Secondary prevention: principles and good practice/screening tests

Author(s):  
David Elliman

Screening can be a very important means to reduce the morbidity and mortality of conditions that cannot currently be prevented. However, it also has the capacity to do harm by incorrectly labelling people as having a condition, when in reality they do not, thus causing anxiety and sometimes resulting in unnecessary interventions. The UK National Screening Committee recommends national policy on screening on the basis of the evidence of the overall effects of a potential programme and its cost-effectiveness. Once a programme is introduced, it should be carefully monitored to ensure that it lives up to expectations, coverage is appropriately high, the expected outcomes are delivered, and that it does not increase inequality. More detail can be found on the UK National Screening Committee website.

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. A653-A654
Author(s):  
E Clay ◽  
A Jamotte ◽  
AT Cohen ◽  
B van Hout ◽  
PD Gumbs ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. L. Lowe ◽  
M. T. Abou-Saleh

The co-occurrence of substance misuse and other psychiatric disorder (dual diagnosis) has been increasingly recognized in the UK. Clinical studies of patients with severe mental disorders showed high rates of substance misuse with poor clinical and social outcome. These patients often fall ‘between the cracks’ of the separate general psychiatric and addiction services. This has necessitated the development of a national policy advocating the provision of integrated care within mainstream psychiatric services. There are emergent models of good practice that require evaluation of effectiveness and cost effectiveness.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1495974
Author(s):  
Emilie Clay ◽  
Aurélien Jamotte ◽  
Peter Verhamme ◽  
Alexander T. Cohen ◽  
Ben. A. Van Hout ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (36) ◽  
pp. 1-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Fortnum ◽  
Obioha C Ukoumunne ◽  
Chris Hyde ◽  
Rod S Taylor ◽  
Mara Ozolins ◽  
...  

BackgroundIdentification of permanent hearing impairment at the earliest possible age is crucial to maximise the development of speech and language. Universal newborn hearing screening identifies the majority of the 1 in 1000 children born with a hearing impairment, but later onset can occur at any time and there is no optimum time for further screening. A universal but non-standardised school entry screening (SES) programme is in place in many parts of the UK but its value is questioned.ObjectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of hearing screening tests and the cost-effectiveness of the SES programme in the UK.DesignSystematic review, case–control diagnostic accuracy study, comparison of routinely collected data for services with and without a SES programme, parental questionnaires, observation of practical implementation and cost-effectiveness modelling.SettingSecond- and third-tier audiology services; community.ParticipantsChildren aged 4–6 years and their parents.Main outcome measuresDiagnostic accuracy of two hearing screening devices, referral rate and source, yield, age at referral and cost per quality-adjusted life-year.ResultsThe review of diagnostic accuracy studies concluded that research to date demonstrates marked variability in the design, methodological quality and results. The pure-tone screen (PTS) (Amplivox, Eynsham, UK) and HearCheck (HC) screener (Siemens, Frimley, UK) devices had high sensitivity (PTS ≥ 89%, HC ≥ 83%) and specificity (PTS ≥ 78%, HC ≥ 83%) for identifying hearing impairment. The rate of referral for hearing problems was 36% lower with SES (Nottingham) relative to no SES (Cambridge) [rate ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.69;p < 0.001]. The yield of confirmed cases did not differ between areas with and without SES (rate ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06;p = 0.12). The mean age of referral did not differ between areas with and without SES for all referrals but children with confirmed hearing impairment were older at referral in the site with SES (mean age difference 0.47 years, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.70 years;p < 0.001). Parental responses revealed that the consequences to the family of the referral process are minor. A SES programme is unlikely to be cost-effective and, using base-case assumptions, is dominated by a no screening strategy. A SES programme could be cost-effective if there are fewer referrals associated with SES programmes or if referrals occur more quickly with SES programmes.ConclusionsA SES programme using the PTS or HC screener is unlikely to be effective in increasing the identified number of cases with hearing impairment and lowering the average age at identification and is therefore unlikely to represent good value for money. This finding is, however, critically dependent on the results of the observational study comparing Nottingham and Cambridge, which has limitations. The following are suggested: systematic reviews of the accuracy of devices used to measure hearing at school entry; characterisation and measurement of the cost-effectiveness of different approaches to the ad-hoc referral system; examination of programme specificity as opposed to test specificity; further observational comparative studies of different programmes; and opportunistic trials of withdrawal of SES programmes.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN61668996.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Karnon ◽  
Alan Brennan ◽  
Abdullah Pandor ◽  
Gerry Fowkes ◽  
Amanda Lee ◽  
...  

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. e1003860
Author(s):  
Tiffeny James ◽  
Naaheed Mukadam ◽  
Andrew Sommerlad ◽  
Hossein Rostami Pour ◽  
Melanie Knowles ◽  
...  

Background National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. Methods and findings We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country’s official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded. Conclusions National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world’s countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vilius Floreskul ◽  
Fatima Juma ◽  
Anjali Daniel ◽  
Imran Zamir ◽  
Zulf Mughal ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Daisy Fancourt

In recent decades, there has been an increasing number of national policy and strategy papers discussing arts in health in countries around the world. Some of this activity has been driven by national arts bodies, championing the value of the arts in health and wellbeing and advocating for their inclusion within core arts funding and practice. Other activity has been led by health bodies, including health departments within governments and health services themselves. This chapter explores some of the most influential documents and considers their implication for research and practice. It draws on case studies of activity within Ireland, the UK, the USA, Australia, and Nordic countries.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document