scholarly journals Adherence to guidelines on documentation required for registration to London GP practice websites: a mixed-methods cross-sectional study

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (687) ◽  
pp. e731-e739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Hodson ◽  
Elizabeth Ford ◽  
Maxwell Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adherence To Guidelines ◽  
Registration Process ◽  
Standard Operating ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Website Content ◽  
Immigration And Ethnicity

BackgroundThe most common obstacle to registration with a GP practice in the UK is difficulty presenting proof of address. NHS guidelines stipulate that inability to provide ID or proof of address is not reasonable grounds to refuse registration. Practices may ask patients to present ID/proof of address, but need a policy in case patients cannot.AimTo find out how many London GP practice websites ask for documentation without a policy for where this cannot be provided and compare how GP practice websites describe the registration process in patient-facing material.Design and settingCross-sectional study of practices from 10 London boroughs (n = 100).MethodA proforma was piloted and then implemented, recording whether practices ‘demanded’, ‘requested’, or ‘mentioned’ photo ID or proof of address and whether there was a plan for patients without documentation. Text relating to documentation from all 100 practices for registration was subjected to thematic analysis.ResultsOut of 100 practices 75% asked for documentation. The majority of these were ‘demanded’. A plan was included for people without documentation in 12% of practice websites. Five themes emerged from analysis of website content: reassuring people without documentation; diverse requirements between practices; conflating administration and treatment; withholding treatment; and immigration and ethnicity.ConclusionMany practice websites breached NHS Standard Operating Principles and possibly the Equalities Act 2010. All practices should create a clear policy for patients who do not have photo ID/proof of address (for example, including a named receptionist), and update their websites accordingly.

The ANALYSIS OF STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOP) ON CUPPING THERAPY SERVICES IN DKI JAKARTA

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-107
Author(s):  
Tri Wahyuni Lestari ◽  
Annisa Rizky Afrilia ◽  
Nita Prihartini
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Therapy ◽  
Standard Operating Procedure ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cupping Therapy ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Operational Procedure ◽  
Standard Operating ◽  
Therapy Services

Traditional cupping therapy is an alternative therapy that is invasive in society. The Indonesian Cupping Association (PBI) has established a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) as a guide for its practitioners in service. In this study, an analysis of the SOP items was evaluated on 30 cupping practitioners in the DKI Jakarta area. This study aims to obtain an overview of the SOP with easy, medium, and difficult categories that can be fulfilled by cupping practitioners and are expected to provide input to the Standard Cupping Operational Procedure module. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional study, conducted on 30 cupping practitioners in DKI Jakarta who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data collection method was done by observing cupping practitioners three times each to avoid bias in their behavior. In addition, interviews were also conducted with 30 clients who use cupping services to assess SOP  impression. Data analysis explained descriptively. Results show that there were SOP activities in the Standard Cupping Operational Procedure module with an easy category of 64.5%, a moderate category of 14.5%, and a difficult category of 21%.  There are easy categories that mean infrastructure, namely 72.7%, 13.6% moderate category, and difficult category of 13.6%. The conclusion contained in the SOP are included in the easy category. However, SOP items still need attention and supervision, especially SOP items with medium and difficult categories.

scholarly journals A Cross-Sectional Study of Experiences and Attitudes towards Clinical Audit of Farm Animal Veterinary Surgeons in the United Kingdom

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Katie Waine ◽  
Rachel S. Dean ◽  
Chris Hudson ◽  
Jonathan Huxley ◽  
Marnie L. Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Audit ◽  
Nationwide Survey ◽  
Clinical Work ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Farm Animal ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Veterinary Surgeons ◽  
The Uk

