Pinch grafting for chronic venous leg ulcers in general practice

Twenty-five patients with chronic venous leg ulcers were treated in general practice by pinch grafting. Fifteen of the ulcers (60%) were completely healed one year after grafting. Prior to grafting 19 patients (76%) complained of daily pain in the ulcer. These patients experienced complete relief from pain after grafting. Pinch grafting is a simple, safe and effective therapy when applied in a domiciliary environment.

Primary dermatological care in general practice

Out of 2,409 clinical cases analysed over an eight-week period, 199 (8.2 per cent) were of a dermatological nature. Atopic eczema, warts, seborrhoeic eczema and acne vulgaris were encountered most frequently. The reaction to a skin clinic in the general practice, with access to liquid nitrogen, electrocautery and histopathology is described. Treatment of patients is summarized. It is suggested that having a practice skin clinic reduces the rate of hospital referrals by two thirds.

Warts in general practice

Eight hundred and ninety seven patients referred by their general practitioner to Health Centre Wart Clinics were interviewed. Seventy one patients (7.9%) were found to have lesions other than cutaneous warts. Females were significantly more likely to have plantar warts on their toes (p less than 0.002) and non-plantar warts on their fingers (p less than 0.03) and less likely to have non-plantar warts on the palms of their hands (p less than 0.03) than males. Patients living in large households (5+ persons) were more likely than patients living in smaller households (2-4 persons) to report an infected co-habitant (p less than 0.001). Patients with periungual warts were significantly more likely to be nailbiters. (p less than 0.001). Patients presenting with warts greater than two years in duration were more likely to have multiple warts than those with warts less than one month in duration (p less than 0.001). Patients who frequently immersed their hands in water were more likely to present with multiple warts on the hands (p less than 0.001). Multiple plantar warts were associated with moist or macerated feet (p less than 0.001). The role of the family doctor in diagnosing and preventing the spread of this infection is discussed.

The importance of validating the diagnosis of coronary heart disease when measuring secondary prevention:a cross-sectional study in general practice

To compare levels of recorded risk factors and drug treatment between patients with validated and non-validated diagnoses of coronary heart disease (CHD) in Northern Ireland.

The distribution of COPD in UK general practice using the new GOLD classification

The new Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2011 document recommends a combined assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) based on current symptoms and future risk.

A large database of primary-care COPD patients across the UK was used to determine COPD distribution and characteristics according to the new GOLD classification. 80 general practices provided patients with a Read code diagnosis of COPD. Electronic and hand searches of patient medical records were undertaken, optimising data capture.

Data for 9219 COPD patients were collected. For the 6283 patients with both forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and modified Medical Research Council scores (mean¡SD age 69.2¡10.6 years, body mass index 27.3¡6.2 kg?m-2), GOLD 2011 group distributions were: A (low risk and fewer symptoms) 36.1%, B (low risk and more symptoms) 19.1%, C (high risk and fewer symptoms) 19.6% and D (high risk and more symptoms) 25.3%. This is in contrast with GOLD 2007 stage classification: I (mild) 17.1%, II (moderate) 52.2%, III (severe) 25.5% and IV (very severe) 5.2%. 20% of patients with FEV1 o50% predicted had more than two exacerbations in the previous 12 months. 70% of patients with FEV1 ,50% pred had fewer than two exacerbations in the previous 12 months.

This database, representative of UK primary-care COPD patients, identified greater proportions of patients in the mildest and most severe categories upon comparing 2011 versus 2007 GOLD classifications. Discordance between airflow limitation severity and exacerbation risk was observed.

