Validation of an improved area-based method of calculating general practice–level deprivation

2010 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 746-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Griffin ◽  
Tim J. Peters ◽  
Debbie Sharp ◽  
Chris Salisbury ◽  
Sarah Purdy
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Practice Level

scholarly journals Links between the amount of antipsychotic medication prescribed per population at general practice level, local demographic factors and medication selection

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. H. Heald ◽  
M. Stedman ◽  
S. Farman ◽  
C. Khine ◽  
M. Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Antipsychotic Medication ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Defined Daily Dose ◽  
Practice Level ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Antipsychotic Prescribing

Abstract Background Antipsychotic medications are the first-line pharmacological intervention for severe mental illnesses (SMI) such as schizophrenia and other psychoses, while also being used to relieve distress and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Our aim was to examine the factors relating to antipsychotic prescribing in general practices across England and how cost changes in recent years have impacted on antipsychotic prescribing. Methods The study examined over time the prescribing volume and prices paid for antipsychotic medication by agent in primary care. Monthly prescribing in primary care was consolidated over 5 years (2013–2018) and DDD amount from WHO/ATC for each agent was used to convert the amount to total DDD/practice. The defined Daily Dose (DDD is the assumed average maintenance dose per day for a drug used for its main indication in adults. Results We included 5750 general practices with practice population > 3000 and with > 30 people on their SMI register. In 2018/19 there were 10,360,865 prescriptions containing 136 million DDD with costs of £110 million at an average cost of £0.81/DDD issued in primary care. In 2017/18 there was a sharp increase in overall prices and they had not reduced to expected levels by the end of the 2018/19 evaluation year. There was a gradual increase in antipsychotic prescribing over 2013–2019 which was not perturbed by the increase in drug price in 2017/18. The strongest positive relation to increased prescribing of antipsychotics came from higher social disadvantage, higher population density (urban), and comorbidities e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Higher % younger and % older populations, northerliness and non-white (Black and Minority Ethnic(BAME)) ethnicity were all independently associated with less antipsychotic prescribing. Higher DDD/general practice population was linked with higher proportion(%) injectable, higher %liquid, higher doses/prescription and higher %zuclopenthixol depot. Less DDD/population was linked with general practices using higher % risperidone and higher spending/dose of antipsychotic. Conclusions The levels of antipsychotic prescribing at general practice level are driven by social factors/comorbidities. We found a link between depot prescriptions with higher antipsychotic DDD and risperidone prescriptions with lower antipsychotic DDD. It is important that all prescribers are aware of these drivers / links.

Optimizing diabetes care regarding cardiovascular targets at general practice level: Direct@GP

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan Wens ◽  
Robert Gerard ◽  
Hans Vandenberghe
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Diabetes Care ◽  
Practice Level

scholarly journals Links between the amount of antipsychotic medication prescribed per population at general practice level, local demographic factors and medication selection

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Hugh Heald ◽  
Mike Stedman ◽  
Sanam Farman ◽  
Chaw Khine ◽  
Mark Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Antipsychotic Medication ◽  
Demographic Factors ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Practice Level ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Antipsychotic Prescribing

Abstract BACKGROUND Antipsychotic medications are the first-line pharmacological intervention for severe mental illnesses(SMI) such as schizophrenia and other psychoses, while also being used to relieve distress and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Since 2014 many antipsychotic agents have moved to generic provision. In 2017_18 supplies of certain generic agents were affected by substantial price increases. Our aim was to examine factors relating to antipsychotic prescribing in general practices across England and how cost changes in recent years have impacted. METHODS The study examined over time the prescribing volume/prices paid for antipsychotic medication by agent in primary care. The NHS in England/Wales publishes each month the prescribing in general practice by BNF code. This was aggregated for the year 2018_19 using Defined Daily doses (DDD). Cost of each agent year-on-year was determined. Monthly prescribing in primary care was consolidated over 5 years(2013-2018) and DDD amount from WHO/ATC for each agent was used to convert the amount to total DDD/practice. RESULTS Description We included 5,750 general practices with practice population >3000 and with >30 people on their SMI register. In 2018_19 there were 10,360,865 prescriptions containing 136 million DDD with costs of £110 million at an average cost of £0.81/DDD issued in primary care. Effect of price In 2017_18 there was a sharp increase in overall prices. There was a gradual increase in antipsychotic prescribing over 2013-2019 which was not perturbed by the drug price increase in 2017/18. Regression Demographic factors The strongest positive relation to increased prescribing of antipsychotics came from higher social disadvantage, higher population density(urban), and comorbidities e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD). Higher %younger and %older populations, northerliness and non-white (Black and Minority Ethnic (BME)) ethnicity were all independently associated with less antipsychotic prescribing. Prescribing Factors Higher DDD/general practice population was linked with higher %injectable, higher %liquid, higher doses/prescription and higher %zuclopenthixol depot. Less DDD/population was linked with general practices using higher %risperidone and higher spending/dose of antipsychotic. CONCLUSIONS Levels of antipsychotic prescribing at general practice level are driven by social factors/comorbidities. We found a contrasting link between depot prescriptions with higher DDD and risperidone prescriptions with lower DDD.

