Prescribing errors in general practice

Prescribing errors are relatively common in general practice. Jennifer McCutcheon provides an overview of common prescribing errors and how they can be prevented Nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals are increasingly becoming prescribers and many of them work autonomously in general practice. Prescribing professionals have a duty to understand what a prescribing error is, common examples of errors in practice, how they are prevented and how they can be investigated and reported should they occur.

Ten years of NIHR research training: perceptions of the programmes: a qualitative interview study

ObjectivesThe UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) training programmes were created to build and sustain research capacity in healthcare. Following the training programme 10-year strategic review, this qualitative study aimed to deepen understanding of facilitators and barriers for those progressing through NIHR-supported research careers.DesignSemistructured qualitative study.Data collection and analysisTelephone interviews conducted between May and August 2017 were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using Framework Approach.SettingUK National Health Service (NHS) Trusts, university medical schools, District General Hospitals, Integrated Academic Training Programme centres and Research Design Services across the North East, North West, South East and South West of England, London and the Midlands.ParticipantsFourteen women and eight men, of whom, 14 were previous or current NIHR personal awardees (seven doctors and seven allied health professionals (AHPs) or nurses) and eight were managers (staff within clinical or university training-related roles).Results(1) NIHR awards were viewed as transformative for research careers; (2) however, there were perceptions of a biased ‘playing field’. (3) Inequalities were perceived for AHPs and nurses, those outside of established research institutes and those in ‘unfashionable’ specialisms. (4) While support for NIHR awards contributed to a healthy research culture, (5) short-term awards were perceived as a barrier to continuing an independent research career.ConclusionsParticipants perceived many strengths of the NIHR training programmes in terms of developing individual careers and research capacity. Areas in which improvement could enhance the ability to attract, develop and retain researcher were identified. Our findings are of relevance to schemes in other countries, where healthcare researchers experience similar challenges. Further work is needed to overcome barriers and ensure equity of access to, and success within, clinical research training schemes to sustain the research workforce needed to address future global health challenges.

A study on waiting time of the OPD Patient in a Multispecialty Hospital

In this study, the OPD is defined as the hospital's department where patients received diagnoses and/or treatment but did not stay overnight. Patients spend substantial amount of time in the clinics, waiting for the services to be delivered by physicians and other allied health professionals. The degree to which health consumers are satisfied with the care received is strongly related to the quality of the waiting experience. The methodology for Data collection is a balance of primary and secondary sources. Primary outcome based upon personal visits to the hospital and hospital database. Secondary outcomes based upon the information collected through questionnaire. The present study was aimed at studying the waiting time of outpatient in the multi-speciality hospital. Our observation reveals that many patients face the difficulties in finding the various OPDs. On an average 10 minutes of waiting time outside the various O.P.D. and other departments.As the Hospital is coming up with the new hospital building, it is expected that infrastructural issues can be taken care during the planning and development stage. Assessment of patient’s waiting time and satisfaction is cost effective way for evaluation of heath care services. Keywords: OPD, Waiting Time, Patient management, Hospital management.

Differences in goals of care discussion outcomes among healthcare professionals: an observational cross-sectional study

Background: Goals of care discussions ensure patients receive the care that they want. Recent studies have recognized the opportunity for allied health professionals, such as nurses, in facilitating goals of care discussions. However, the outcomes of such interventions are not well studied. Aim: To compare the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by physicians and nurses. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to an Internal Medicine unit from January 2018 to August 2019. A comprehensive chart review was performed on a random sample of patients. Patient’s decision to accept or refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation was recorded and analyzed. Analysis was stratified by patients’ comorbidity burden and illness severity. Setting/Participants: The study took place at a tertiary care center and included 200 patients. Patients aged ⩾ 18 were included. Patients who have had pre-existing goals of care documentation were excluded. Results: About 52% of the goals of care discussions were completed by nurses and 48% by physicians. Patients were more likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nurse-led discussions compared to physician-led ones (80.8% vs 61.4%, p = 0.003). Multiple regression showed that patients with higher comorbidity burden (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62–0.82), more severe illness (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.88–0.99), and physician-led goals of care discussions (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15–0.62) were less likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Conclusions: There was a significant difference between the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by nurses and physicians. Patients were more likely to accept aggressive resuscitative measures in nurse-led goals of care discussions. Further research efforts are needed to identify the factors contributing to this discrepancy, and to devise ways of improving goals of care discussion delivery.

