Improving the delivery of coronary care for ethnic minorities.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Asia↗
Biomedical subjects
K Khunti
Publications and source records attributed to K Khunti.
Features of primary health care teams associated with successful quality improvement of diabetes care: a qualitative study.
BACKGROUND: In quality improvement activities such as audit, some general practices succeed in improving care and some do not. With audit of care likely to be one of the major tools in clinical governance, it would be helpful to establish what features of primary health care teams are associated with successful audit in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to identify those features of primary health care teams that were associated with successful quality improvement during systematic audit of diabetes care. METHOD: Semi-structured tape-recorded interviews were carried out with lead GPs and practice nurses in 18 general practices in Leicestershire that had the opportunity to improve their care and had completed two data collections in a multipractice audit of diabetes care. The interviewees were asked to describe their practice's approach to audit and the transcripts were coded for common features and judged for strength of feeling by blinded independent raters. Features common to practices that had, and those that had not, managed to improve diabetes care were identified. RESULTS: Six features were identified reliably in the transcripts by blinded independent raters. Four were significantly associated with the successful improvement of care. Success was more likely in teams in which: the GP or nurse felt personally involved in the audit; they perceived their teamwork as good; they had recognized the need for systematic plans to address obstacles to quality improvement; and their teams had a positive attitude to continued monitoring of care. A positive attitude to audit and a personal interest in the disease were not associated with improvement in care. CONCLUSIONS: Success in improving diabetes care is associated with certain organizational features of primary health care teams. Experimental studies are required to determine whether the development of teamwork enables practice teams to identify and overcome systematically the obstacles to improved quality of patient care that face them.
Diabetes Mellitus↗
Inequalities in provision of systematic care for patients with diabetes.
BACKGROUND: GPs are now playing a greater role in the care of people with diabetes; however, the level of performance in primary care is variable. Practices with a recall system and diabetes mini-clinic have been shown to achieve better outcome of care of patients with diabetes. Systematic care also requires effective community-based diabetes services and access to primary care diabetes teams including dieticians, chiropodists, and optometrists and ophthalmologists. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine how services for people with diabetes are organized in primary care and whether there are inequalities in systematic care of people with diabetes. METHODS: A piloted postal questionnaire was sent to all 327 general practices in three health authorities in England serving a population of >2 million people. The three health authorities provided practice-based routine data relating to all general practices. RESULTS: A total of 264 (80.7%) practices replied; 236 (89.4%) employed a diabetes recall system and 196 (74.2%) reviewed their patients in a diabetes mini-clinic. Multiple regression showed that having a recall system was associated independently with a GP [odds ratio (OR) 6.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-14.9] or a practice nurse (OR 3.5; 1.4-8.7) with an interest in diabetes. Having a diabetes mini-clinic was associated independently with a GP with an interest in diabetes (OR 4.1; 2.1-7.8), a practice nurse having attended a diabetes course (OR 2.8, 1.3-6.2), practices with more partners (OR 1.2 per additional partner; 1.0-1.4) and fundholding practices (OR 2.6; 1.2-5.5). One hundred and sixteen (43.9%) practices had a chiropodist present in the practice, and 90 (34.1%) had a practice-based dietician. A chiropodist and a dietician were significantly more likely to be attached in training practices and in less deprived areas. A practice-based dietician was significantly associated with larger practices. CONCLUSIONS: Providing high quality primary care is essential to meeting the government's agenda of reducing inequalities. This study shows high levels of structured diabetes care which are not related to deprivation. However, practices in more deprived areas still lag behind practices in more affluent areas in terms of access to members of the diabetes team. To improve care of people with diabetes in primary care, deficiencies and inequalities highlighted in our survey must be addressed. The results of this survey will be valuable to primary care groups and organizations responsible for commissioning diabetes services.
Chi-Square Distribution↗
Quality of clinical care in general practice.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Family Practice↗
Features of primary care associated with variations in process and outcome of care of people with diabetes.