scholarly journals Sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 inhibitors, the latest residents on the block: Impact on glycaemic control at a general practice level in England

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 1659-1669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian H. Heald ◽  
Anthony A. Fryer ◽  
Simon G. Anderson ◽  
Mark Livingston ◽  
Mark Lunt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Practice Level

scholarly journals Patient experience of general practice and use of emergency hospital services in England: regression analysis of national cross-sectional time series data

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 643-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E Cowling ◽  
Azeem Majeed ◽  
Matthew J Harris
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Hospital Services ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Emergency Admissions ◽  
Emergency Hospital ◽  
Practice Level

BackgroundThe UK Government has introduced several national policies to improve access to primary care. We examined associations between patient experience of general practice and rates of visits to accident and emergency (A&E) departments and emergency hospital admissions in England.MethodsThe study included 8124 general practices between 2011–2012 and 2013–2014. Outcome measures were annual rates of A&E visits and emergency admissions by general practice population, according to administrative hospital records. Explanatory variables included three patient experience measures from the General Practice Patient Survey: practice-level means of experience of making an appointment, satisfaction with opening hours and overall experience (on 0–100 scales). The main analysis used random-effects Poisson regression for cross-sectional time series. Five sensitivity analyses examined changes in model specification.ResultsMean practice-level rates of A&E visits and emergency admissions increased from 2011–2012 to 2013–2014 (310.3–324.4 and 98.8–102.9 per 1000 patients). Each patient experience measure decreased; for example, mean satisfaction with opening hours was 79.4 in 2011–2012 and 76.6 in 2013–2014. In the adjusted regression analysis, an SD increase in experience of making appointments (equal to 9 points) predicted decreases of 1.8% (95% CI −2.4% to −1.2%) in A&E visit rates and 1.4% (95% CI −1.9% to −0.9%) in admission rates. This equalled 301 174 fewer A&E visits and 74 610 fewer admissions nationally per year. Satisfaction with opening hours and overall experience were not consistently associated with either outcome measure across the main and sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsAssociations between patient experience of general practice and use of emergency hospital services were small or inconsistent. In England, realistic short-term improvements in patient experience of general practice may only have modest effects on A&E visits and emergency admissions.

scholarly journals Waiting lists, waiting times and admissions: an empirical analysis at hospital and general practice level

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 971-985 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Windmeijer ◽  
Hugh Gravelle ◽  
Pierre Hoonhout
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Waiting Times ◽  
Waiting Lists ◽  
Practice Level

scholarly journals How to implement patient experience surveys and use their findings for service improvement: a qualitative expert consultation study in Australian general practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. e000033
Author(s):  
Hyun Jung Song ◽  
Sarah Dennis ◽  
Jean-Frédéric Levesque ◽  
Mark Harris
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
System Level ◽  
Service Improvement ◽  
Expert Consultation ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Practice Level ◽  
Australian General Practice

ObjectiveTo identify barriers (patient, provider, practice and system levels) to consider when implementing patient experience surveys in Australian general practice and enablers of their systematic use to inform service improvement in clinical practice as well as the broader health system.Methods and analysisAn expert consultation and qualitative content analysis of cross-sectional, open-text survey data. Data were collected from key international and Australian experts in the areas of measurement and quality improvement in general practice.ResultsResponses from 20 participants from six countries were included in the study. Participants discussed the importance of ensuring value and relevance of surveys to stakeholders. Lack of resources, IT infrastructure, capacity building and sustained funding were identified as barriers to implementing surveys. Participants discussed the importance of clearly defining and communicating the purpose of surveys and agreed on the value of using patient experience to inform reflective, team-based learning at the practice level. Opinions differed on the use of patient experience data at the system level, with some questioning its utility or fairness for external performance reporting. Others recommended the aggregation and reporting of these data under certain conditions, including for the purpose of triangulation with other quality and outcome data. The study identified an evidence gap in the assessment and interpretation of patient experience data at the practice and system levels, including the analysis and contextualisation of survey findings at the system level.ConclusionPatient experience surveys have potential for guiding practice level quality improvement, but many barriers to their implementation remain. There is need for greater research and policy efforts to understand how this information can be used at the system level for improving Australian general practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document