Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Pringle

Publications and source records attributed to M Pringle.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Radiography of the lumbar spine in primary care patients with low back pain: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that radiography of the lumbar spine in patients with low back pain is not associated with improved clinical outcomes or satisfaction with care. DESIGN: Randomised unblinded controlled trial. SETTING: 73 general practices in Nottingham, north Nottinghamshire, southern Derbyshire, north Lincolnshire, and north Leicestershire. 52 practices recruited participants to the trial. SUBJECTS: 421 patients with low back pain of a median duration of 10 weeks. INTERVENTION: Radiography of the lumbar spine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Roland adaptation of the sickness impact profile, visual analogue scale for pain, health status, EuroQol, satisfaction with care, use of primary and secondary care services, and reporting of low back pain at three and nine months after randomisation. RESULTS: The intervention group were more likely to report low back pain at three months (relative risk 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.60) and had a lower overall health status score and borderline higher Roland and pain scores. A higher proportion of participants consulted their doctor in the three months after radiography (1.62, 1.33 to 1.97). Satisfaction with care was greater in the group receiving radiography at nine but not three months after randomisation. Overall, 80% of participants in both groups at three and nine months would have radiography if the choice was available. An abnormal finding on radiography made no difference to the outcome, as measured by the Roland score. CONCLUSIONS: Radiography of the lumbar spine in primary care patients with low back pain of at least six weeks' duration is not associated with improved patient functioning, severity of pain, or overall health status but is associated with an increase in doctor workload. Guidelines on the management of low back pain in primary care should be consistent about not recommending radiography of the lumbar spine in patients with low back pain in the absence of indicators for serious spinal disease, even if it has persisted for at least six weeks. Patients receiving radiography are more satisfied with the care they received. The challenge for primary care is to increase satisfaction without recourse to radiography.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Non-invasive methods for measuring data quality in general practice.

AIM: To develop non-invasive methods of measuring the quality of data recorded in general practice. METHODS: Laboratory and pharmaceutical claims data from fourteen practices (44 doctors) from the FirstHealth network of general practices were examined to determine the extent to which valid minimum bounds on expected rates of diagnosis coding could be established. These were compared with recorded rates in patient notes to measure completeness of diagnosis recording. Data completeness was measured for demographic data and a marker for the accuracy of gender coding was developed from diagnosis data. RESULTS: Minimum rates of diagnosis could be established for asthma, diabetes (NIDDM and IDDM), ischaemic heart disease, hypothyroidism, bipolar affective disorder and Parkinson's disease. Minimum bounds for the number of patients requiring monitoring of warfarin and digoxin levels were also established. These expected minimum rates were combined with measures of completeness of age, gender, ethnicity and smoking data, and a gender coding accuracy measure, to produce a set of fourteen data quality indicators. Pass/fail thresholds on each indicator were set and each of the fourteen practices was scored on the number of passes they achieved. The scores ranged from three to nine out of fourteen passses. CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive data quality measures may be useful in providing feedback to general practitioners as part of a data quality improvement cycle. The sensitivity of this method will decline as data quality improves.

Data Collection↗
PubMed2001

Adverse effects of oral corticosteroids in relation to dose in patients with lung disease.

BACKGROUND: The adverse effects of oral corticosteroids are widely recognised but there are few quantitative data on which to base advice to patients. In a two part cross sectional study we compared adverse effects in patients with lung disease taking oral corticosteroids and control subjects and related the adverse effects to corticosteroid dose in the patient group. METHODS: Data on oral corticosteroid use, lifestyle, fractures, and other possible adverse effects were collected by questionnaire and compared between a community based cohort of patients taking continuous or frequent intermittent oral corticosteroids for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or alveolitis and age and sex matched control subjects. Dose related effects were explored in the corticosteroid group using cumulative dose quartiles and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 367 patients (> or = 50 years, 48% female) and 734 control subjects completed the questionnaire. The cumulative incidence of fractures since the time of diagnosis was 23% for patients taking oral corticosteroids and 15% in the control group (odds ratio (OR) 1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 2.6). Patients were more likely to have had a fracture of the vertebrae (OR 10; 95% CI 2.9 to 34), hip (OR 6; 95% CI 1.2 to 30), and ribs or sternum (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6 to 6.6) than control subjects. They also reported a significant increase in cataracts, use of antacids, muscle weakness, back pain, bruising, oral candidiasis, and having fewer teeth. The effects of oral corticosteroids were dose related: the odds ratio for patients in the highest compared with the lowest cumulative dose quartile (median prednisolone dose 61 g versus 5 g) ranged from 2 for all fractures to 9 for vertebral fractures and bruising. CONCLUSIONS: By quantifying the morbidity associated with the use of oral corticosteroids, this study should help to rationalise their long term use.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