Independent and Supplementary Prescribing

Written by a group of multi-professional authors, this fully updated third edition builds on the success of this classic text. The book explores a number of key areas for prescribers, including prescribing within a multidisciplinary team context, consultation skills, ethical and legal issues surrounding prescribing, the psychology and sociology of prescribing, and applied pharmacology. Among the other topics featured are monitoring skills, medicines concordance, evidence based prescribing, prescribing within a public health perspective, calculation skills, prescribing in dermatology, and minimizing the risk of prescribing errors. Each chapter has been revised and additional chapters on antimicrobial prescribing, education and training to become a prescriber, and a new section on renal impairment have been added. This book is an essential resource for both new and experienced prescribers and anyone undertaking the non-medical prescribing (NMP) programme including nurses, pharmacists, allied health professionals and optometrists.

Curriculum for vestibular medicine (vestmed) proposed by the barany society

This document presents the initiative of the Bárány Society to improve diagnosis and care of patients presenting with vestibular symptoms worldwide. The Vestibular Medicine (VestMed) concept embraces a wide approach to the potential causes of vestibular symptoms, acknowledging that vertigo, dizziness, and unsteadiness are non-specific symptoms that may arise from a broad spectrum of disorders, spanning from the inner ear to the brainstem, cerebellum and supratentorial cerebral networks, to many disorders beyond these structures. The Bárány Society Vestibular Medicine Curriculum (BS-VestMed-Cur) is based on the concept that VestMed is practiced by different physician specialties and non-physician allied health professionals. Each profession has its characteristic disciplinary role and profile, but all work in overlapping areas. Each discipline requires good awareness of the variety of disorders that can present with vestibular symptoms, their underlying mechanisms and etiologies, diagnostic criteria and treatment options. Similarly, all disciplines require an understanding of their own limitations, the contribution to patient care from other professionals and when to involve other members of the VestMed community. Therefore, the BS-VestMed-Cur is the same for all health professionals involved, the overlaps and differences of the various relevant professions being defined by different levels of detail and depth of knowledge and skills. The BS-VestMed-Cur defines a Basic and an Expert Level Curriculum. The Basic Level Curriculum covers the VestMed topics in less detail and depth, yet still conveys the concept of the wide net approach. It is designed for health professionals as an introduction to, and first step toward, VestMed expertise. The Expert Level Curriculum defines a Focused and Broad Expert. It covers the VestMed spectrum in high detail and requires a high level of understanding. In the Basic and Expert Level Curricula, the range of topics is the same and runs from anatomy, physiology and physics of the vestibular system, to vestibular symptoms, history taking, bedside examination, ancillary testing, the various vestibular disorders, their treatment and professional attitudes. Additionally, research topics relevant to clinical practice are included in the Expert Level Curriculum. For Focused Expert proficiency, the Basic Level Curriculum is required to ensure a broad overview and additionally requires an expansion of knowledge and skills in one or a few specific topics related to the focused expertise, e.g. inner ear surgery. Broad Expert proficiency targets professionals who deal with all sorts of patients presenting with vestibular symptoms (e.g. ORL, neurologists, audiovestibular physicians, physical therapists), requiring a high level of VestMed expertise across the whole spectrum. For the Broad Expert, the Expert Level Curriculum is required in which the minimum attainment targets for all the topics go beyond the Basic Level Curriculum. The minimum requirements regarding knowledge and skills vary between Broad Experts, since they are tuned to the activity profile and underlying specialty of the expert. The BS-VestMed-Cur aims to provide a basis for current and future teaching and training programs for physicians and non-physicians. The Basic Level Curriculum could also serve as a resource for inspiration for teaching VestMed to students, postgraduate generalists such as primary care physicians and undergraduate health professionals or anybody wishing to enter VestMed. VestMed is considered a set of competences related to an area of practice of established physician specialties and non-physician health professions rather than a separate clinical specialty. This curriculum does not aim to define a new single clinical specialty. The BS-VestMed-Cur should also integrate with, facilitate and encourage translational research in the vestibular field.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Southern California: Not Just “Anti” vs. “Pro” Vaccine

