IPV Routine Enquiry in Antenatal Care: Perspectives of Women and Healthcare Professionals-A Qualitative Study.

Despite one in three women experiencing abuse by an intimate partner in their lifetime, intimate partner violence (IPV) is under-reported. Globally, IPV routine enquiry is used as part of healthcare response to addressing IPV. This paper presents the views of pregnant women (n = 40) and providers (n = 30) of IPV routine enquiry as part of antenatal care policy in Ireland. Respondents supported IPV routine enquiry as part of usual antenatal care, and while immediate disclosure was recognized as important, it was not a primary expectation. Routine enquiry was seen as a woman's right and a providers' duty to provide holistic, empowered, women centered and safe care and where provision of information and education on IPV is as fundamental as the disclosure of abuse.

The multimorbidity collaborative medication review and decision making (MyComrade) study: a pilot cluster randomised trial in two healthcare systems.

BACKGROUND: While international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MyComrade (MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. AIM: The pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial of the MyComrade intervention across two healthcare systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)). DESIGN: A pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial was conducted (clustered at general practice level), using specific progression criteria and a process evaluation framework. SETTING: General practices in the ROI and NI. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible practices were those in defined geographical areas who had GP's and Practice Based Pharmacists (PBP's) (in NI) willing to conduct medication reviews. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years and over, with multi morbidity and on ten or more medications. INTERVENTION: The MyComrade intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care, using a planned collaborative approach guided by an agreed checklist, within a specified timeframe. OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility outcomes, using pre-determined progression criteria, assessed practice and patient recruitment and retention and intervention acceptability and fidelity. Anonymised patient-related quantitative data, from practice medical records and patient questionnaires were collected at baseline, 4 and 8 months, to inform potential outcome measures for a definitive trial. These included (i) practice outcomes-completion of medication reviews; (ii) patient outcomes-treatment burden and quality of life; (iii) prescribing outcomes-number and changes of prescribed medications and incidents of potentially inappropriate prescribing; and (iv) economic cost analysis. The framework Decision-making after Pilot and feasibility Trials (ADePT) in conjunction with a priori progression criteria and process evaluation was used to guide the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: The recruitment of practices (n = 15) and patients (n = 121, mean age 73 years and 51% female), representing 94% and 38% of a priori targets respectively, was more complex and took longer than anticipated; impacted by the global COVID-19 pandemic. Retention rates of 100% of practices and 85% of patients were achieved. Both practice staff and patients found the intervention acceptable and reported strong fidelity to the My Comrade intervention components. Some practice staff highlighted concerns such as poor communication of the reviews to patients, dissatisfaction regarding incentivisation and in ROI the sustainability of two GPs collaboratively conducting the medication reviews. Assessing outcomes from the collected data was found feasible and appropriate for a definitive trial. Two progression criteria met the 'Go' criterion (practice and patient retention), two met the 'Amend' criterion (practice recruitment and intervention implementation) and one indicated a 'Stop - unless changes possible' (patient recruitment). CONCLUSION: The MyComrade intervention was found to be feasible to conduct within two different healthcare systems. Recruitment of participants requires significant time and effort given the nature of this population and the pairing of GP and pharmacist may be more sustainable to implement in routine practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ISRCTN, ISRCTN80017020 ; date of confirmation 4/11/2019; retrospectively registered.

The MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MyComrade) study: a protocol for a cross-border pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making (MyComrade) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. Our aim in this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of a trial of the intervention with unique modifications accounting for contextual variations in two neighbouring health systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)). METHODS: A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted, using a mixed-methods process evaluation to investigate the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention based on pre-defined progression criteria. A total of 16 practices will be recruited (eight in ROI; eight in NI), and four practices in each jurisdiction will be randomly allocated to intervention or control. Twenty people living with multimorbidity and prescribed ≥ 10 repeat medications will be recruited from each practice prior to practice randomisation. In intervention practices, the MyComrade intervention will be delivered by pairs of general practitioners (GPs) in ROI, and a GP and practice-based pharmacist (PBP) in NI. The GPs/GP and PBP will schedule the time to review the medications together using a checklist. Usual care will proceed in practices in the control arm. Data will be collected via electronic health records and postal questionnaires at recruitment and 4 and 8 months after randomisation. Qualitative interviews to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and explore experiences related to multimorbidity management will be conducted with a purposive sample of GPs, PBPs, practice administration staff and patients in intervention and control practices. The feasibility of conducting a health economic evaluation as part of a future definitive trial will be assessed. DISCUSSION: The findings of this pilot study will assess the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention in two different health systems. Evaluation of the progression criteria will guide the decision to progress to a definitive trial and inform trial design. The findings will also contribute to the growing evidence-base related to intervention development and feasibility studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN80017020 . Date of confirmation is 4/11/2019.

