Bridging the two cultures. Commercial archaeology and the study of prehistoric Britain

This paper was given at a meeting of the Society held on 12 January 2006 and it discusses the relationship between academic research and developer-funded archaeology in Britain today, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each. It considers the relationship between archaeological theory and practice and discusses the changing roles of academics, fieldworkers and managers. It argues that important issues need to be resolved, including the dissemination of information from recent archaeological fieldwork and the use of ‘grey literature’ in informing more ambitious interpretations of the past.

The Palaeolithic Rivers of Southwest Britain

The Palaeolithic Rivers of Southwest Britain (PRoSWeB) project synthesises the archaeological evidence for the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic occupation of south-west Britain (c. 500,000 - 40,000 BP), with a principal focus upon the archaeological and geological potential of the region's Middle Pleistocene fluvial environments. South-west Britain was defined as the region west of the headwaters of the Rivers Frome and Piddle and south-west of the River Avon.

What is the new medicines use review ‘patient survey’ attempting to capture in the context of existing patient satisfaction with pharmacy questionnaires and a new conceptual framework?

The community pharmacy service medicines use review (MUR) was introduced in 2005 ‘to improve patient knowledge, concordance and use of medicines’ through a private patient–pharmacist consultation. The MUR presents a fundamental change in community pharmacy service provision. While traditionally pharmacists are dispensers of medicines and providers of medicines advice, and patients as recipients, the MUR considers pharmacists providing consultation-type activities and patients as active participants. The MUR facilitates a two-way discussion about medicines use. Traditional patient–pharmacist behaviours transform into a new set of behaviours involving the booking of appointments, consultation processes and form completion, and the physical environment of the patient–pharmacist interaction moves from the traditional setting of the dispensary and medicines counter to a private consultation room. Thus, the new service challenges traditional identities and behaviours of the patient and the pharmacist as well as the environment in which the interaction takes place. In 2008, the UK government concluded there is at present too much emphasis on the quantity of MURs rather than on their quality.[1] A number of plans to remedy the perceived imbalance included a suggestion to reward ‘health outcomes’ achieved, with calls for a more focussed and scientific approach to the evaluation of pharmacy services using outcomes research. Specifically, the UK government set out the main principal research areas for the evaluation of pharmacy services to include ‘patient and public perceptions and satisfaction’as well as ‘impact on care and outcomes’. A limited number of ‘patient satisfaction with pharmacy services’ type questionnaires are available, of varying quality, measuring dimensions relating to pharmacists’ technical competence, behavioural impressions and general satisfaction. For example, an often cited paper by Larson[2] uses two factors to measure satisfaction, namely ‘friendly explanation’ and ‘managing therapy’; the factors are highly interrelated and the questions somewhat awkwardly phrased, but more importantly, we believe the questionnaire excludes some specific domains unique to the MUR. By conducting patient interviews with recent MUR recipients, we have been working to identify relevant concepts and develop a conceptual framework to inform item development for a Patient Reported Outcome Measure questionnaire bespoke to the MUR. We note with interest the recent launch of a multidisciplinary audit template by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB) in an attempt to review the effectiveness of MURs and improve their quality.[3] This template includes an MUR ‘patient survey’. We will discuss this ‘patient survey’ in light of our work and existing patient satisfaction with pharmacy questionnaires, outlining a new conceptual framework as a basis for measuring patient satisfaction with the MUR. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the NHS Surrey Research Ethics Committee on 2 June 2008. References 1. Department of Health (2008). Pharmacy in England: Building on Strengths – Delivering the Future. London: HMSO. www. official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7341/7341.pdf (accessed 29 September 2009). 2. Larson LN et al. Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care: update of a validated instrument. JAmPharmAssoc 2002; 42: 44–50. 3. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (2009). Pharmacy Medicines Use Review – Patient Audit. London: RPSGB. http:// qi4pd.org.uk/index.php/Medicines-Use-Review-Patient-Audit. html (accessed 29 September 2009).