Clinical audit is a quality improvement tool used to assess and improve the clinical services provided to patients. This is the first study to investigate the extent to which clinical audit is understood and utilised in farm animal veterinary practice. A cross-sectional study to collect experiences and attitudes of farm animal veterinary surgeons in the UK towards clinical audit was conducted using an online nationwide survey. The survey revealed that whilst just under three-quarters (n = 237/325; 73%) of responding veterinary surgeons had heard of clinical audit, nearly 50% (n = 148/301) had never been involved in a clinical audit of any species. The participants’ knowledge of what a clinical audit was varied substantially, with many respondents reporting not receiving training on clinical audit at the undergraduate or postgraduate level. Respondents that had participated in a clinical audit suggested that protected time away from clinical work was required for the process to be completed successfully. This novel study suggests that clinical audit is undertaken to some extent in farm animal practice and that practitioner perception is that it can bring benefits, but was felt that more resources and support were needed for it to be implemented successfully on a wider scale.

scholarly journals Association between home birth and breast feeding outcomes: a cross-sectional study in 28 125 mother–infant pairs from Ireland and the UK

BMJ Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. e010551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Quigley ◽  
Cristina Taut ◽  
Tamara Zigman ◽  
Louise Gallagher ◽  
Harry Campbell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Feeding ◽  
Home Birth ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e019952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harriet Ruth Feldman ◽  
Nicholas J DeVito ◽  
Jonathan Mendel ◽  
David E Carroll ◽  
Ben Goldacre
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Current System ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Gift ◽  
The Uk

ObjectiveWe set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees.DesignCross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers.SettingNHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care organisations) in England.Participants236 Trusts were contacted, of which 217 responded.Main outcome measuresWe assessed all disclosures for completeness and openness, scoring them for achieving each of five measures of transparency.Results185 Trusts (78%) provided a register. 71 Trusts did not respond within the 28 day time limit required by the FoIA. Most COI registers were incomplete by design, and did not contain the information necessary to assess conflicts of interest. 126/185 (68%) did not record the names of recipients. 47/185 (25%) did not record the cash value of the gift or hospitality. Only 31/185 registers (16%) contained the names of recipients, the names of donors, and the cash amounts received. 18/185 (10%) contained none of: recipient name, donor name, and cash amount. Only 15 Trusts had their disclosure register publicly available online (6%). We generated a transparency index assessing whether each Trust met the following criteria: responded on time; provided a register; had a register with fields identifying donor, recipient, and cash amount; provided a register in a format that allowed further analysis; and had their register publicly available online. Mean attainment was 1.9/5; no NHS trust met all five criteria.ConclusionOverall, recording of employees’ conflicts of interest by NHS trusts is poor. None of the NHS Trusts in England met all transparency criteria. 19 did not respond to our FoIA requests, 51 did not provide a Gifts and Hospitality Register and only 31 of the registers provided contained enough information to assess employees’ conflicts of interest. Despite obligations on healthcare professionals to disclose conflicts of interest, and on organisations to record these, the current system for logging and tracking such disclosures is not functioning adequately. We propose a simple national template for reporting conflicts of interest, modelled on the US ‘Sunshine Act’.

scholarly journals Political views of doctors in the UK: a cross-sectional study

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (10) ◽  
pp. 880-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate L Mandeville ◽  
Rose-Marie Satherley ◽  
Jennifer A Hall ◽  
Shailen Sutaria ◽  
Chris Willott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Political Views ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundLittle is known about the political views of doctors in the UK despite doctors' importance in the functioning of the National Health Service (NHS).MethodsThis is a survey-based, cross-sectional study in which we asked questions about voting behaviour in 2015 and 2017 UK general elections and 2016 referendum on leaving the European Union (EU) (Brexit), and questions relating to recent health policies.Results1172 doctors (45.1% women) from 1295 responded to an online survey. 60.5% described their political views as ‘left-wing’ and 62.2% described themselves as ‘liberal’. 79.4% of respondents voted to remain in the EU in the 2016 referendum compared with 48.1% of voters as a whole (χ2=819.8, p<0.001). 98.6% of respondents agreed that EU nationals working in the NHS should be able to remain in the UK after Brexit. The median score for the impact of Brexit on the NHS on a scale of 0 (worst impact) to 10 (best impact) was 2 (IQR=1–4). Most respondents agreed with the introduction of minimum alcohol pricing in the UK (73.9%), charging patients who are not eligible for NHS treatment for non-urgent care (70.6%) and protecting a portion of national spending for the NHS (87.1%). 65.8% thought there was too much use of NHS-funded private sector provision in their medical practice. Specialty, income and grade were associated with divergent opinions.ConclusionsUK doctors are left-leaning and liberal in general, which is reflected in their opinions on topical health policy issues. Doctors in the UK voted differently from the general electorate in recent polls.