In this study, we evaluated the status of and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in two major hospital systems (academic and private) in Southern California. Responses were collected via an anonymous and voluntary survey from a total of 2491 participants, including nurses, physicians, other allied health professionals, and administrators. Among the 2491 participants that had been offered the vaccine at the time of the study, 2103 (84%) were vaccinated. The bulk of the participants were middle-aged college-educated White (73%), non-Hispanic women (77%), and nursing was the most represented medical occupation (35%). Political affiliation, education level, and income were shown to be significant factors associated with vaccination status. Our data suggest that the current allocation of healthcare workers into dichotomous groups such as “anti-vaccine vs. pro-vaccine” may be inadequate in accurately tailoring vaccine uptake interventions. We found that healthcare workers that have yet to receive the COVID-19 vaccine likely belong to one of four categories: the misinformed, the undecided, the uninformed, or the unconcerned. This diversity in vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers highlights the importance of targeted intervention to increase vaccine confidence. Regardless of governmental vaccine mandates, addressing the root causes contributing to vaccine hesitancy continues to be of utmost importance.

Exploration of implementation, financial and technical considerations within allied health professional (AHP) telehealth consultation guidance: a scoping review including UK AHP professional bodies’ guidance

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a shift to remote consultations, but telehealth consultation guidelines are lacking or inconsistent. Therefore, a scoping review was performed to chart the information in the articles exploring telehealth for the UK allied health professionals (AHPs) and compare them with the UK AHP professional bodies’ guidelines.DesignScoping review following Aksey and O’ Malley methodological framework.Data sourcesCINHAL and MEDLINE were searched from inception to March 2021 using terms related to ‘telehealth’, ‘guidelines’ and ‘AHPs’. Additionally, the UK AHP professional bodies were contacted requesting their guidelines.Study selectionArticles exploring telehealth for patient consultations, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journal or guidelines available from UK AHP professional bodies/their websites were considered eligible for review.Data extractionOne reviewer extracted data concerning three overarching domains: implementation, financial and technological considerations.Results2632 articles were identified through database searches with 21 articles eligible for review. Eight guidelines were obtained from the UK AHP professional bodies with a total of 29 included articles/guidelines. Most articles were published in the last two years; there was variety in telehealth terminology, and most were developed for occupational therapists, physiotherapists and speech and language therapists. Information was lacking about the assessment of telehealth use and effectiveness, barriers and limitations, the logistical management, the family’s and caregiver’s roles and the costs. There was lack of clarity on the AHPs’ registration requirements, costs and coverage, and legal aspects.ConclusionThis study identified gaps in current guidelines, which showed similarities as well as discrepancies with the guidance for non-AHP healthcare professionals and revealed that the existing guidelines do not adequately support AHPs delivering telehealth consultations. Future research and collaborative work across AHP groups and the world’s leading health institutions are suggested to establish common guidelines that will improve AHP telehealth services.

The introduction of advanced paramedics into primary care in Northern Ireland: a qualitative descriptive study of the experiences of general practitioners

Background: Primary care is dealing with an ever-increasing workload. The causes are multi-factorial but include a decreasing number of General Practitioners (GPs), combined with increased numbers of patients with multiple co-morbidities and an ageing population. As a result of these pressures, nursing and allied health professionals are now working within a growing number of advanced practice roles delivering community-based care. One such example is paramedics taking up advanced roles within General Practice settings in Northern Ireland. What is not known, however, is what GPs’ experiences are of these developments.Aims: To examine the experiences of GPs who have introduced an advanced paramedic into their primary care team in Northern Ireland.Design: A qualitative descriptive design was chosen as the most suitable approach to allow participants to relay their experiences in their own words within the loose confines of a semi-structured interview.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a group of four purposively selected GPs who had direct experience of the phenomena of interest. These interviews were transcribed verbatim, anonymised and then analysed thematically.Results: The thematic analysis produced three superordinate themes of alleviating pressure, acceptance and psychological well-being. These were underpinned by seven ordinate themes that were supported using verbatim quotes. These were then discussed and contextualised with themes from existing literature.Conclusion: Generally, there was widespread support from the GPs for the introduction of advanced paramedics into primary care teams. The reasons were multi-factorial but the reduction in GP workload featured prominently. The participants reported benefits in terms of increased resilience and work‐life balance. The capacity to provide a clinician with experience of dealing with acute and emergency presentations, in combination with managing routine procedures, was also reported to be of great importance.