BACKGROUND: There is now clear evidence that tight control of blood glucose and blood pressure significantly lowers the risk of complications in both type I and type II diabetes. Although there is evidence that primary care can be as effective as secondary care in delivering care for people with diabetes, standards in primary care are variable. Previous studies have shown that practice, patient or organisational factors may influence the level of care of patients with diabetes. However, these studies have been conducted in single geographical areas and involved only small numbers of practices. AIM: To determine the standard of diabetes care in general practice and to determine which features of practices are associated with delivering good quality care. DESIGN OF STUDY: A questionnaire survey and analysis of multi-practice audit data. SETTING: Three health authorities in England, comprising 169 general practices. METHOD: This study was conducted with a total population of 1,182,872 patients and 18,642 people with diabetes. Linkage analysis was carried out on data collected by a questionnaire, routinely collected health authority data, and multi-practice audit data collected by primary care audit groups. Practice annual compliance was measured with process and outcome measures of care, including the proportion of patients who had an examination of their fundi, feet, blood pressure, urine, glycated haemoglobin, and the proportion who had a normal glycated haemoglobin. RESULTS: Median compliance with process and outcome measures of care varied widely between practices: fundi were checked for 64.6% of patients (interquartile range [IQR] = 45.3-77.8%), urine was checked for 71.4% (IQR = 49.7-84.3%), feet were checked for 70.4% (IQR = 51.0-84.4%), blood pressure for 83.6% (IQR = 66.7-91.5%), and glycated haemoglobin was checked for 83.0% of patients (IQR = 69.4-92.0%). The glycated haemoglobin was normal in 42.9% of patients (IQR = 33.0-51.2%). In multiple regression analysis, compliance with measures of process of care were significantly associated with smaller practices, fundholding practices, and practices with a recall system. Practices with more socioeconomically deprived patients were associated with lower compliance with most process measures. Practices with a greater proportion of patients attending hospital clinics had lower compliance with process and outcome measures. Being a training practice, having a diabetes mini-clinic, having more nurses, personal care, and general practitioner or nurse interest in diabetes were not associated with compliance of process or outcome of care. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recent evidence that complications of diabetes may be delayed or prevented, this study has highlighted a number of deficiencies in the provision of diabetes care and variations in care between general practices. Provision of high quality diabetes care in the United Kingdom will present an organisational challenge to primary care groups and trusts, especially those in deprived areas.
Delivery of Health Care↗
Diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: an assessment of international guidelines.
An appraisal of published, peer-reviewed guidelines, in terms of their development methodologies and clinical effectiveness, was undertaken using a published and validated appraisal tool. Electronic databases revealed 13 guidelines on heart failure but only seven of these referred to diagnosis. The quality of the published guidelines was variable but there was consensus over the main symptoms and diagnostic tests, although only two symptoms were mentioned in all guidelines. Only two guidelines scored greater than 50% for rigour of development.
Cardiovascular Diseases↗
Effectiveness of screening and monitoring tests for diabetic retinopathy--a systematic review.
AIMS: To determine which screening and monitoring tests for diabetic retinopathy are most effective and under what circumstances. METHODS: A systematic review of the English language literature, published from 1983 to April 1999. RESULTS: Available studies are generally limited in their ability to answer the important questions on the effectiveness of tests for early detection of diabetic retinopathy. No randomized controlled trials were identified although primary studies exist for two screening tests: ophthalmoscopy, either direct or indirect, and retinal photography, using either mydriasis or non-mydriasis. Retinal photography under mydriasis appears to be the most effective test, with the majority reporting levels of sensitivity in excess of 80%. However effectiveness is compromised when photographs are ungradable. Ophthalmoscopy can also reach acceptable standards of sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: Based on an assessment of available cohort studies, the most effective strategy for testing is the use of mydriatic retinal photography with the additional use of ophthalmoscopy for cases where photographs are ungradable. This does not exclude the use of ophthalmoscopy alone for opportunistic case finding but there is evidence of considerable variation in effectiveness of this test.
