Reasons for and consequences of missed appointments in general practice in the UK: questionnaire survey and prospective review of medical records

Background Missed appointments are a common occurrence in primary care in the UK, yet little is known about the reasons for them, or the consequences of missing an appointment. This paper aims to determine the reasons for missed appointments and whether patients who miss an appointment subsequently consult their general practitioner (GP). Secondary aims are to compare psychological morbidity, and the previous appointments with GPs between subjects and a comparison group. Methods Postal questionnaire survey and prospective medical notes review of adult patients missing an appointment and the comparison group who attended appointments over a three week period in seven general practices in West Yorkshire. Results Of the 386 who missed appointments 122 (32%) responded. Of the 386 in the comparison group 223 (58%) responded, resulting in 23 case-control matched pairs with complete data collection. Over 40% of individuals who missed an appointment and participated said that they forgot the appointment and a quarter said that they tried very hard to cancel the appointment or that it was at an inconvenient time. A fifth reported family commitments or being too ill to attend. Over 90% of the patients who missed an appointment subsequently consulted within three months and of these nearly 60% consulted for the stated problem that was going to be presented in the missed consultation. The odds of missing an appointment decreased with increasing age and were greater among those who had missed at least one appointment in the previous 12 months. However, estimates for comparisons between those who missed appointments and the comparison group were imprecise due to the low response rate. Conclusion Patients who miss appointments tend to cite practice factors and their own forgetfulness as the main reasons for doing so, and most attend within three months of a missed appointment. This study highlights a number of implications for future research. More work needs to be done to engage people who miss appointments into research in a meaningful way

A large population based study of the Mental Health and Wellbeing of Children and Young People in the North of England

BACKGROUND: There has been a recent reported rise in prevalence of mental health problems among children in the United Kingdom, alongside increased referrals into specialist services. There is a need for up-to-date information regarding changing trends of young people's mental health to allow for improved understanding and service planning. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to provide an overview of the current mental health and well-being of years 8, 9 and 11 secondary school-aged pupils from two large regions in the North of England. METHOD: This was a cohort cross-sectional study. Measures including the Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire, the EQ-5D-Y, social media use questions, and a mental health service use questionnaire were completed by participants. RESULTS: In total, 6328 questionnaires were returned from 21 secondary schools. One in 10 participating pupils scored 'very high' for total mental health difficulties. Significant differences on well-being scores were found between both gender and year groups. CONCLUSION: In recent years, the proportion of children facing mental health problems has increased. In particular, high levels of female pupils and year 11 pupils report facing difficulties. It is important to develop targeted, accessible interventions, and to continue to collect up-to-date measures for this population

Buprenorphine versus dihydrocodeine for opiate detoxification in primary care: a randomised controlled trial

Background Many drug users present to primary care requesting detoxification from illicit opiates. There are a number of detoxification agents but no recommended drug of choice. The purpose of this study is to compare buprenorphine with dihydrocodeine for detoxification from illicit opiates in primary care. Methods Open label randomised controlled trial in NHS Primary Care (General Practices), Leeds, UK. Sixty consenting adults using illicit opiates received either daily sublingual buprenorphine or daily oral dihydrocodeine. Reducing regimens for both interventions were at the discretion of prescribing doctor within a standard regimen of not more than 15 days. Primary outcome was abstinence from illicit opiates at final prescription as indicated by a urine sample. Secondary outcomes during detoxification period and at three and six months post detoxification were recorded. Results Only 23% completed the prescribed course of detoxification medication and gave a urine sample on collection of their final prescription. Risk of non-completion of detoxification was reduced if allocated buprenorphine (68% vs 88%, RR 0.58 CI 0.35–0.96, p = 0.065). A higher proportion of people allocated to buprenorphine provided a clean urine sample compared with those who received dihydrocodeine (21% vs 3%, RR 2.06 CI 1.33–3.21, p = 0.028). People allocated to buprenorphine had fewer visits to professional carers during detoxification and more were abstinent at three months (10 vs 4, RR 1.55 CI 0.96–2.52) and six months post detoxification (7 vs 3, RR 1.45 CI 0.84–2.49). Conclusion Informative randomised trials evaluating routine care within the primary care setting are possible amongst drug using populations. This small study generates unique data on commonly used treatment regimens

Longitudinal realist evaluation of the dementia PersonAlised care team (D-PACT) intervention: protocol

