Care of Transgender Patients: A General Practice Quality Improvement Approach

Primary care must ensure high quality lifelong care is offered to trans and gender minority patients who are known to have poor health and adverse healthcare experiences. This quality improvement project aimed to interrogate and audit the data of trans and gender minority patients in one primary care population in England. A new data collection instrument was created examining pathways of care, assessments and interventions undertaken, monitoring, and complications. General practitioners identified a sample from the patient population and then performed an audit to examine against an established standard of care. No appropriate primary care audit standard was found. There was inconsistency between multiple UK gender identity clinics’ (GIC) individual recommended schedules of care and between specialty guidelines. Using an international, secondary care, evidence-informed guideline, it appeared that up to two-thirds of patients did not receive all recommended monitoring standards, largely due to inconsistencies between GIC and international guidance. It is imperative that an evidence-based primary care guideline is devised alongside measurable standards. Given the findings of long waits, high rates of medical complexity, and some undesired treatment outcomes (including a fifth of patients stopping hormones of whom more than half cited regret or detransition experiences), this small but population-based quality improvement approach should be replicated and expanded upon at scale.

726 Consenting for Surgery During the Pandemic: A Closed-Loop Audit on Discussing and Documenting the Risks of Hospital-Acquired COVID-19

Introduction There is limited data on the nosocomial transmission of COVID-19. The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) have published guidance on consenting for surgery, which includes discussing the risks of hospital-acquired COVID-19 with patients as part of the consenting process1. We performed a closed-loop audit on our unit’s consenting practice to assess compliance using the RCS guidelines as the audit standard. Method A retrospective case review, including elective and emergency procedures, were identified from June to November 2020. Consent forms were reviewed for evidence of patient counselling for the risks of hospital-acquired COVID-19 using the RCS guidance for comparison. Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR swabs and radiological imaging suggestive of COVID-19 within 30-days were also assessed. We undertook the 1st cycle of data collection in September. Following this, we used a local meeting to educate the surgical team. The 2nd cycle (re-audit) was performed in December. Results In cycle 1, from June to August 17/29 (59%) case notes documented the discussion of the COVID-19 risk. None of these patients contracted the virus. In cycle 2, from September to November, compliance improved to 28/33 (80%). One (3%) patient had contracted COVID-19. They had a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR swab and signs suggestive of COVID-19 on their CT chest. Conclusions The re-audit demonstrated an improvement in our consenting practice from 59% to 80%. One patient had hospital-acquired COVID-19 during our period of data collection, which reflects current data that suggests nosocomial COVID-19 is rare2. With new advisory guidelines, it is important to discuss these risks.

1444 Is FBC Being Investigated Within 32 Hours of Surgery in Neck of Femur Fractures?

Introduction The UK treats approximately 76,000 neck of femur (NOF) fractures annually (NHFD 2018). These patients are known to be frail and dehydrated upon arrival to the emergency department. Surgery can expose patients to substantial blood loss both preoperatively and postoperatively (Foss et al). Furthermore, studies have shown that postoperative anaemia is detrimental in patients who have had hip surgery (Marval et al 2014). Thus, it is imperative to monitor patients’ haemoglobin (Hb) levels immediately after the operation so that optimum treatment can be assured. The current audit standard in our local trust states that all patients must have their full blood count (FBC) within 32 hours post-surgery. As Covid-19 has brought disruption to the NHS, It is important for us to highlight any issues that arise in the monitoring of Hb in the post-operative phase of these NOF patients. Method Using retrospective analysis, this study analysed the number of patients having the FBC within 32 hours post-surgery during the pandemic (n = 60) and was compared to a similar cohort pre-pandemic (n = 139). Results 91% of patients overall had their Hb checked within 32 hours. 92% in the pre-covid group had a Hb check within time compared to 81% in the covid group. The risk ratio calculated was 1.5. Conclusions Conclusively, patients in the covid group were 1.5 times more likely to have their FBC checked past 32 hours post-surgery. However, this finding was not significant. Overall, the audit standard was not met.