Diabetic Retinopathy↗
Effect of systematic review of medication by general practitioner on drug consumption among nursing-home residents.
BACKGROUND: nursing-home patients usually have many medical problems and often take many drugs. They are therefore at risk from drug side effects and interactions. AIMS: to evaluate the impact of a visit by a general practitioner and a comprehensive repeat prescribing review on the consumption of inappropriate drugs in nursing homes. METHOD: two general practitioners made one comprehensive visit to four randomly selected nursing homes. In each home we discussed all patients in detail with a senior member of staff. We reviewed the prescribing record of each patient and stopped items if we considered them inappropriately prescribed or unnecessary. RESULTS: repeat prescriptions were altered in 65% of patients: 51% had an item stopped and 26% had an item changed to a cheaper alternative or the dose reduced. There was a reduction in the mean number of repeat prescriptions prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: a single visit by a general practitioner to a nursing home and a comprehensive repeat prescribing review can lead to a reduction in the number of items prescribed and to substantial savings for the health service. Further rigorous, cost-effectiveness studies are needed.
Aged↗
Attitudes to lifestyle risk factors for coronary heart disease amongst South Asians in Leicester: a focus group study.
BACKGROUND: South Asians have a significantly higher risk of mortality from coronary heart disease (CHD) compared with the general population in the UK. There is a lack of evidence on attitudes to and knowledge of risk factors for CHD amongst South Asians. Such information is important for the provision of effective health promotion services. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to identify key issues relating to knowledge of and attitudes to lifestyle risk factors for CHD amongst South Asians aged over 40 years in Leicester, UK. METHOD: A qualitative focus group analysis was carried out using randomly selected South Asians from GP lists and South Asians attending community centres. Group discussions were taped, translated and transcribed. The transcripts were analysed using qualitative methodology to identify key issues and themes. RESULTS: Participants expressed a range of attitudes to and different levels of knowledge of lifestyle risk factors for CHD. Barriers to improving lifestyle with respect to diet and exercise were identified; these included lack of information (e.g. of how to cook traditional Indian food more healthily) and cultural barriers, such as lack of women-only exercise facilities. Participants perceived stress as an important cause of CHD, and stress directly related to ethnic minority status was described frequently. Language was identified as a key barrier to accessing health services. CONCLUSION: Health professionals need to provide individually tailored health promotion for South Asians which avoids stereotyping, but recognizes potential cultural obstacles to change. The issue of stress amongst South Asians requires more research and needs to be recognized as an important issue by health professionals. South Asians still face problems accessing health and leisure services due to language and cultural issues.
Adult↗
Referral for autopsies: analysis of 651 consecutive deaths in one general practice.
Autopsies represent a key instrument in educating doctors and may aid quality assurance for primary and secondary care. This study shows that only a few patients have an autopsy, of which the majority are carried out at the request of the coroner for medicolegal reasons. Better education and communication between general practitioners, hospital clinicians, pathologists, and coroners may increase the rate of autopsies.
Autopsy↗
Who looks after people with diabetes: primary or secondary care?
Because the prevalence of type 2 diabetes has increased greatly over the past decade, UK general practitioners have been encouraged to develop services for people with diabetes and to offer structured diabetes care. The resultant shift from secondary care can place considerable demands on primary health care teams. Data were obtained from 108 practices in two English health districts followed up in primary and secondary care. Nearly two-thirds of the people with diabetes were being followed up only in general practice, the remainder in hospital or both. The proportion managed in primary care varied from 5.6% to 94.6%. The settings where diabetes care was most likely to be offered were training practices, practices with good nursing support, practices with a high prevalence of diabetes, and practices in which a high proportion of diabetic patients were controlled by diet or hypoglycaemic agents. Tight control of glycaemia and blood pressure is now seen as important in diabetes, and is best achieved in general practice. This survey revealed large variations in delivery of general-practice diabetes care that need to be addressed by better organization and funding.
