OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 2: changes in primary care clinical activity in England during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity across a broad range of clinical services. The NHS stopped non-urgent work in March 2020, later recommending services be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible. AIM: To describe changes in the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in general practice across six clinical areas: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental health, female and reproductive health, screening and related procedures, and processes related to medication. DESIGN AND SETTING: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 23.8 million patient records in general practice, in situ using OpenSAFELY. METHOD: Common primary care activities were analysed using Clinical Terms Version 3 codes and keyword searches from January 2019 to December 2020, presenting median and deciles of code usage across practices per month. RESULTS: Substantial and widespread changes in clinical activity in primary care were identified since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with generally good recovery by December 2020. A few exceptions showed poor recovery and warrant further investigation, such as mental health (for example, for 'Depression interim review' the median occurrences across practices in December 2020 was down by 41.6% compared with December 2019). CONCLUSION: Granular NHS general practice data at population-scale can be used to monitor disruptions to healthcare services and guide the development of mitigation strategies. The authors are now developing real-time monitoring dashboards for the key measures identified in this study, as well as further studies using primary care data to monitor and mitigate the indirect health impacts of COVID-19 on the NHS.

The impact of COVID‐19 on A Level exams in England: Students as consumers

The recent global outbreak of the COVID‐19 pandemic created significant challenges for society, not least for education. England went into lockdown in March 2020;following this, A Level exams were cancelled and the Department for Education announced that results were to be determined by teacher‐assessed grades. This paper draws upon research conducted during this time with A Level students. It is based on a total of 53 Skype interviews with students who had their A Level exams cancelled, most of whom had ambitions to start university in September 2020. A number of striking findings emerged from the study. Students were well‐informed about the changes to the A Level exam assessment and the impact structural inequalities were likely to have on assessed grades. White students and those from independent fee‐paying schools were consistently more satisfied with the measures put in place to assess their grades compared to students from Black and minority ethnic backgrounds. However, all students—regardless of their background—identified patterns of unfairness which were based on structural inequalities. We conclude that these findings point to students adopting some of the attributes of the ‘student as consumer’, not by concentrating on choices associated with free market economies such as ‘good value’, but rather by identifying more ethical ‘values’ within education. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of British Educational Research Journal is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

A cohort study of duplicate faecal immunochemical testing in patients at risk of colorectal cancer from North-West England.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate if duplicate faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) sampling improves the negative and positive predictive value of patients thought to be at risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Specifically, we aimed to investigate whether the proportion of FIT-negative CRC missed by a single FIT test in symptomatic patients could be reduced by duplicate FIT testing. DESIGN: A retrospective service evaluation cohort study of the diagnostic accuracy of duplicate FIT testing. SETTING: Patients referred from primary care with suspected CRC to four secondary care trusts in North-West England. PARTICIPANTS: 28 622 patients over 18-years-old with lower gastrointestinal symptoms suggestive of CRC who completed two FIT samples. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The performance of duplicate FIT for detecting CRC at a threshold of 10 µgHb/g. RESULTS: The sensitivity if either test was >10 µgHb/g was 0.978 (0.955-0.989), specificity was 0.662 (0.657-0.668), positive predictive value 0.031 (0.028-0.035) and negative predictive value 1.00 (0.999-1.00). Despite two-thirds of patients (18952) being negative following two tests, at this threshold only seven CRC were missed over a 26-month period. All seven patients had other high-risk features which should have prompted investigation. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that in routine NHS practice, a duplicate FIT sample strategy together with clinical evaluation for evidence of anaemia and weight loss is superior to a single FIT sample alone and would allow symptomatic patients to be managed in primary care without the need for urgent referral to secondary care for urgent colonic imaging.

Remote digital urinalysis with smartphone technology as part of remote management of glomerular disease during the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic: single-centre experience in 25 patients.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the provision of healthcare through remote and increasingly digitalized means. The management of glomerular pathology, for which urinalysis is crucial, has been notably affected. Here we describe our single-centre experience of using remote digital urinalysis in the management of patients with glomerular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: All patients with native kidney glomerular disease who consented to participate in digital smartphone urinalysis monitoring between March 2020 and July 2021 were included. Electronic health records were contemporaneously reviewed for outcome data. Patient feedback was obtained through the testing portal. Results: Twenty-five patients utilized the digital urinalysis application. A total of 105 digital urinalysis tests were performed for a wide variety of indications. Four patients experienced a relapse (detected remotely) and two patients underwent three successful pregnancies. The majority of patients were managed virtually (60%) or virtually and face to face (F2F) combined (32%). The average number of clinic reviews and urine tests performed during the pandemic either virtually and/or F2F was comparable to levels pre-pandemic and the ratio of reviews to urinalysis (R:U) was stable (pre-pandemic 1:0.9 versus during the pandemic 1:0.8). Patients seen exclusively F2F with supplementary home monitoring had the highest R:U ratio at 1:2.1. A total of 95% of users provided feedback, all positive. Conclusion: Remote urinalysis proved a safe and convenient tool to facilitate decision-making where traditional urinalysis was difficult, impractical or impossible. Our approach allowed us to continue care in this vulnerable group of patients despite a lack of access to traditional urinalysis.