General practitioner and nurse prescriber experiences of prescribing antibiotics for respiratory tract infections in UK primary care out-of-hours services (the UNITE study).

Background: Interventions are needed to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Although community antibiotic prescribing appears to be decreasing in the UK, figures for out-of-hours (OOH) prescribing have substantially increased. Understanding the factors influencing prescribing in OOH and any perceived differences between general practitioner (GP) and nurse prescriber (NP) prescribing habits may enable the development of tailored interventions promoting optimal prescribing in this setting. Objectives: To explore UK GP and NP views on and experiences of prescribing antibiotics for RTIs in primary care OOH services. Methods: Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs and NPs working in primary care OOH services. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse data. Results: The research shows that factors particular to OOH influence antibiotic prescribing, including a lack of patient follow-up, access to patient GP records, consultation time, working contracts and implementation of feedback, audit and supervision. NPs reported perceptions of greater accountability for their prescribing compared with GPs and reported they had longer consultations during which they were able to discuss decisions with patients. Participants agreed that more complex cases should be seen by GPs and highlighted the importance of consistency of decision making, illness explanations to patients as well as a perception that differences in clinical training influence communication with patients and antibiotic prescribing decisions. Conclusions: Environmental and social factors in OOH services and a mixed healthcare workforce provide unique influences on antibiotic prescribing for RTIs, which would need to be considered in tailoring interventions that promote prudent antibiotic prescribing in OOH services.

Understanding the delayed prescribing of antibiotics for respiratory tract infection in primary care: a qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify general practitioner (GP) views and understanding on the use of delayed prescribing in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured telephone interview study. SETTING: Primary care general practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: 32 GPs from identified high-prescribing and low-prescribing general practices in England. METHOD: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with GPs identified from practices within clinical commissioning groups with the highest and lowest prescribing rates in England. A thematic analysis of the data was conducted to generate themes. RESULTS: All GPs had a good understanding of respiratory tract infection (RTI) management and how the delayed prescribing approach could be used in primary care. However, GPs highlighted factors that were influential as to whether delayed prescribing was successfully carried out during the consultation. These included the increase in evidence of antimicrobial resistance, and GPs' prior experiences of using delayed prescribing during the consultation. The patient-practitioner relationship could also influence treatment outcomes for RTI, and a lack of an agreed prescribing strategy within and between practices was considered to be of significance to GPs. Participants expressed that a lack of feedback on prescribing data at an individual and practice level made it difficult to know if delayed prescribing strategies were successful in reducing unnecessary consumption. GPs agreed that coherent and uniform training and guidelines would be of some benefit to ensure consistent prescribing throughout the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed prescribing is encouraged in primary care, but is not always implemented successfully. Greater uniformity within and between practices in the UK is needed to operationalise delayed prescribing, as well as providing feedback on the uptake of antibiotics. Finally, GPs may need further guidance on how to answer the concerns of patients without interpreting these questions as a demand for antibiotics, as well as educating the patient about antimicrobial resistance and supporting a good patient-practitioner relationship.

Patients' hopes and expectations of a specialist chronic fatigue syndrome/ME service: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The 2007 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines on Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) recommend early management of the condition. Investment by the Department of Health has expanded the number of specialist U.K. CFS/ME services but there has been little research on what patients hope or expect from referral. METHODS: A qualitative study exploring hopes and expectations of patients newly referred to a CFS/ME Service in the South of England. Interviews with 20 patients were analysed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Participants hoped referral to a specialist service would clarify diagnosis, give guidance and support, assist in understanding the complexity of the illness and provide hope for the future. While many participants valued the support of their GP, all viewed referral as offering a level of specialist expertise beyond that available in primary care. Many participants expressed high levels of uncertainty about the nature of CFS/ME. While participants hoped that the service would be able to provide information and guidance, many expressed the view that more information earlier in their illness would make the waiting period less stressful and make it possible for them to do more to help themselves. CONCLUSIONS: GP referral to a specialist service appeared to be highly valued by the participants in this study. The levels of uncertainty expressed by many patients about the nature of CFS/ME raises the issue of the role of information on CFS/ME during the early stages of the illness and suggests a need for more reassurance and positive advice during the waiting period.

Women's views about management and cause of urinary tract infection: qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the views of women with urinary tract infection on the acceptability of different strategies for managing the infection, including delayed use of antibiotics, and the cause of infection. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study with semistructured one to one interviews within a randomised controlled trial of different management strategies. Analysis drew on some of the principles of constant comparison to generate key themes grounded in reported experiences and understandings. SETTING: Seven general practices across four counties in southern England. PARTICIPANTS: 21 women presenting to general practices who were taking part in the larger trial. RESULTS: Women preferred not to take antibiotics and were open to alternative management approaches. With a strategy of "antibiotic delay" some women felt a lack of validation or that they were not listened to by their general practitioner. Women attributed urinary tract infection to lifestyle habits and behaviours, such as poor hygiene, general "negligence," and even a "penalty of growing old." CONCLUSION: A clear acknowledgment of women's triggers to consult is needed. If women are asked to delay taking antibiotics, the clinician must address the particular worries that women might have and explain the rationale for not using antibiotics immediately.

Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate clinical and dipstick predictors of infection and develop and test clinical scores; to compare management using clinical and dipstick scores with commonly used alternative strategies; to estimate the cost-effectiveness of each strategy; and to understand the natural history of urinary tract infection (UTI) and women's concerns about its presentation and management. DESIGN: There were six studies: (1) validation development for diagnostic clinical and dipstick scores; (2) validation of the scores developed; (3) observation of the natural history of UTI; (4) randomised controlled trial (RCT) of scores developed in study 1; (5) economic analysis of the RCT; (6) qualitative study of patients in the RCT. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 17-70 with suspected UTI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to five management approaches: empirical antibiotics; empirical delayed antibiotics; target antibiotics based on a higher symptom score; target antibiotics based on dipstick results; or target antibiotics based on a positive mid-stream specimen of urine (MSU). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Antibiotic use, use of MSUs, rates of reconsultation and duration, and severity of symptoms. RESULTS: (1) 62.5% of women had confirmed UTI. Only nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood independently predicted diagnosis of UTI. A dipstick rule--based on having nitrite or both leucocytes and blood--was moderately sensitive (77%) and specific (70%) [positive predictive value (PPV) 81%, negative predictive value (NPV) 65%]. A clinical rule--based on having two of urine cloudiness, offensive smell, reported moderately severe dysuria, moderately severe nocturia--was less sensitive (65%) (specificity 69%, PPV 77%, NPV 54%). (2) 66% of women had confirmed UTI. The predictive values of nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood were confirmed. The dipstick rule was moderately sensitive (75%) but less specific (66%) (PPV 81%, NPV 57%). (3) Symptoms rated as moderately bad or worse lasted 3.25 days on average for infections sensitive to antibiotics; resistant infections lasted 56% longer, infections not treated with antibiotics 62% longer and symptoms associated with urethral syndrome 33% longer. Symptom duration was shorter if the doctor was perceived to be positive about prognosis, and longer with frequent somatic symptoms, previous history of cystitis, urinary frequency and more severe symptoms at baseline. (4) 66% of the MSU group had laboratory-confirmed UTI. Women suffered 3.5 days of moderately bad symptoms if they took antibiotics immediately but 4.8 days if they delayed taking antibiotics for 48 hours. Taking bicarbonate or cranberry juice had no effect. (5) The MSU group was more costly over 1 month but not over 1 year. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that for a value per day of moderately bad symptoms of over 10 pounds, the dipstick strategy is most likely to be cost-effective. (6) Fear of spread to the kidneys, blood in the urine, and the impact of symptoms on vocational and leisure activities were important triggers for seeking help. When patients are asked to delay taking antibiotics the uncomfortable and worrying journey from 'person to patient' needs to be acknowledged and the rationale behind delaying the antibiotics made clear. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve good symptom control and reduce antibiotic use clinicians should either offer a 48-hour delayed antibiotic prescription to be used at the patient's discretion or target antibiotic treatment by dipsticks (positive nitrite or positive leucocytes and blood) with the offer of a delayed prescription if dipstick results are negative.

The journey towards a cancer diagnosis: the experiences of people with cancer, their family and carers.

This small-scale study aimed to provide an insight into the time between first noticing a symptom, attending a healthcare provider and obtaining a cancer diagnosis. Previous research showed that the pre-diagnostic moments on the illness trajectory were important to people with cancer and could influence levels of satisfaction with subsequent care. This article provides an overview of the qualitative component (phase 2) of a three-pronged study that involved a workshop, a literature review and focus groups and interviews with people affected by cancer. Results highlighted some of the difficulties encountered during the complex journey towards a diagnosis of cancer. These included fear of what might be found, communication of symptoms to healthcare practitioners, the influence of family on decisions to attend a primary care practitioner and the importance of a person's gender on perceptions of health-seeking behaviour. Results presented warrant further investigation and suggest the importance of viewing the 'cancer journey' as including the journey leading up to a diagnosis of cancer.

A comparison of the risks of venous thromboembolic disease in association with different combined oral contraceptives.