THE IMPACT OF KEY AUDIT MATTERS DISCLOSURE ON COMMUNICATIVE VALUE OF THE AUDITOR’S REPORT: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

This research aims to discuss whether the disclosure of key audit matters (KAM) increases the communicative value of the auditor’s report. It also examines factors that need to be considered related to KAM disclosure. It is carried out in connection with the issuance of the Exposure Draft of Indonesia Audit Standard (AS) 701 on ”Pengomunikasian Hal Audit Utama dalam Laporan Auditor Independen” which was adopted from the International Standard on Auditing 701. In Indonesia, no research was found yet related to this topic. By conducting a systematic literature review of the latest articles from 2012 to 2021, this study found that KAM disclosure increases the communicative value of the auditor’s report, which is useful for report users in their decision-making. This study also informed specific areas that were often disclosed as KAM and provided information related to the factors that can decrease the communicative value of KAM disclosure. The results support the plan of AS 701 implementation in Indonesia because it will increase the communicative value of the auditor’s report. This study will be of interest to auditors in preparing the implementation of AS 701, report users in understanding KAM disclosure, and regulators as initial infor­mation regarding KAM disclosure to support their duties when AS 701 has been effectively implemented in Indonesia.

Clozapine & constipation: an audit of bowel habit monitoring and laxative prescribing in inpatients on clozapine

AimsTo establish how often bowel habits are monitored in inpatients on clozapineTo determine how many of these patients are prescribed laxatives and whether these are utilisedBackgroundIt's estimated that 30-60% of patients will suffer from constipation whilst on clozapine; this can lead to ileus, intestinal obstruction and bowel ischaemia, all of which can be fatal. Constipation is much more common than clozapine-induced blood dyscrasias, and has a higher mortality rate. Despite this, there is no strict universal framework for bowel habit monitoring equivalent to the compulsory FBC monitoring. Local trust guidance indicates that bowel habits should be monitored regularly, at least at any point of blood sampling. However, monitoring processes across the trust were noted to be variable, as were laxative prescribing practices.MethodThe data sample of current inpatients on clozapine across the trust was identified from pharmacy records. The patient's Rio notes from the preceding 3 months were searched for predetermined terms relating to bowel habits and constipation, and the notes were then analysed for assessment of bowel habit. The number of FBCs collected during this 3 month period was then used to produce comparison with the audit standard. The data on laxative prescribing were collected from current medication lists on EPMA.ResultA data sample of 31 current inpatients was identified. The audit found that only 54.8% (17) of patients had their bowel habits monitored at least with every FBC taken. There was significant variability between different wards, with the best performing ward having 100% adherence to the audit standard, and the worst performing having 0%. In terms of laxative prescribing, it was found that 87.1% (27) of patients had at least 1 regular or 1 PRN laxative prescribed. Regular laxatives were prescribed for 61.2% (19) of patients, whereas only PRN laxatives were prescribed in 25.8% (8) of patients. Of those prescribed only PRN laxatives, only 50% (4) ever utilised this medication.ConclusionBowel habits are not consistently monitored across the trust in inpatients on clozapine, leaving room for potentially life-threatening side effects to be missed. Additionally, regular laxative prescribing is not standard throughout the trust, which could further add to the potential for significant constipation-related morbidity to occur. A standard method of monitoring bowel habits throughout the trust, as well as a trust laxative prescribing policy, could be a way of remedying this issue and preventing harmful outcomes for our patients on clozapine.

The physical healthcare of patients in secure hospitals: setting standards for medical equipment

AimsThe increased morbidity and mortality relating to the poor physical health of patients with severe mental illness has repeatedly been an area identified as requiring improvement. Despite this, no national minimum standard has been published around the minimum level of physical health equipment that should be available within an inpatient psychiatric setting.The aim of this project was to improve and standardise availability of physical health equipment across the five clinical areas within a medium secure inpatient forensic setting, thus enabling optimal and timely medical care and physical examination of patients to occur.MethodThis project used a combination of audit and quality improvement practices. An audit standard was created and current practice was established within the 5 clinical areas of a Medium Secure Forensic Unit. Improvements were made in a systematic and measured way and two audit cycles were completed.ResultAt baseline, the attainment of audit standard ranged from 14-76%. Clinical areas were sharing equipment and there was an inconsistency as to where and how equipment was being stored. Changes implemented included redistribution and reorganisation of equipment which increased attainment to between 48% - 86%. Following this further equipment was ordered and the equipment was separated into that which was required on a daily basis to conduct physical observations and more specialist specific examination equipment. Re-audit found attainment across the five clinical areas being between 90-100%.ConclusionMonitoring of physical health within psychiatric inpatient settings is a key area of patient care, and is frequently identified as requiring improvement. Without access to equipment to monitor and assess physical health, this becomes challenging and potentially poorly completed. By standardizing available equipment and furthermore through practical steps such as separating the equipment required on a daily basis and that used less frequently the retention of equipment improved. This enables delivery of high quality, timely and thorough monitoring and assessment of physical health to be achievable.