Delivery of Health Care↗
Diagnosis of patients with chronic heart failure in primary care: usefulness of history, examination, and investigations.
Chronic heart failure is a common clinical syndrome that may have different causes. Its incidence and prevalence are predicted to rise substantially over the next 10 years. There are therefore major consequences for resource provision, especially in primary care, where most patients are managed. Chronic heart failure is a serious condition with high morbidity and mortality. There is good evidence to show that treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction improves symptoms and signs, slows progression of heart failure, reduces hospitalisation rates, and improves survival. Despite this evidence, primary care studies show that patients with heart failure are incorrectly diagnosed and inadequately treated. Most patients present in general practice, and because effective treatment relies on a correct diagnosis, this is a key step in the appropriate management of heart failure. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence about the usefulness of signs, symptoms, and investigations in diagnosing heart failure in primary care. To identify relevant studies for this review, four strategies were used: a MEDLINE search from 1993 to January 1998 using the diagnosis search filter; a MEDLINE search from 1993 to January 1998 using the guideline search filter to locate published heart failure guidelines; a search for review articles in the Cochrane Library; and a check of references in the studies identified. The search terms included MeSH terms and the keywords 'heart failure' and 'diagnosis'. All searches were limited to humans and English language articles. Studies were included in this review on the basis of quality and relevance to primary care. The review shows that symptoms and signs are important because they alert clinicians to the possibility of heart failure as a diagnosis. However, they are not sufficiently specific for confirming left ventricular systolic dysfunction. From the evidence available, a patient with suspected heart failure must have objective tests to confirm the diagnosis. These should include an electrocardiogram and, ideally, an echocardiogram. Further research is also needed on the usefulness of signs and symptoms in primary care, as most studies of heart failure have been conducted in secondary care.
Electrocardiography↗
Clinical governance for diabetes in primary care: use of practice guidelines and participation in multi-practice audit.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Diabetes Mellitus↗
Improving aspirin prophylaxis after myocardial infarction in primary care: collaboration in multipractice audit between primary care audit group and health authority.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Aspirin↗
Meta-analysis of diabetes care in general practice. Like was not compared with like.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Diabetes Mellitus↗
Quality of care of patients with diabetes: collation of data from multi-practice audits of diabetes in primary care.
BACKGROUND: GPs are now playing a greater role in the care of patients with diabetes. The challenges described in the Saint Vincent Joint Task Force Report include achievement of a reduction in long-term complications by collecting key clinical information and systematically organizing care of patients with diabetes. The number of practices conducting audit and the number of primary care audit groups conducting multi-practice audits of diabetes have increased since the introduction of audit in 1991. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the feasibility of collating data from multi-practice audits of diabetes in primary care and to describe the pattern of care for diabetes patients in primary care. METHODS: A confidential postal questionnaire was sent to all medical audit advisory groups that had completed a multi-practice audit of diabetic care. The main outcome measures studied were prevalence and treatment of known diabetes and annual compliance with key process measures. RESULTS: Data could be collated for 17 of the 25 audit groups that supplied data representing information from 495 practices with 38 288 diabetic patients. Seven audit groups supplied data from a population denominator comprising 1475512 patients giving a prevalence of 1.46% (range 1.1-1.7%), 50.7% (range 32.5-69.0%) were managed by general practice only, 19.1% (7.6-39.7%) by hospital care only and 30.2% (11.0-49.5%) by shared care. Annual mean compliance for process measures showed wide variations: glycated haemoglobin or fructosamine checked for 72.5% (range 25.3-89.3%), fundi checked for 67.5% (57.8-86.6%), urine checked for 65.8% (27.5-80.0%), blood pressure checked for 87.6% (76.9-96.5%), smoking checked for 71.45 (21.9-86.0%), feet checked for 67.7% (40.0-90.8%) and BMI checked for 52.5% (26.4-68.2%). CONCLUSION: This study shows the feasibility of collating audit data and the potential of this approach for describing patterns of care and highlighting general and local deficiencies. Information about levels of performance in large numbers of patients can be used to set standards or norms against which individual practitioners can compare their own activity. Comparison of the health needs of local populations with national data could be used to inform commissioning services. However, audits should employ uniform evidence-based criteria so as to facilitate collation and allow comparison.