General practice-recorded depression and antidepressant use in young people with newly diagnosed Type 1 diabetes: a cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

Aims - To investigate whether young people with Type 1 diabetes have an increased rate of depression andantidepressant use and whether their risk varies by age group, time from diabetes diagnosis, calendar period ofdiagnosis or complications status. Methods - A cohort of incident cases of patients with Type 1 diabetes diagnosed before 35 years of age (n = 5548) wasidentified within the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and individually age and sex matched with up to two controlsubjects without diabetes (n = 10 657). Patients with depression were identified through general practice-recordeddepression codes and antidepressant prescriptions. Cox regression models gave hazard ratios for depression in peoplewith Type 1 diabetes compared with control subjects. Results - People with Type 1 diabetes were twice as likely to have a record of antidepressant use and generalpractice-diagnosed depression as their matched control subjects (hazard ratio 2.08, 95% CI 1.73–2.50, P < 0.001).These associations varied by time from diagnosis, with marked increases observed within the first 5 years of diagnosis(hazard ratio 2.14, 95% CI 1.51–3.03, P < 0.001), and by age at diabetes diagnosis, with excesses noted even in the 10-to 19-year age group (hazard ratio 1.45, 95% CI 1.06–1.98, P = 0.02). Conclusions - This population-based study shows that people with Type 1 diabetes have higher rates of generalpractice-recorded depression and antidepressant use. The excess is present within 5 years of diabetes diagnosis,suggesting psychological input for patients is warranted in the early years of their condition.

Neurophobia among general practice trainees: The evidence, perceived causes and solutions

Introduction

As general practice (GP) is the main source of referrals to neurologists, neurology education for GP trainees is important. We investigated the existence of neurophobia, contributing factors and potential prevention strategies among GP trainees.

In a questionnaire survey interest, knowledge, confidence and perceived difficulty in neurology were compared with different medical specialties. Reasons for difficulty with neurology, postgraduate neurology education experience, learning methods and suggested teaching improvements were examined.

Of 205 GP trainees, 118 (58%) completed the questionnaire. Threshold analyses justified categorical intervals for the Likert responses. Trainees recorded poorer knowledge (p < 0.001), less confidence (p < 0.001) and more perceived difficulty (p < 0.001) with neurology than with any other medical specialty. GP trainees had less interest in neurology than any other medical specialty (Duncan test, p < 0.001). There was a similar gradation in difficulty and confidence perception across medical specialties. Hospital and community-based neurology teaching was graded as “poor” or “very poor” by over 60% of GP trainees. There were multiple perceived causes of neurophobia, including neuroanatomy and poor quality teaching. More organised clinical teaching and referral guidance were suggested to address GP neurophobia.

Neurophobia is common among GP trainees in Northern Ireland. GP trainees have clear and largely uniform ideas on improving their neurology education. GP training posts should reflect the importance of neurology within the GP curriculum.

Musculoskeletal (MSK) and Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) in General Practice (GP): A Novel GP-based MSK and SEM Clinic for Managing Musculoskeletal symptoms in a GP

Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints are common within primary care (1) (2) (3) but some General Practitioners (GPs)/family physicians do not feel comfortable managing these symptoms (3), preferring to refer onto hospital specialists or Integrated Clinical Assessment and Treatment Services (ICATs). Long waiting times for hospital outpatient reviews are a major cause of patient inconvenience and complaints (4). We therefore aimed to establish a GP-ran MSK and sport and exercise medicine (SEM) clinic based within a Belfast GP surgery that would contribute to a sustainable improvement in managing these common conditions within primary care as well as reducing waiting times for patients with these conditions to see a specialist. This shift from hospital-based to community-based management is in-keeping with recent policy changes within the UK health-system, including Transforming Your Care within Northern Ireland (NI) (5). The GP-ran MSK and SEM clinic was held monthly within a Belfast GP practice, staffed by one GP with a specialist interest in MSK and SEM conditions and its performance was reviewed over a three month period. Parameters audited included cases seen, orthopaedic and x-ray referral rates and secondary care referrals comparing the GP practice’s performance to the same time period in the previous year as well as patient satisfaction questionnaires.