The cost-effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care: the PRINCE cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme (SEPRP) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) relative to usual practice in primary care. The programme consisted of group-based sessions delivered jointly by practice nurses and physiotherapists over 8 weeks. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 32 general practices in Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: 350 adults with COPD, 69% of whom were moderately affected. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention arm (n=178) received a 2 h group-based SEPRP session per week over 8 weeks delivered jointly by a practice nurse and physiotherapist at the practice surgery or nearby venue. The control arm (n=172) received the usual practice in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental costs, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) scores, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained estimated using the generic EQ5D instrument, and expected cost-effectiveness at 22 weeks trial follow-up. RESULTS: The intervention was associated with an increase of €944 (95% CIs 489 to 1400) in mean healthcare cost and €261 (95% CIs 226 to 296) in mean patient cost. The intervention was associated with a mean improvement of 1.11 (95% CIs 0.35 to 1.87) in CRQ Total score and 0.002 (95% CIs -0.006 to 0.011) in QALYs gained. These translated into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €850 per unit increase in CRQ Total score and €472 000 per additional QALY gained. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective at respective threshold values of €5000, €15 000, €25 000, €35 000 and €45 000 was 0.980, 0.992, 0.994, 0.994 and 0.994 in the CRQ Total score analysis compared to 0.000, 0.001, 0.001, 0.003 and 0.007 in the QALYs gained analysis. CONCLUSIONS: While analysis suggests that SEPRP was cost-effective if society is willing to pay at least €850 per one-point increase in disease-specific CRQ, no evidence exists when effectiveness was measured in QALYS gained. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52 403 063.

The effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme for improving the health status of people with moderate and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care: the PRINCE cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme on the health status of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). DESIGN: Two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 32 general practices in the Republic of Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: 350 participants with a diagnosis of moderate or severe COPD. INTERVENTION: Experimental group received a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme, delivered by the practice nurse and physiotherapist. Control group received usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Health status as measured by the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) at baseline and at 12-14 weeks postcompletion of the programme. RESULTS: Participants allocated to the intervention group had statistically significant higher mean change total CRQ scores (adjusted mean difference (MD) 1.11, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.87). However, the CI does not exclude a smaller difference than the one that was prespecified as clinically important. Participants allocated to the intervention group also had statistically significant higher mean CRQ Dyspnoea scores after intervention (adjusted MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.78) and CRQ Physical scores (adjusted MD 0.37, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.60). However, CIs for both the CRQ Dyspnoea and CRQ Physical subscales do not exclude smaller differences as prespecified as clinically important. No other statistically significant differences between groups were seen. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care based structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme is feasible and may increase local accessibility to people with moderate and severe COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN52403063.

Life with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: striving for 'controlled co-existence'.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the meaning of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for people and their response to this disease. BACKGROUND: COPD is a major cause of disability and death. The symptoms of COPD have the potential to impact on every aspect of a person's day-to-day life. To date most published qualitative studies have focused on the 'experience' of breathlessness and its impact on the person. Few studies have sought to 'understand' the meaning of COPD to people and their response to this disease. This study aimed to address this gap. DESIGN: Straussian grounded theory guided study design. Grounded theory was considered appropriate for this study because of its focus on how people respond to and act on the problems they encounter. METHODS: Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 26 people with COPD. Study participants were recruited from general practices on the western seaboard of Ireland. RESULTS: Two interrelated categories were identified as contributing to 'co-existing with COPD': 'hiding' and 'battling'. 'Co-existing with COPD' was conceptualised as the core category. The potential to 'co-exist' with COPD was influenced by mediating factors. CONCLUSION: The Theory of Co-existing with COPD was generated from the data. This theory explains the delicate balance people with COPD maintain to 'co-exist with COPD'. 'Controlled co-existence' enables the person to feel in control and live life to the optimum. This is a fragile balance however and the unpredictability of COPD can tip the person into 'strained co-existence' or 'uncontrolled co-existence'. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Understanding the experience of living with COPD and the balances involved in 'co-existing with COPD' can help health professionals provide more focused and empowered client care. Enabling people to achieve 'controlled co-existence' with COPD challenges health professionals to educate people with COPD on how to effectively manage their disease.