from general practices in eight localities across England. Randomisation will take place at the level of the general practices. The intended sample (three arms of 25 practices) powers the study to detect a 3 mmHg difference in systolic BP between the different quality improvement interventions. An additional 10 practices per arm will receive a questionnaire to measure any change in confidence in managing CKD. Follow up will take place over two years. Outcomes will be measured using anonymised routinely collected data extracted from practice computer systems. Our primary outcome measure will be reduction of systolic BP in people with CKD and hypertension at two years. Secondary outcomes will include biomedical outcomes and markers of quality, including practitioner confidence in managing CKD. A small group of practices (n = 4) will take part in an in-depth process evaluation. We will use time series data to examine the natural history of CKD in the community. Finally, we will conduct an economic evaluation based on a comparison of the cost effectiveness of each intervention. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ISRCTN56023731. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

Ethnicity Recording in Primary Care Computerised Medical Record Systems: An Ontological Approach

Background Ethnicity recording within primary care computerised medical record (CMR) systems is suboptimal, exacerbated by tangled taxonomies within current coding systems.Objective To develop a method for extending ethnicity identification using routinely collected data.Methods We used an ontological method to maximise the reliability and prevalence of ethnicity information in the Royal College of General Practitioner’s Research and Surveillance database. Clinical codes were either directly mapped to ethnicity group or utilised as proxy markers (such as language spoken) from which ethnicity could be inferred. We compared the performance of our method with the recording rates that would be identified by code lists utilised by the UK pay for the performance system, with the help of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF).Results Data from 2,059,453 patients across 110 practices were included. The overall categorisable ethnicity using QOF codes was 36.26% (95% confidence interval (CI): 36.20%–36.33%). This rose to 48.57% (CI:48.50%–48.64%) using the described ethnicity mapping process. Mapping increased across all ethnic groups. The largest increase was seen in the white ethnicity category (30.61%; CI: 30.55%–30.67% to 40.24%; CI: 40.17%–40.30%). The highest relative increase was in the ethnic group categorised as the other (0.04%; CI: 0.03%–0.04% to 0.92%; CI: 0.91%–0.93%).Conclusions This mapping method substantially increases the prevalence of known ethnicity in CMR data and may aid future epidemiological research based on routine data

A simple clinical coding strategy to improve recording of child maltreatment concerns: an audit study

Background Recording concerns about child maltreatment, including minor concerns, is recommended by the General Medical Council (GMC) and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) but there is evidence of substantial under-recording.Aim To determine whether a simple coding strategy improved recording of maltreatment-related concerns in electronic primary care records.Design and Setting Clinical audit of rates of maltreatment-related coding before January 2010–December 2011 and after January–December 2012 implementation of a simple coding strategy in 11 English family practices. The strategy included encouraging general practitioners to use, always and as a minimum, the Read code ‘Child is cause for concern’. A total of 25,106 children aged 0–18 years were registered with these practices. We also undertook a qualitative service evaluation to investigate barriers to recording.Method Outcomes were recording of 1) any maltreatment-related codes, 2) child protection proceedings and 3) child was a cause for concern.Results We found increased recording of any maltreatment-related code (rate ratio 1.4; 95% CI 1.1–1.6), child protection procedures (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1–1.6) and cause for concern (RR 2.5; 95% CI 1.8–3.4) after implementation of the coding strategy. Clinicians cited the simplicity of the coding strategy as the most important factor assisting implementation.Conclusion This simple coding strategy improved clinician’s recording of maltreatment-related concerns in a small sample of practices with some ‘buy-in’. Further research should investigate how recording can best support the doctor–patient relationshipHow this fits in Recording concerns about child maltreatment, including minor concerns, is recommended by the General Medical Council (GMC) and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), but there is evidence of substantial underrecording. We describe a simple clinical coding strategy that helped general practitioners to improve recording of maltreatment-related concerns. These improvements could improve case finding of children at risk and information sharing

The QICKD study protocol: a cluster randomised trial to compare quality improvement interventions to lower systolic BP in chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a relatively newly recognised but common long-term condition affecting 5 to 10% of the population. Effective management of CKD, with emphasis on strict blood pressure (BP) control, reduces cardiovascular risk and slows the progression of CKD. There is currently an unprecedented rise in referral to specialist renal services, which are often located in tertiary centres, inconvenient for patients, and wasteful of resources. National and international CKD guidelines include quality targets for primary care. However, there have been no rigorous evaluations of strategies to implement these guidelines. This study aims to test whether quality improvement interventions improve primary care management of elevated BP in CKD, reduce cardiovascular risk, and slow renal disease progression DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) METHODS: This three-armed CRT compares two well-established quality improvement interventions with usual practice. The two interventions comprise: provision of clinical practice guidelines with prompts and audit-based education. The study population will be all individuals with CKD from general practices in eight localities across England. Randomisation will take place at the level of the general practices. The intended sample (three arms of 25 practices) powers the study to detect a 3 mmHg difference in systolic BP between the different quality improvement interventions. An additional 10 practices per arm will receive a questionnaire to measure any change in confidence in managing CKD. Follow up will take place over two years. Outcomes will be measured using anonymised routinely collected data extracted from practice computer systems. Our primary outcome measure will be reduction of systolic BP in people with CKD and hypertension at two years. Secondary outcomes will include biomedical outcomes and markers of quality, including practitioner confidence in managing CKD. A small group of practices (n = 4) will take part in an in-depth process evaluation. We will use time series data to examine the natural history of CKD in the community. Finally, we will conduct an economic evaluation based on a comparison of the cost effectiveness of each intervention. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ISRCTN56023731. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

Groundwater dynamics in coastal gravel barriers backed by freshwater lagoons and the potential for saline intrusion: Two cases from the UK

“NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Marine Systems. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Marine Systems, [VOL 123, (01.08.13)] DOI 10.1016/j.jmarsys.2013.04.004". The full text is under embargo until 01.08.15