Impact of paracetamol pack size restrictions on poisoning from paracetamol in England and Wales: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: About 500 drug poisoning deaths involving paracetamol (acetaminophen) occur every year in England and Wales. To reduce the number of deaths, regulations were introduced in 1998 to restrict the sale of paracetamol. In this paper, we evaluate the impact of these regulations. METHODS: Mortality data for England and Wales were provided by the Office for National Statistics. Deaths were defined as due to compound paracetamol (paracetamol in combination with another analgesic, a low dose opioid or other ingredients) or paracetamol only, with or without alcohol or other drugs. The Department of Health provided data on all hospital admissions with a primary diagnosis of paracetamol poisoning. RESULTS: Mortality rates for paracetamol only were similar for males and females, and decreased from about 4.5 to 2.8 per million between 1997 and 1999 and again from about 3.1 to 2.2 per million between 2001 and 2002. These falls may be attributable to random variation in the rates. Deaths involving compound paracetamol, which were not subject to the 1998 regulations, remained relatively constant over the study period. There was evidence of a decreasing trend in paracetamol only mortality rates and this followed overall trends for other drug poisoning excluding opioids and drugs of misuse. Hospital admissions due to paracetamol poisoning increased from about 27 000 to 33 000 between 1995/1996 and 1997/1998 and then decreased to 25 000 in 2001/2002. There were almost 50 per cent more admissions for females than males, with the highest admission rates amongst females aged 15-24 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Between 1993 and 2002, mortality rates and hospital admissions due to paracetamol poisoning declined. However, the contribution of the 1998 regulations to this decline is not clear. Paracetamol poisoning continues to be an important public health issue in England and Wales and represents significant workload for the NHS in England

Email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals

Background Email is a popular and commonly-used method of communication, but its use in healthcare is not routine. Where email communication has been utilised in health care, its purposes have included use for clinical communication between healthcare professionals, but the effects of using email in this way are not known. This review assesses the use of email for two-way clinical communication between healthcare professionals. Objectives To assess the effects of healthcare professionals using email to communicate clinical information, on healthcare professional outcomes, patient outcomes, health service performance, and service efficiency and acceptability, when compared to other forms of communicating clinical information. Search methods We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1 2010), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to January 2010), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to January 2010), PsycINFO (1967 to January 2010), CINAHL (EbscoHOST) (1982 to February 2010), and ERIC (CSA) (1965 to January 2010). We searched grey literature: theses/dissertation repositories, trials registers and Google Scholar (searched July 2010). We used additional search methods: examining reference lists, contacting authors. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies examining interventions in which healthcare professionals used email for communicating clinical information, and that took the form of 1) unsecured email 2) secure email or 3) web messaging. All healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers in all settings were considered. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed the included studies' risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We report all measures as per the study report. Main results We included one randomised controlled trial involving 327 patients and 159 healthcare providers at baseline. It compared an email to physicians containing patient-specific osteoporosis risk information and guidelines for evaluation and treatment with usual care (no email). This study was at high risk of bias for the allocation concealment and blinding domains. The email reminder changed health professional actions significantly, with professionals more likely to provide guideline-recommended osteoporosis treatment (bone density measurement and/or osteoporosis medication) when compared with usual care. The evidence for its impact on patient behaviours/actions was inconclusive. One measure found that the electronic medical reminder message impacted patient behaviour positively: patients had a higher calcium intake, and two found no difference between the two groups. The study did not assess primary health service outcomes or harms. Authors' conclusions As only one study was identified for inclusion, the results are inadequate to inform clinical practice in regard to the use of email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals. Future research needs to use high-quality study designs that take advantage of the most recent developments in information technology, with consideration of the complexity of email as an intervention, and costs

Training interventions for improving telephone consultation skills in clinicians

The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of training interventions on clinician telephone skills

Computer-assisted history-taking systems (CAHTS) in health care: benefits, risks and potential for further development

Background A computer-assisted history-taking system (CAHTS) is a tool that aids clinicians in gathering data from patients to inform a diagnosis or treatment plan. Despite the many possible applications and even though CAHTS have been available for nearly three decades, these remain underused in routine clinical practice. Objective Through an interpretative review of the literature, we provide an overview of the field of CAHTS, which also offers an understanding of the impact of these systems on policy, practice and research. Methods We conducted a search and critique of the literature on CAHTS. Using a comprehensive set of terms, we searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, The Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database over a ten-year period (January 1997 to May 2007) to identify systematic reviews, technical reports and health technology assessments, and randomised controlled trials. Results The systematic review of the literature suggests that CAHTS can save professionals' time, improve delivery of care to those with special needs and also facilitate the collection of information, especially potentially sensitive information (e.g. sexual history, alcohol consumption). The use of CAHTS also has disadvantages that impede the process of history taking and may pose risks to patients. CAHTS are inherently limited when detecting non-verbal communication, may pose irrelevant questions and frustrate the users with technical problems. Our review suggests that barriers such as a preference for pen-and-paper methods and concerns about data loss and security still exist and affect the adoption of CAHTS. In terms of policy and practice, CAHTS make input of data from disparate sites possible, which facilitates work from disparate sites and the collection of data for nationwide screening programmes such as the vascular risk assessment programme for people aged 40_74, now starting in England. Conclusions Our review shows that for CAHTS to be adopted in mainstream health care, important changes should take place in how we conceive, plan and conduct primary and secondary research on the topic so that we provide the framework for a comprehensive evaluation that will lead to an evidence base to inform policy and practice

Why children do not attend their appointments: is there a need for an interface between general practitioners and hospitals allowing for the exchange of patients' contact details?

OBJECTIVES: A service evaluation project on the reasons why children do not attend their outpatient appointments. DESIGN: Analysis of paediatric clinic lists over two consecutive days. Parents of the non-attenders were identified and their reasons for not attending the appointment were elicited using a survey. SETTING: The appointments were scheduled to take place in the Paediatric department at St. Mary's Hospital, London. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 201 appointments scheduled, 49 patients did not attend their paediatric appointment. Telephone contact was successful with 35 parents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Parents were asked to verify if their contact details were correct, if they were aware of the appointment and if they had received a reminder. The reasons for non-attendance were explored. RESULTS: Of the 49 non-attenders, correct contact details were held on file for 24 of the patients (49.0%). Of the 35 parents contacted, 18 were aware (51.4%) of their child's appointment. CONCLUSIONS: This project revealed that the principal reason for non-attendance is unawareness of the appointment due to incorrect contact details held by the hospital. Potential strategies for reducing non-attendance at this paediatric outpatient clinic include developing a confirmation or reminder system and improved communication with parents. The creation of a new interface between hospitals and GPs would allow hospitals to access patient contact details held by GPs. It would also ensure that hospitals hold up-to-date patient contact details and that appointment details are effectively communicated to parents. The interface would automatically feed through any updated patient details, keeping hospital records current

Assessing patients' experience of integrated care: a survey of patient views in the North West London Integrated Care Pilot

Despite the importance of continuity of care and patient engagement, few studies have captured patients' views on integrated care. This study assesses patient experience in the Integrated Care Pilot in North West London with the aim to help clinicians and policymakers understand patients' acceptability of integrated care and design future initiatives