Patterns and predictors of help-seeking contacts with health services and general practitioner detection of suicidality prior to suicide: a cohort analysis of suicides occurring over a two-year period

Background: Contact with primary care and psychiatric services prior to suicide may be considerable, presenting
opportunities for intervention. However, there is scant knowledge on the frequency, nature and determinants of
contact.
Method: Retrospective cohort study-an analysis of deaths recorded as suicide by the Northern Ireland Coroner’s
Office linked with data from General Practice patient records over a 2 year period
Results: Eighty-seven per cent of suicides were in contact with General Practice services in the 12 months before
suicide. The frequency of contact with services was considerable, particularly among patients with a common
mental disorder or substance misuse problems. A diagnosis of psychiatric problems was absent in 40 % of suicides.
Excluding suicide attempts, the main predictors of a noted general practitioner concern for patient suicidality are
male gender, frequency of consultations, diagnosis of mental illness and substance misuse.
Conclusions: Despite widespread and frequent contact, a substantial proportion of suicidal people were
undiagnosed and untreated for mental health problems. General Practitioner alertness to suicidality may be too
narrowly focused.

Preventing drug related morbidity: a process for facilitating changes in practice

Aim: To describe how quantitative data obtained from applying a series of indicators for preventable drug related morbidity (PDRM) in the electronic patient record in English general practice can be used to facilitate changes aimed at helping to improve medicines management. Design: A multidisciplinary discussion forum held at each practice facilitated by a clinical researcher. Subjects and setting: Eight English general practices. Outcome measures: Issues discussed at the multidisciplinary discussion forum and ideas generated by practices for tackling these issues. Progress made by practices after 1, 3, and 6 months. Results: A number of clinical issues were raised by the practices and ideas for moving them forward were discussed. The issues that were easiest and most straightforward to deal with (for example, reviewing specific patient groups) were quickly addressed in most instances. Practices were less likely to have taken steps towards addressing issues at a systems level. Conclusions: Data generated from applying PDRM indicators can be used to facilitate practice-wide discussion on medicines management. Different practices place different priority levels on the issues they wish to pursue. Individual practice "ownership'' of these, together with having a central committed figure at the practice, is key to the success of the process.

Forty-eight hour access to primary care: practice factors predicting patients' perceptions

Background: The government has proposed a 48-hour target for GP availability. Although many practices are moving towards delivering that goal, recent national patient surveys have reported a deterioration in patients' reports of doctor availability. What practice factors contribute to patients' perceptions of doctor availability? Method: A cross sectional patient survey (11 000 patients from 54 inner London practices, 7247 (66%) respondents) using the General Practice Assessment Survey. We asked patients how soon they could be seen in their practice following non-urgent consultation requests and related their aggregated responses to the characteristics of their practice. Results: Three factors relating to practice administration and appointments systems operation independently predicted patients' reports of doctor availability. These were the proportion of patients asked to attend the surgery and wait to be seen, the proportion of patients seen using an emergency surgery arrangement, and the extent of practice computerization. Conclusion: Some practices may have difficulty in meeting the target for GP availability. Meeting the target will involve careful review of practice administrative procedures.

PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors in general practice are an important source of potentially preventable morbidity and mortality. Building on previous descriptive, qualitative and pilot work, we sought to investigate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and likely generalisability of a complex pharm acist-led IT-based intervention aiming to improve prescribing safety in general practice. Objectives: We sought to: • Test the hypothesis that a pharmacist-led IT-based complex intervention using educational outreach and practical support is more effective than simple feedback in reducing the proportion of patients at risk from errors in prescribing and medicines management in general practice. • Conduct an economic evaluation of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS). • Analyse data recorded by pharmacists, summarising the proportions of patients judged to be at clinical risk, the actions recommended by pharmacists, and actions completed in the practices. • Explore the views and experiences of healthcare professionals and NHS managers concerning the intervention; investigate potential explanations for the observed effects, and inform decisions on the future roll-out of the pharmacist-led intervention • Examine secular trends in the outcome measures of interest allowing for informal comparison between trial practices and practices that did not participate in the trial contributing to the QRESEARCH database. Methods Two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of 72 English general practices with embedded economic analysis and longitudinal descriptive and qualitative analysis. Informal comparison of the trial findings with a national descriptive study investigating secular trends undertaken using data from practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database. The main outcomes of interest were prescribing errors and medication monitoring errors at six- and 12-months following the intervention. Results: Participants in the pharmacist intervention arm practices were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) if they had a history of peptic ulcer (OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.38, 0.89), to have been prescribed a beta-blocker if they had asthma (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91) or (in those aged 75 years and older) to have been prescribed an ACE inhibitor or diuretic without a measurement of urea and electrolytes in the last 15 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.78). The economic analysis suggests that the PINCER pharmacist intervention has 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker’s ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 (6 months) or £85 (12 months) per error avoided. The intervention addressed an issue that was important to professionals and their teams and was delivered in a way that was acceptable to practices with minimum disruption of normal work processes. Comparison of the trial findings with changes seen in QRESEARCH practices indicated that any reductions achieved in the simple feedback arm were likely, in the main, to have been related to secular trends rather than the intervention. Conclusions Compared with simple feedback, the pharmacist-led intervention resulted in reductions in proportions of patients at risk of prescribing and monitoring errors for the primary outcome measures and the composite secondary outcome measures at six-months and (with the exception of the NSAID/peptic ulcer outcome measure) 12-months post-intervention. The intervention is acceptable to pharmacists and practices, and is likely to be seen as costeffective by decision makers.

The causes of prescribing errors in English general practices: a qualitative study

Aim: To examine the causes of prescribing and monitoring errors in English general practices and provide recommendations for how they may be overcome. Design: Qualitative interview and focus group study with purposive sampling and thematic analysis informed by Reason’s accident causation model. Participants: General practice staff participated in a combination of semi-structured interviews (n=34) and six focus groups (n=46). Setting: Fifteen general practices across three primary care trusts in England. Results: We identified seven categories of high-level error-producing conditions: the prescriber, the patient, the team, the task, the working environment, the computer system, and the primary-secondary care interface. Each of these was further broken down to reveal various error-producing conditions. The prescriber’s therapeutic training, drug knowledge and experience, knowledge of the patient, perception of risk, and their physical and emotional health, were all identified as possible causes. The patient’s characteristics and the complexity of the individual clinical case were also found to have contributed to prescribing errors. The importance of feeling comfortable within the practice team was highlighted, as well as the safety of general practitioners (GPs) in signing prescriptions generated by nurses when they had not seen the patient for themselves. The working environment with its high workload, time pressures, and interruptions, and computer related issues associated with mis-selecting drugs from electronic pick-lists and overriding alerts, were all highlighted as possible causes of prescribing errors and often interconnected. Conclusion: This study has highlighted the complex underlying causes of prescribing and monitoring errors in general practices, several of which are amenable to intervention.

Factors that influence the detection of psychological problems in adolescents attending general practices

Background Epidemiological studies indicate that the prevalence of psychological problems in patients attending primary care services may be as high as 25%. Aim To identify factors that influence the detection of psychological difficulties in adolescent patients receiving primary care in the UK. Design of study A prospective study of 13-16 year olds consecutively attending general practices. Setting General practices, Norfolk, UK. Method Information was obtained from adolescents and parents using the validated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and from GF`s using the consultation assessment form. Results Ninety-eight adolescents were recruited by 13 GPs in Norfolk (mean age = 14.4 years, SD = 1.08; 38 males, 60 females). The study identified psychological difficulties in almost one-third of adolescents (31/98, 31.6%). Three factors significant to the detection of psychological disorders in adolescents were identified: adolescents' perceptions of difficulties according to the self-report SDQ, the severity of their problems as indicated by the self-report SDQ, and whether psychological issues were discussed in the consultation. GPs did not always explore psychological problems with adolescents, even if GPs perceived these to be present. Nineteen of 31 adolescents with psychological difficulties were identified by GPs (sensitivity = 61.2%, specificity = 85.1%). A management plan or follow-up was made for only seven of 19 adolescents identified, suggesting that ongoing psychological difficulties in many patients are not being addressed. Conclusions GPs are in a good position to identify psychological issues in adolescents, but GPs and adolescents seem reluctant to explore these openly. Open discussion of psychological issues in GP consultations was found to be the most important factor in determining whether psychological difficulties in adolescents are detected by GPs.