Background Different dementia support roles exist but evidence is lacking on which aspects are best, for whom and in what circumstance, and on their associated costs and benefits. Phase 1 of the Dementia PersonAlised Care Team programme (D-PACT), developed a post-diagnostic primary care-based intervention for people with dementia and their carers and assessed the feasibility of a trial. AimPhase 2 of the programme aims to 1) refine our programme theory on how, when and for whom the intervention works and 2) evaluate its value and impact. Design & setting A realist longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation will be conducted in urban, rural, and coastal areas across Southwest and Northwest England where low-income groups or ethnic minorities (eg, South Asian) are represented. Design was informed by patient, public and professional stakeholder input and Phase one findings. Method High volume qualitative and quantitative data will be collected longitudinally from people with dementia, carers and practitioners. Analyses will comprise: 1) realist longitudinal case studies; 2) conversation analysis of recorded interactions; 3) statistical analyses of outcome and experience questionnaires; 4 a) health economic analysis examining costs of delivery; 4b) realist economic analysis of high-cost events and ‘near misses’. All findings will be synthesised using a joint display table, evidence appraisal tool, triangulation and stakeholder co-analysis. Conclusion Our realist evaluation will describe how, why and for whom the intervention leads (or not) to change over time; it also demonstrates how a non-randomised design can be more appropriate for complex interventions with similar questions or populations

The Improving Rural Cancer Outcomes Trial: a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention to reduce time to diagnosis in rural cancer patients in Western Australia.

BACKGROUND: Rural Australians have poorer survival for most common cancers, due partially to later diagnosis. Internationally, several initiatives to improve cancer outcomes have focused on earlier presentation to healthcare and timely diagnosis. We aimed to measure the effect of community-based symptom awareness and general practice-based educational interventions on the time to diagnosis in rural patients presenting with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer in Western Australia. METHODS: 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomised controlled trial. Community Intervention: cancer symptom awareness campaign tailored for rural Australians. GP intervention: resource card with symptom risk assessment charts and local cancer referral pathways implemented through multiple academic detailing visits. Trial Area A received the community symptom awareness and Trial Area B acted as the community campaign control region. Within both Trial Areas general practices were randomised to the GP intervention or control. PRIMARY OUTCOME: total diagnostic interval (TDI). RESULTS: 1358 people with incident breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer were recruited. There were no significant differences in the median or ln mean TDI at either intervention level (community intervention vs control: median TDI 107.5 vs 92 days; ln mean difference 0.08 95% CI -0.06-0.23 P=0.27; GP intervention vs control: median TDI 97 vs 96.5 days; ln mean difference 0.004 95% CI -0.18-0.19 P=0.99). There were no significant differences in the TDI when analysed by factorial design, tumour group or sub-intervals of the TDI. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest trial to test the effect of community campaign or GP interventions on timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We found no effect of either intervention. This may reflect limited dose of the interventions, or the limited duration of follow-up. Alternatively, these interventions do not have a measurable effect on time to cancer diagnosis

Consent rates for video-recording general practice consultations: effect of ethnicity and other factors

We sought consent for video-recording general practice consultations from 260 consecutive attenders in nine surgeries. Intensive fieldwork including language support, from both the researcher and professional interpreters, was undertaken. The overall consent rate was 77.3%. No significant differences in consent rates were found between white and south Asian patients, even after controlling for age, gender and self-reported understanding of English. No differences in consent rates were found with respect to age, gender and self-reported understanding of English

Psychometric properties of the Needs Assessment Tool - Progressive Disease Cancer in UK Primary Care Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

Background: The assessment of patients’ needs for care is a critical step in achieving patient-centred cancer care. Tools can be used to assess needs and inform care planning. The Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease- Cancer (NAT: PD-C) is an Australian oncology clinic tool for assessment by clinicians of patients’ and carers’ palliative care needs. This has not been validated in the UK Primary Care setting. Aim: To test the psychometric properties and acceptability of a UK primary-care adapted NAT:PD-C. Design: Reliability: NAT: PD-C -guided video-recorded consultations were viewed, rated and re-rated by clinicians. Weighted Fleiss’ kappa and PABAK statistics were used. Construct: During a consultation GPs used NAT:PD-C, patient measures (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale; Research Utilisation Group Activities of Daily Living; Palliative care Outcome Score; Australian Karnofsky Performance Scale) and carer measures (Carer Strain Index; Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool). Kendall’s Tau-b was used. Setting/Participants: General medical practitioners (GPs), nurses, patients and carers were recruited from primary care practices. Results: Reliability: All patient wellbeing items and 4/5 items in the carer/family ability to care section showed adequate inter-rater reliability. There was moderate test-retest reliability for 5/6 in the patient wellbeing section and 5/5 in the carer/family ability to care section. Construct: There was at least fair agreement for 5/6 of patient wellbeing items; high for daily living (Kendall’s Tau-b =0.57, p<0.001). The NAT:PD-C has adequate carer construct validity (5/8) with strong agreement for 2/8. Over three-quarters of GPs considered the NAT: PD-C to have high acceptability. Conclusion: The NAT PD-C is reliable, valid and acceptable the UK primary care setting. Effectiveness in reducing patient and carer unmet need and issues regarding implementation are yet to be evaluated