An audit into the monitoring of off-label antipsychotics in primary care

AimsTo ascertain whether patients prescribed second generation antipsychotics for off-label indications are being monitored and screened adequately for physical health side-effects.BackgroundThe prevalence of off-label antipsychotic use has increased significantly over recent decades. Common off-licence uses include dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder, adjunctive treatment for unipolar depression and personality disorders. Recent studies have demonstrated that up to 65% of antipsychotic prescriptions are now off-label. Since the metabolic side-effects of second-generation antipsychotics are well-established, guidelines have emphasised the need for active, routine physical health screening of all individuals taking these drugs. However, there have been few studies or reviews which have specifically investigated screening rates of individuals receiving antipsychotic medications for off-licence indications.MethodAn audit of patients taking second-generation antipsychotics for off-label indications, under the caseload of Neighbourhoods 1, 3 and 4 of Lewisham Assessment & Liaison team, was conducted. After isolating individual patients fulfilling inclusion criteria, patient investigation documents were requested from relevant GP practices. 40 patients were isolated in total, and data were successfully collected in 60% (n = 24). Data were collected via a proforma. This consisted of patient information, indications for antipsychotic use, and each variable to be monitored. The audit standard used was the recommendations of the 12th Maudsley guidelines. Data were then entered into SPSS and analysed.ResultThe most common reasons for off-label antipsychotic prescribing were Emotionally Unstable Personality disorder (42%, n = 10) and depression (29%, n = 7). Findings demonstrated that 54% (n = 13) of patients audited had ‘basic’ blood screening (FBC, U&E, LFTs), however glucose (38%, n = 9), Prolactin (13%, n = 3), and Creatine Kinase (0%, n = 0), and monitoring was less frequent. 0% (n = 0) were completely monitored as per audit standard.ConclusionPrimary care monitoring of off-label antipsychotics is unsatisfactory, with no patients having a complete set of investigations. Reasons for this are unclear at this stage, however based on initial discussion with GP surgeries, may be due to lack of education regarding screening investigations, patients lost between primary and secondary care services, and a lack of clarity regarding responsibility and designated roles. This audit will be expanded to also include patients from Neighbourhood 2 of the Lewisham Assessment & Liaison team. A more detailed investigation will be conducted into the barriers to physical health screening, such that a targeted intervention can be implanted.

Basic clinical equipment for physical health assessment in mid Essex inpatient units

AimsIt is trust policy that the Basic Clinical Equipment for Physical Health Assessment should be available on each unit. The standard for this audit is therefore 100% completion.BackgroundThis was a cross-sectional study of six mental health units across Mid Essex. We audited equipment and consumables in comparison to trust policies. For the purpose of the audit we designed an audit tool.MethodOverall compliance across all wards for all audited items was 77.5% (64.9% – 87.5%). Average compliance for equipment provision 83.3% (73.9 %– 91.3%) was greater than that for consumables 72.1% (58.8% – 82.4%).ResultWhen looking at the compliance on each unit separately, our data show that no unit has met the standard of 100% for equipment or consumables. From all units, one of the two older adults’ inpatient units had the highest overall compliance and highest compliance for consumables at 87.5% and 82.4% respectively while the perinatal unit had the lowest overall compliance and lowest compliance for consumables at 64.9% and 58.8 respectively. For the equipment compliance, intensive care unit and one of the older adults tied for the highest compliance at 91.3% while male inpatient unit and perinatal inpatient unit were tied the lowest compliance at 73.9%.ConclusionThis is an audit to assess the availability of Basic Clinical Equipment for Physical Health Assessment on inpatient units in Mid Essex. With an audit standard of 100% completion, it shows that overall compliance on all units was 77.5% which is not meeting our standard.