AIMS: In October 1995 in response to the results of three studies, the Committee on the Safety of Medicines advised doctors and pharmacists that oral contraceptives containing desogestrel (DSG) and gestodene (GST) were associated with around a two-fold increase in the risk of thromboembolism compared with those containing other progestogens. The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of idiopathic venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) in users of combined oral contraceptives (COCs), to compare the risk between formulations and to examine the effect of using age banding as opposed to matching by exact year of birth. METHODS: A nested case control study was conducted using the General Practice Research Database. Women with a VTE event recorded between 1992 and 1997, who were treated with an anticoagulant, from consideration of their prescription records were likely to have been using a COC prescription on the day of the event and also had no exclusion factors, were deemed cases. For comparison with the previous studies, two nested case control studies were undertaken. Study 1 used controls matched by practice and year of birth. Study 2 used controls matched by practice and within 5 years age bands. RESULTS: We found an incidence of idiopathic VTE amongst users of combined oral contraceptives of 3.8 per 10 000 exposed women years. Incidence rates increased markedly after 35 years of age. The nested case-control study using controls matched by year of birth showed no significant difference in risk between the major COC formulations. With levonorgestrel (LNG) 150 microgram and ethinyloestradiol (EE) 30 microgram as the reference, the adjusted ORs for GST 75 microgram and EE 30 microgram was 1.3 (95% CI 0.8, 2.1), for DSG 150 microgram and EE 30 microgram it was 1.0 (95% CI 0.7, 1.7) and for DSG 150 microgram and EE 20 microgram it was 0.8 (95% CI 0.4, 1.6). Using less rigorous matching criteria, matching controls to cases within 5 years age bands, the ORs increased. When a mixed group of COCs, characterized by having LNG as the progestogen component was used as the reference category, there was an elevation in the ORs for the newer products. We found a significant association between idiopathic VTE and current smoking (OR 2.0 (1.4, 2.7)), BMI over 35 (OR 3.8 (1.8, 8.0)) and asthma (OR 1.9 (1.3, 2.9)). The OR for women who had proxy evidence of general ill health (indicated by the number of prescriptions issued) was 2.2 (1.7, 3.7). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that a number of the characteristics of the women taking COCs affect the risk of VTE. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that there is any difference in risk between COC formulations containing under 50 microg ethinyloestradiol.

Validation of the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in general practice database studies.

AIMS: The study was conducted to determine whether the method for selecting cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE) from general practice databases significantly affected the findings of an epidemiological study. METHODS: Cases of VTE were identified from the UK General Practice Research Database (GPRD) by searching for codes for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). These had to be supported by evidence of anticoagulation and be exposed to a combined oral contraceptive (COC) at the time of the event. Additional information about the event was sought from general practitioners who were requested to complete a questionnaire and to supply anonymised copies of hospital letters and discharge summaries. RESULTS: Of the 285 cases identified from the GPRD, additional information was available for 177 VTE events. This information showed that 84% of those events were supported by hospital investigations or a death certificate. Using only verified cases, rather than all GPRD identified events, did not alter the results of the epidemiological study. CONCLUSIONS: The GPRD provides information of sufficiently high quality to allow valid epidemiological research of VTE events. Excluding cases without a database record of hospital admission would lead to valid events being overlooked, and an under-estimate of the disease incidence.

Cancer patients' information needs and information seeking behaviour: in depth interview study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore why cancer patients do not want or seek information about their condition beyond that volunteered by their physicians at times during their illness. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on in-depth interviews. SETTING: Outpatient oncology clinics at a London cancer centre. PARTICIPANTS: 17 patients with cancer diagnosed in previous 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analysis of patients' narratives to identify key themes and categories. RESULTS: While all patients wanted basic information on diagnosis and treatment, not all wanted further information at all stages of their illness. Three overarching attitudes to their management of cancer limited patients' desire for and subsequent efforts to obtain further information: faith, hope, and charity. Faith in their doctor's medical expertise precluded the need for patients to seek further information themselves. Hope was essential for patients to carry on with life as normal and could be maintained through silence and avoiding information, especially too detailed or "unsafe" information. Charity to fellow patients, especially those seen as more needy than themselves, was expressed in the recognition that scarce resources-including information and explanations-had to be shared and meant that limited information was accepted as inevitable. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients' attitudes to cancer and their strategies for coping with their illness can constrain their wish for information and their efforts to obtain it. In developing recommendations, the government's cancer information strategy should attend to variations in patients' desires for information and the reasons for them.

Venous thromboembolic disease and combined oral contraceptives: A re-analysis of the MediPlus database.

