Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Khunti

Publications and source records attributed to K Khunti.

34 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

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↗
PubMed1999

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↗
PubMed1999

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↗
PubMed1999

Collation and comparison of multi-practice audit data: prevalence and treatment of known diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Different methods have been used to determine the prevalence and treatment of diabetes. Despite the large number of studies, previous estimations of prevalence and treatment have been carried out on relatively small numbers of patients, and then in only a few practices in single geographical regions. AIM: To investigate the feasibility of collating data from multi-practice audits organized by primary care audit groups in order to estimate the prevalence and treatment of patients with known diabetes, and to discuss the methodological issues and reasons for variation. METHOD: A postal questionnaire survey of all primary care audit groups in England and Wales that had conducted a multi-practice audit of diabetes between 1993-1995. Prevalence rates and patterns of diabetic care were compared with other community-based surveys of known diabetes from 1986-1996 identified on MEDLINE. RESULTS: Twenty-five (43%) audit groups supplied data from multi-practice audits of diabetes. Seven (28%) multi-practice audits involving 259 practices fulfilled the inclusion criteria for prevalence estimation. The overall prevalence of diabetes based on a population of 1,475,512 patients was 1.46% (range between audit groups = 1.18% to 1.66%; chi 2 = 308; df = 6; P < 0.0001). Male to female ratio was 1.15:1. Treatment of diabetes could be ascertained for 10 (40%) audit groups comprising 319 practices. Of these, 23.4% (range = 16.5%-27.4%) were controlled by diet, 48.5% (range = 43.6%-55.8%) were prescribed oral hypoglycaemic drugs, and 28.2% (range = 25.0%-32.4%) were treated with insulin. There were significant variations between audit groups in treatment pattern (chi 2 = 250; df = 18; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Prevalence and treatment rates of diabetes and other chronic diseases can be assessed and compared using data from multi-practice audits. Collation of audit data could improve the precision of quantitative estimates of health status in populations. A standard method of data recording and collection may provide a new approach that could considerably improve our ability to monitor disease and its management.

Diabetes Mellitus↗
PubMed1997

Impact of an audiology clinic in one general practice.

There is a large demand for the provision of hearing aids. However, there are lengthy delays involved between referral and fitment of National Health Service (NHS) hearing aids. This report shows that a general practice based audiology clinic can lead to an increase in the number of patients referred and fitted with a hearing aid. The introduction of the clinic also led to reduced waiting times for patients to be fitted with hearing aids.

Audiology↗
PubMed1997

Effective audit in general practice: a method for systematically developing audit protocols containing evidence-based review criteria.

Though many general practitioners (GPs) now take part in audit, there is still concern about the extent to which participation in audit leads to improvements in practice. Improved methods are needed for the incorporation of research evidence into criteria for use in audit. In this paper, a six-stage systematic method is described for developing audit protocols containing prioritized evidence-based criteria. The stages are: selection of a topic, identification of key elements of care, focused literature reviews, prioritization of the criteria on the strength of the evidence and impact on outcome, preparation of full documentation, and peer review.

Clinical Protocols↗
PubMed1983

Accuracy of intracardiac injections determined by a post-mortem study.

Intracardiac injection sites were traced at necropsy on 18 patients who died after unsuccessful cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In only 13 patients (72%) was the heart punctured. Of the 46 injections carried out, 5 (11%) pierced the left ventricle and 13 (28%) the right ventricle. Other structures punctured included the pulmonary trunk, the aorta, and the lung. The fourth intercostal space just lateral to the sternal edge was the commonest injection site, and only 5 injections were subxiphoid. Post-mortem injections on a further 20 cadavers confirmed that the right ventricle is the most frequent puncture site whichever approach is used.

Autopsy↗