One in 100 using out-of-hours primary care needs hospital care within three days

BMJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
pp. i5974
Author(s):  
Susan Mayor
Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Nina J. Zhu ◽  
Monsey McLeod ◽  
Cliodna A. M. McNulty ◽  
Donna M. Lecky ◽  
Alison H. Holmes ◽  
...  

We describe the trend of antibiotic prescribing in out-of-hours (OOH) general practices (GP) before and during England’s first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We analysed practice-level prescribing records between January 2016 to June 2020 to report the trends for the total prescribing volume, prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics and key agents included in the national Quality Premium. We performed a time-series analysis to detect measurable changes in the prescribing volume associated with COVID-19. Before COVID-19, the total prescribing volume and the percentage of broad-spectrum antibiotics continued to decrease in-hours (IH). The prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics was higher in OOH (OOH: 10.1%, IH: 8.7%), but a consistent decrease in the trimethoprim-to-nitrofurantoin ratio was observed OOH. The OOH antibiotic prescribing volume diverged from the historical trend in March 2020 and started to decrease by 5088 items per month. Broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing started to increase in OOH and IH. In OOH, co-amoxiclav and doxycycline peaked in March to May in 2020, which was out of sync with seasonality peaks (Winter) in previous years. While this increase might be explained by the implementation of the national guideline to use co-amoxiclav and doxycycline to manage pneumonia in the community during COVID-19, further investigation is required to see whether the observed reduction in OOH antibiotic prescribing persists and how this reduction might influence antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Edmond Brasseur ◽  
Allison Gilbert ◽  
Anne-Françoise Donneau ◽  
Justine Monseur ◽  
Alexandre Ghuysen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Aoife Watson ◽  
Donna McConnell ◽  
Vivien Coates

Abstract Aim To determine which community-based interventions are most effective at reducing unscheduled hospital care for hypoglycaemic events in adults with diabetes. Methods Medline Ovid, CINAHL Plus and ProQuest Health and Medical Collection were searched using both key search terms and medical subject heading terms (MeSH) to identify potentially relevant studies. Eligible studies were those that involved a community-based intervention to reduce unscheduled admissions in adults with diabetes. Papers were initially screened by the primary researcher and then a secondary reviewer. Relevant data were then extracted from papers that met the inclusion criteria. Results The search produced 2226 results, with 1360 duplicates. Of the remaining 866 papers, 198 were deemed appropriate based on titles, 90 were excluded following abstract review. A total of 108 full papers were screened with 19 full papers included in the review. The sample size of the 19 papers ranged from n = 25 to n = 104,000. The average ages within the studies ranged from 41 to 74 years with females comprising 57% of the participants. The following community-based interventions were identified that explored reducing unscheduled hospital care in people with diabetes; telemedicine, education, integrated care pathways, enhanced primary care and care management teams. Conclusions This systematic review shows that a range of community-based interventions, requiring different levels of infrastructure, are effective in reducing unscheduled hospital care for hypoglycaemia in people with diabetes. Investment in effective community-based interventions such as integrated care and patient education must be a priority to shift the balance of care from secondary to primary care, thereby reducing hospital admissions.


1990 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Ludder Jackson
Keyword(s):  

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 1288-1305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric K. Shaw ◽  
Jenna Howard ◽  
Elizabeth C. Clark ◽  
Rebecca S. Etz ◽  
Rajiv Arya ◽  
...  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-290
Author(s):  
Paul C. Young ◽  
Yu Shyr ◽  
M. Anthony Schork

Objective. To determine the roles of primary care physicians and specialists in the medical care of children with serious heart disease. Setting. Pediatric Cardiology Division; Tertiary Care Children's Hospital. Subjects. Convenience sample of parents, primary care physicians, and pediatric cardiologists of 92 children with serious heart disease. Design. Questionnaire study; questionnaires based on 16 medical care needs, encompassing basic primary care services, care specific to the child's heart disease and general issues related to chronic illness. Results. All children had a primary care physician (PCP), and both they and the parents (P) reported high utilization of PCP for basic primary care services. However, there was little involvement of PCP in providing care for virtually any aspect of the child's heart disease. Parents expressed a low level of confidence in the ability of PCP in general or their child's own PCP to meet many of their child's medical care needs. Both PCP and pediatric cardiologists (PC) were significantly more likely than parents to see a role for PCP in providing for care specific to the heart disease as well as more general issues related to chronic illness. PC and PCP generally agreed about the role PCP should play, although PC saw a bigger role for PCP in providing advice about the child's activity than PCP themselves did. PC were less likely to see the PCP as able to follow the child for long term complications than PCP did. PC were more likely than PCP to believe that PCP were too busy or were inadequately reimbursed to care for children with serious heart disease. Only about one-third of parents reported discussing psychosocial, family, economic, or genetic issues with any provider, and PCP were rarely involved in these aspects of chronic illness. Conclusions. Primary care physicians do not take an active role in managing either the condition-specific or the more general aspects of this serious chronic childhood illness. With appropriate information and support from their specialist colleagues primary care physicians could provide much of the care for this group of children. Generalists and specialists are both responsible for educating and influencing parents about the role primary care physicians can play in caring for children with serious chronic illness.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document