A retrospective audit of medicines use review forms

The medicines use review (MUR) service was introduced in England and Wales in 2005 to improve patients’ knowledge and use of medicines through a private, patient–pharmacist consultation. The pharmacist completes a standard form as a record of the MUR consultation and the patient receives a copy. The 2008 White Paper, Pharmacy in England[1] notes some MURs are of poor or questionable quality and there are anecdotal reports that pharmacists elect to conduct ‘easy’ MURs with patients on a single prescribed medicine only.[2] In 2009, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB) launched a multi-disciplinary audit template to review the effectiveness of MURs and improve their quality.[3] Prior to this, we conducted a retrospective MUR audit in a 1-month period in 2008. Our aims were to report on findings from this audit and the validity of using MUR forms as data for audit.

Methodology for assessing the appropriateness of Continuing Professional Development for pharmacy professionals’ revalidation

From April 2010, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) will be responsible for the statutory regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in Great Britain (GB).[1] All statutorily regulated health professionals will need to periodically demonstrate their fitness-to-practise through a process of revalidation.[2] One option being considered in GB is that continuing professional development (CPD) records will form a part of the evidence submitted for revalidation, similar to the system in New Zealand.[3] At present, pharmacy professionals must make a minimum of nine CPD entries per annum from 1 March 2009 using the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB) CPD framework. Our aim was to explore the applicability of new revalidation standards within the current CPD framework. We also wanted to review the content of CPD portfolios to assess strengths and qualities and identify any information gaps for the purpose of revalidation.

Estimating the hidden number of scrapie affected holdings in great Britain using a simple, truncated count model allowing for heterogeneity.

None of the current surveillance streams monitoring the presence of scrapie in Great Britain provide a comprehensive and unbiased estimate of the prevalence of the disease at the holding level. Previous work to estimate the under-ascertainment adjusted prevalence of scrapie in Great Britain applied multiple-list capture–recapture methods. The enforcement of new control measures on scrapie-affected holdings in 2004 has stopped the overlapping between surveillance sources and, hence, the application of multiple-list capture–recapture models. Alternative methods, still under the capture–recapture methodology, relying on repeated entries in one single list have been suggested in these situations. In this article, we apply one-list capture–recapture approaches to data held on the Scrapie Notifications Database to estimate the undetected population of scrapie-affected holdings with clinical disease in Great Britain for the years 2002, 2003, and 2004. For doing so, we develop a new diagnostic tool for indication of heterogeneity as well as a new understanding of the Zelterman and Chao’s lower bound estimators to account for potential unobserved heterogeneity. We demonstrate that the Zelterman estimator can be viewed as a maximum likelihood estimator for a special, locally truncated Poisson likelihood equivalent to a binomial likelihood. This understanding allows the extension of the Zelterman approach by means of logistic regression to include observed heterogeneity in the form of covariates—in case studied here, the holding size and country of origin. Our results confirm the presence of substantial unobserved heterogeneity supporting the application of our two estimators. The total scrapie-affected holding population in Great Britain is around 300 holdings per year. None of the covariates appear to inform the model significantly.

The 'direct costs' of livestock disease: The development of a system of models for the analysis of 30 endemic livestock diseases in Great Britain

The 'direct costs' attributable to 30 different endemic diseases of farm animals in Great Britain are estimated using a standardised method to construct a simple model for each disease that includes consideration of disease prevention and treatment costs. The models so far developed provide a basis for further analyses including cost-benefit analyses for the economic assessment of disease control options. The approach used reflects the inherent livestock disease information constraints, which limit the application of other economic analytical methods. It is a practical and transparent approach that is relatively easily communicated to veterinary scientists and policy makers. The next step is to develop the approach by incorporating wider economic considerations into the analyses in a way that will demonstrate to policy makers and others the importance of an economic perspective to livestock disease issues.

Updated estimates of the costs associated with thirty four endemic livestock diseases in Great Britain: A note

This Note outlines the further development of a system of models for the estimation of the costs of livestock diseases first presented by Bennett (2003). The models have been developed to provide updated and improved estimates of the costs associated with 34 endemic diseases of livestock in Great Britain, using border prices and including assessments of the impact of diseases on human health and animal welfare. Results show that, of the diseases studied, mastitis has the highest costs for cattle diseases, enzootic abortion for sheep diseases, swine influenza for pig diseases and salmonellosis for poultry diseases.