scholarly journals Survey of the effect of viewing an online e-cigarette advertisement on attitudes towards cigarette and e-cigarette use in adults located in the UK and USA: a cross-sectional study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e027525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Booth ◽  
Ian P Albery ◽  
Sharon Cox ◽  
Daniel Frings
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Social Acceptability ◽  
Cigarette Use ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Likert Scales ◽  
Post Exposure ◽  
Smoking Group ◽  
The Uk

ObjectivesThis study explored the potential for e-cigarette advertisements to (1) enhance attitudes towards cigarettes and/or (2) reduce barriers to e-cigarettes uptake. The study tested whether exposure to an online electronic cigarette advertisement changed attitudes towards cigarettes and e-cigarettes in smokers, non-smokers, e-cigarette users and dual users (smokers who also use e-cigarettes).DesignCross-sectional studySettingOnline surveyParticipantsAdults (n=964) aged 18 to 65 years old (M=36 years, SD=11.6) from the UK and USA. Participants were grouped into current non-smokers, e-cigarette users, dual users and smokers.InterventionsParticipants viewed 1 of 15 randomly assigned online e-cigarette advertisements.Primary measuresThree single seven-point Likert scales measuring health, desirability, social acceptability were completed pre and post advertisement exposure.ResultsPost exposure all smoking groups showed a decrease or no change in how socially acceptable or desirable they rated cigarettes. Paradoxically, dual users rated cigarettes as being significantly healthier after viewing the advertisement (p=0.01) while all other smoking group ratings remained the same. There was an increase or no change in how all smoking groups perceived the healthiness and desirability of e-cigarettesConclusionsWe observed no evidence that exposure to an e-cigarette advertisement renormalises or encourages smoking in smokers, non-smokers or e-cigarette users. However, there is some indication that viewing an e-cigarette advertisement may increase duals users’ perceptions of the health of smoking.

scholarly journals Engagement, not personal characteristics, was associated with the seriousness of regulatory adjudication decisions about physicians: a cross-sectional study

BMC Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier A. Caballero ◽  
Steve P. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
Statistical Modelling ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
Apparent Relationship ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Background Outcomes of processes questioning a physician’s ability to practise —e.g. disciplinary or regulatory— may strongly impact their career and provided care. However, it is unclear what factors relate systematically to such outcomes. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we investigate this via multivariate, step-wise, statistical modelling of all 1049 physicians referred for regulatory adjudication at the UK medical tribunal, from June 2012 to May 2017, within a population of 310,659. In order of increasing seriousness, outcomes were: no impairment (of ability to practise), impairment, suspension (of right to practise), or erasure (its loss). This gave adjusted odds ratios (OR) for: age, race, sex, whether physicians first qualified domestically or internationally, area of practice (e.g. GP, specialist), source of initial referral, allegation type, whether physicians attended their outcome hearing, and whether they were legally represented for it. Results There was no systematic association between the seriousness of outcomes and the age, race, sex, domestic/international qualification, or the area of practice of physicians (ORs p≥0.05), except for specialists who tended to receive outcomes milder than suspension or erasure. Crucially, an apparent relationship of outcomes to age (Kruskal-Wallis, p=0.009) or domestic/international qualification (χ2,p=0.014) disappeared once controlling for hearing attendance (ORs p≥0.05). Both non-attendance and lack of legal representation were consistently related to more serious outcomes (ORs [95% confidence intervals], 5.28 [3.89, 7.18] and 1.87 [1.34, 2.60], respectively, p<0.001). Conclusions All else equal, personal characteristics or first qualification place were unrelated to the seriousness of regulatory outcomes in the UK. Instead, engagement (attendance and legal representation), allegation type, and referral source were importantly associated to outcomes. All this may generalize to other countries and professions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document