Musculoskeletal (MSK) and Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) in General Practice (GP): A Novel GP-based clinic

The problem-Musculoskeletal (MSK) symptoms are common within primary care but some GPs are not comfortable managing these; waiting times for hospital appointments are a major cause of patients’ complaints. Current UK healthcare policies emphasise a need for more community-based management. We aimed to pilot an innovative general practice-based clinic to improve the management of MSK and Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) symptoms within general practice.

The approach-This project was conducted in an inner-city practice of approximately 9,000 patients and 5 GP partners. The practice commissioned a novel monthly 4-hour clinic staffed by one GP with a specialist interest in MSK and SEM conditions. Each patient was allocated a 20-minute appointment. All primary care staff within the practice could refer any patient for whom they considered hospital referral appropriate, with no specific exclusion criteria. Management plans included injection therapy, exercise prescription and onward referral. After three months (August-October 2014) numbers of consultations, sources of referral, reasons for referral and management outcomes were described; patient satisfaction was assessed by questionnaire, offered to 10 randomly selected patients by reception staff and self-completed by patients. Costs of the clinic were compared to current options.

Findings- All patients (14 males; 21 females; aged 35-77 years), were seen within four weeks of referral (one third of orthopaedic referrals in 2013 waited over 9 weeks for appointment). Most were referred from other GPs; some came from physiotherapy and podiatry. Shoulder problems were the most frequent reason for referral. The commonest management option was steroid injection, with most patients being given advice regarding exercise and analgesia; there were 3 onward referrals (2 physiotherapy; 1 rheumatology).

Comparing August-October data in 2014 and 2013, total, orthopaedic and rheumatology referrals were reduced by 147, 2 and 3, respectively; within the practice MSK presentations and physiotherapy and x-ray referrals were 60, 47 and 90 fewer, respectively.

The cost per attendance at the clinic was £61; initial orthopaedic-ICAT assessments cost £82 and a consultant appointment £213.

Satisfaction questionnaires were returned by all 10 selected participants and provided positive feedback, expressing preference for community-based, rather than hospital, management.

Consequence- Our pilot study indicates that this novel service model has potential for efficient and effective management of MSK and SEM complaints in primary care, reducing the need for hospital referral and the clinical burden on general practices. The innovation deserves further evaluation in a full-scale trial to determine its generalisability to other practice settings and populations.

Six-year follow-up of the SPHERE RCT: secondary prevention of heart disease in general practice.

Objective: To determine the long-term effectiveness of a complex intervention in primary care aimed at improving outcomes for patients with coronary heart disease.

Design: A 6-year follow-up of a cluster randomised controlled trial, which found after 18 months that both total and cardiovascular hospital admissions were significantly reduced in intervention practices (8% absolute reduction).

Setting: 48 general practices in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Participants: 903 patients with established coronary heart disease at baseline in the original trial.

Intervention: The original intervention consisted of tailored practice and patient plans; training sessions for practitioners in medication prescribing and behavioural change; and regular patient recall system. Control practices provided usual care. Following the intervention period, all supports from the research team to intervention practices ceased.

Outcome measures: Primary outcome: hospital admissions, all cause and cardiovascular; secondary outcomes: mortality; blood pressure and cholesterol control.

Results: At 6-year follow-up, data were collected from practice records of 696 patients (77%). For those who had died, we censored their data at the point of death and cause of death was established. There were no significant differences between the intervention and control practices in either total (OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.28)) or cardiovascular hospital admissions (OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.65)). We confirmed mortality status of 886 of the original 903 patients (98%). There were no significant differences in mortality (15% in intervention and 16% in control) or in the proportions of patients above target control for systolic blood pressure or total cholesterol.

Conclusions: Initial significant differences in the numbers of total and cardiovascular hospital admissions were not maintained at 6 years and no differences were found in mortality or blood pressure and cholesterol control. Policymakers need to continue to assess the effectiveness of previously efficacious programmes.

Trial registration number: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24081411.