In October 1995 the Committee on Safety of Medicines advised UK doctors and pharmacists that oral contraceptives containing desogestrel and gestodene were associated with double the risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) compared to pills containing other progestogens. In 1997 data was analysed from the MediPlus database of UK general practitioner records, which reported odds ratios for desogestrel and gestodene lower than that for levonorgestrel. Here the results of a more stringent nested case control analysis on the MediPlus database are reported. The study was larger and cases were verified. A crude incidence of idiopathic VTE was found amongst users of combined oral contraceptives of 4.6 per 10 000 exposed women years. Using levonorgestrel 150 microg + ethinyloestradiol 30 microg as reference, non-significant odds ratios of 1.1 (0.5-2.6) for desogestrel 150 microg + ethinyloestradiol 30 microg and 1.1 (0.5-2.4) for gestodene 75 microg + ethinyloestradiol 30 microg were found. The results of this study show no significant difference in risk between different formulations of combined oral contraceptive.

Patterns of contraception in UK women with Type 1 diabetes mellitus: a GP database study.

AIM: To establish the patterns of contraceptive prescribing for women aged 15-49 with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) and compare them with the patterns in women without diabetes. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using a UK primary care database. RESULTS: Nine hundred and thirty-eight women with a diagnosis of Type 1 DM were identified. A comparison group of women aged 15-49 without diabetes (n = 10000) were randomly selected from the database. Twenty-five per cent of the women with diabetes and 32% without diabetes were prescribed a hormonal contraceptive in 1994. Women with Type 1 DM were more likely to be prescribed a combined oral contraceptive than a progestogen only pill (POP) but were 2.12 (95% CI 1.65-2.72) times more likely to be prescribed a POP than women without diabetes and were less likely to be prescribed a combined pill - odds ratio 0.53 (95% CI 0.44-0.64). The pregnancy rate in women with Type 1 DM over the age of 25 years was lower than for women without diabetes. Women under 25 years with Type 1 DM seemed more likely to record a pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between women with Type 1 DM and those without diabetes highlight the variation in the way that GPs and patients evaluate the risks and benefits when deciding on contraception.

PIP: This cross-sectional study using a UK primary care database establishes the patterns of contraceptive prescribing for women aged 15-49 with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) and compares them with the patterns in women without DM. A total of 938 Type 1 DM women were identified and a comparison group of women without diabetes (n = 10,000) were randomly selected from the database. Statistical analysis showed that 25% of the Type 1 DM women and 32% of those without diabetes were prescribed a hormonal contraceptive in 1994. Type 1 DM women were more likely to be prescribed a combined oral contraceptive than a progestogen-only pill (POP). However, they were 2.12 (95% CI, 1.65-2.72) times more likely to be prescribed a POP and less likely to be prescribed a combined pill (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 1.65-0.64) compared to women without diabetes. In addition, the pregnancy rates in Type 1 DM women over the age of 25 years were lower than in women without diabetes. This finding suggests that Type 1 DM women under age 25 appear more likely to record a pregnancy. In conclusion, differences between Type 1 DM women and those without diabetes highlight the variation in the way that general practitioners and patients evaluate the risks and benefits when deciding on contraception.

Primary care units in A&E departments in North Thames in the 1990s: initial experience and future implications.

BACKGROUND: In 1992, the Tomlinson Report recommended a shift from secondary to primary care, including specific primary care provision in accident and emergency (A&E) departments. Availability of short-term so-called Tomlinson moneys allowed a number of experimental services. A study of the experience of A&E-based staff is reported to assist general practitioners (GPs) and purchasers and identify areas for further research. AIMS: To find the number and scope of primary care facilities in A&E services in North Thames; to find factors encouraging or inhibiting the setting-up of a successful service; to examine the views of a range of A&E staff including GPs, consultants, and nurses; and to suggest directions for more specific research. METHOD: A postal questionnaire was sent to all North Thames A&E departments, and an interview study of staff in one unit was arranged, leading to a questionnaire study of all GPs employed in North Thames primary care services in A&E. This was followed by interviews of staff members in five contrasting primary care units in A&E. RESULTS: By mid-1995, at least 16 of the 33 North Thames A&E departments ran a primary care service. Seven mainly employed GPs, the others employed nurse practitioners (NPs). Problems for GPs included unclear role definition and their non-availability at times of highest patient demand. GPs' reasons for working in A&E sometimes differed from the aims of primary care in an A&E service. Staff interviews revealed differing views about their role and about use of triage protocols. Ethnicity data were being collected, but not yet being used, to improve service to patients. CONCLUSIONS: A number of benefits follow the introduction of primary care practitioners into A&E. Different models have evolved, with a variety of GP and NP staffing arrangements according to local ideas and priorities. There is some confusion over whether these services aim to improve A&E-based care or to divert it to general practice. Cost information is inadequate so far, though the use of GPs has shown the possibility of economy. Appropriate location of services requires clearer identification of costs. This may be possible for the proposed primary care groups.