Data Collection↗
Use of multiple methods to determine factors affecting quality of care of patients with diabetes.
BACKGROUND: The process of care of patients with diabetes is complex; however, GPs are playing a greater role in its management. Despite the research evidence, the quality of care of patients with diabetes is variable. In order to improve care, information is required on the obstacles faced by practices in improving care. Qualitative and quantitative methods can be used for formation of hypotheses and the development of survey procedures. However, to date few examples exist in general practice research on the use of multiple methods using both quantitative and qualitative techniques for hypothesis generation. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine information on all factors that may be associated with delivery of care to patients with diabetes. METHODS: Factors for consideration on delivery of diabetes care were generated by multiple qualitative methods including brainstorming with health professionals and patients, a focus group and interviews with key informants which included GPs and practice nurses. Audit data showing variations in care of patients with diabetes were used to stimulate the brainstorming session. A systematic literature search focusing on quality of care of patients with diabetes in primary care was also conducted. RESULTS: Fifty-four potential factors were identified by multiple methods. Twenty (37.0%) were practice-related factors, 14 (25.9%) were patient-related factors and 20 (37.0%) were organizational factors. A combination of brainstorming and the literature review identified 51 (94.4%) factors. Patients did not identify factors in addition to those identified by other methods. CONCLUSION: The complexity of delivery of care to patients with diabetes is reflected in the large number of potential factors identified in this study. This study shows the feasibility of using multiple methods for hypothesis generation. Each evaluation method provided unique data which could not otherwise be easily obtained. This study highlights a way of combining various traditional methods in an attempt to overcome the deficiencies and bias that may occur when using a single method. Similar methods can also be used to generate hypotheses for other exploratory research. An important responsibility of health authorities and primary care groups will be to assess the health needs of their local populations. Multiple methods could also be used to identify and commission services to meet these needs.
Data Collection↗
Approaches to the organization of multi-practice audits in primary health care in the UK.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the approaches taken by audit groups in primary care in organizing multi-practice audits and to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the methods used. DESIGN: Postal questionnaire survey. SETTING: One hundred and six primary care audit groups in England and Wales. RESULTS: Ninety multi-practice audits had been conducted since 1993, 46 of which were audits of diabetes and 44 of asthma care. A total of 48 completed questionnaires (24 each for asthma and diabetes) were returned (response rate 53%). Audit groups reported inviting 3338 practices to take part, of which 1157 completed the audit. The commonest methods used to encourage practice participation were a personal letter (75%), audit group newsletter (63%) and sending an audit protocol to the practice (63%). Groups used various methods for selecting audit review criteria, however only three (6%) used a systematic review of available literature. Each audit group advocated a number of methods for identifying patients and for data extraction. Forty-one (85.6%) groups reported that practices received feedback of results in an individualized practice feedback report. In 19 (39.6%) audits, the audit group had not undertaken any follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that multi-practice audit can encourage the participation of large numbers of practices. Audit groups are co-ordinating multi-practice audits and feeding back information to practices on a comparative basis. However, there are weaknesses in the design and conduct of some audits. Groups should pay more attention to the selection of audit criteria, methods of identifying and sampling patients, data collection procedures, and methods for implementing changes in performance. For other countries that are beginning quality improvement activities, the results of this study emphasize the need to give attention to basic methodological principles.
Asthma↗