Understanding barriers to using long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) in primary care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) are highly effective. In primary care, LARCs are prescribed less frequently than user-dependent contraceptives despite higher efficacy rates. Unplanned pregnancies are rising in the UK, and LARCs may have a role in reducing these through and redressing inequitable contraceptive access. To provide contraceptive services that offer maximal choice and patient benefit, we must understand what contraception users and healthcare professionals (HCPs) think about LARCs and uncover barriers to their use. METHODS: A systematic search using CINAHL, MEDLINE via Ovid, PsycINFO, Web of Science and EMBASE identified research about LARC use for pregnancy prevention in primary care. The approach adhered to the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses' methodology, critically appraised the literature, and used NVivo software to organise data and perform thematic analysis to determine key themes. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met our inclusion criteria. Three themes were identified: (1) trustworthiness (where and from whom participants obtained information regarding LARCs), (2) control (whether LARCs detract from personal autonomy) and (3) systems (how HCPs influenced LARC access). Misgivings about LARCs frequently arose from social networks and fears of surrendering control over fertility were prominent. HCPs perceived access issues and lack of familiarity or training as the main barriers to prescribing LARCs. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care plays a key role in improving access to LARC but barriers need to be addressed especially those involving misconception and misinformation. Access to LARC removal services are key to empower choice and prevent coercion. Facilitating trust within patient-centred contraceptive consult is essential.

Cancer treatment decisions for people living with dementia: Experiences of family carers, a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: As the UK population ages, the prevalence of both dementia and cancer will increase. Family carers of people with dementia who are subsequently diagnosed with cancer are often involved in treatment decisions about cancer. These decisions are uniquely challenging. OBJECTIVES: To explore the experience of carers involved in cancer treatment decisions for people with dementia. DESIGN: A cross-sectional qualitative interview study with inductive thematic analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen carers of people with dementia were identified via Primary Care Research Networks and the Join Dementia Research database. RESULTS: Three main themes were derived: 'already at breaking point', which describes the extreme strain that carers were already under when the cancer diagnosis was made; 'maintaining the status quo', which describes how despite the gravity of a cancer diagnosis, avoiding further dementia-related deterioration was of prime importance; and 'LPA', which explores the benefits and frustrations of the use of lasting powers of attorney. DISCUSSION: Current services are ill-equipped to deal with people who have a combination of dementia and cancer. Proxy decisions about cancer care are made in the context of carer stress and exhaustion, which is exacerbated by shortcomings in service provision. CONCLUSIONS: As the prevalence of comorbid cancer and dementia rises, there is an urgent need to improve services that support carers with proxy health care decision-making. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The study design was codeveloped with a local dementia-specific patient and public involvement (PPI) group. A project-specific PPI group was formed with support from the Alzheimer's Society Research Partnership scheme to provide further bespoke input.

Understanding the relationship between social determinants of health and maternal mortality: Scientific Impact Paper No. 67.

Within this document we use the terms pregnant woman and women's health. However, it is important to acknowledge that it is not only people who identify as women for whom it is necessary to access care. Obstetric and gynaecology services and delivery of care must therefore be appropriate, inclusive and sensitive to the needs of those individuals whose gender identity does not align with the sex they were assigned at birth.

Patients' and clinicians' perceptions of oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic narrative review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of developing a stroke by 20%. AF related strokes are associated with greater morbidity. Historically, warfarin was the anticoagulant of choice for stroke prevention in patients with AF but lately patients are being switched or started on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs are promoted as safer alternatives to warfarin and it is expected that they will be associated with fewer challenges both for patients and healthcare professionals. This systematic narrative review aimed to explore perspectives of patients and professionals on medicines optimisation of oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists and DOACs in atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Prospero registration CRD42018091591. Systematic searches undertaken of research studies (qualitative and quantitative), published February 2018 to November 2020 from several databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Medline Via Ovid, CINHAL via Ebsco, and PubMED via NCBI) following PRISMA methodology. Data were organised using Covidence software. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included studies and synthesized the findings (thematic analysis approach). RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included. Studies were critically appraised using established critical appraisal tools (Qualsyst) and a risk of bias was assigned. Clinicians considered old age and the associated complexities such as co-morbidities and the increased potential for bleeding as potential barriers to optimising anticoagulation. Whereas patients' health and medication beliefs influenced adherence. Notably, structured patient support was important in enhancing safety and effective anticoagulation. For both patients and clinicians, confidence and experience of safe anticoagulation was influenced by the presence of co-morbidities,  poor knowledge and understanding of AF and the purpose of anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: Age, complex multimorbidity and polypharmacy influence prescribing, with DOACs being perceived to be safer than warfarin. This systematic narrative review suggests that interventions are needed to support patient self-management. There are residual anxieties associated with long term anticoagulation in the context of complexities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.