The role of radiography in primary care patients with low back pain of at least 6 weeks duration: a randomised (unblinded) controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To test the hypotheses that: (1) Lumbar spine radiography in primary care patients with low back pain is not associated with improved patient outcomes, including pain, disability, health status, sickness absence, reassurance, and patient satisfaction or belief in the value of radiography. (2) Lumbar spine radiography in primary care patients with low back pain is not associated with changes in patient management, including medication use, and the use of primary and secondary care services, physical therapies and complementary therapies. (3) Participants choosing their treatment group (i.e. radiography or no radiography) do not have better outcomes than those randomised to a treatment group. (4) Lumbar spine radiography is not cost-effective compared with usual care without lumbar spine radiography. DESIGN: A randomised unblinded controlled trial. SETTING: Seventy-three general practices in Nottingham, North Nottinghamshire, Southern Derbyshire, North Lincolnshire and North Leicestershire. Fifty-two practices recruited participants to the trial. SUBJECTS: Randomised arm: 421 participants with low back pain, with median duration of 10 weeks. Patient preference arm: 55 participants with low back pain, with median duration of 11 weeks. INTERVENTION: Lumbar spine radiography and usual care versus usual care without radiography. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Roland adaptation of the Sickness Impact Profile, visual analogue pain scale, health status scale, EuroQol, use of primary and secondary care services, and physical and complementary therapies, sickness absence, medication use, patient satisfaction, reassurance and belief in value of radiography at 3 and 9 months post-randomisation. RESULTS: Participants randomised to receive an X-ray were more likely to report low back pain at 3 months (odds ratio (OR) = 1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02 to 2.40) and had a lower overall health status score (p = 0.02). There were no differences in health or functional status at 9 months. A higher proportion of participants consulted the general practitioner (GP) in the 3 months following an X-ray (OR = 2.72; 95% CI, 1.80 to 4.10). There were no differences in use of any other services, medication use or sickness absence at 3 or 9 months. No serious spinal pathology was identified in either group. The commonest X-ray reports were of discovertebral degeneration and normal findings. Many patients did not perceive their information needs were met within the consultation. Satisfaction with care was greater in the group receiving radiography at 9 months. Participants randomised to receive an X-ray were not less worried, or more reassured about serious disease causing their low back pain. Satisfaction was associated with meeting participants' information needs and reduced belief in the necessity for investigations for low back pain, including X-rays and blood tests. In both groups, at 3 and 9 months 80% of participants would choose to have an X-ray if the choice was available. Participants in the patient preference group achieved marginally better outcomes than those randomised to a treatment group, but the clinical significance of these differences is unclear. Lumbar spine radiography was associated with a net economic loss at 3 and 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar spine radiography in primary care patients with low back pain of at least 6 weeks duration is not associated with improved functioning, severity of pain or overall health status, and is associated with an increase in GP workload. Participants receiving X-rays are more satisfied with their care, but are not less worried or more reassured about serious disease causing their low back pain. CONCLUSIONS - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Further work is required to develop and test an educational package that educates patients and GPs about the utility of radiography and provides strategies for identifying and meeting the information needs of patients, and the needs of patients and GPs to be reassured about missing serious disease. Guidelines on the management of low back pain in primary care should be consistent about not recommending lumbar spine radiography in patients with low back pain in the absence of red flags for serious spinal pathology, even if the pain has persisted for at least 6 weeks.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

A prescription for improvement? An observational study to identify how general practices vary in their growth in prescribing costs.

OBJECTIVE: To identify how some general practices have low growth in prescribing costs relative to other practices. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Trent region of England. PARTICIPANTS: 162 general practices: 54 with low growth in prescribing costs, 54 with average increases in costs, and 54 with large increases in costs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in prescribing costs in therapeutic categories in which it has been suggested that savings can be made. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the three groups of practices in terms of their changes in prescribing costs for almost all the variables studied. For the group of practices with lowest growth in costs the most important factors were reducing numbers of prescription items and costs per item; relatively low growth in the costs of "new and expensive" drugs; increasing generic prescribing; and reducing costs for modified release products. This group of practices did not increase costs as much as the others for lipid lowering drugs (P=0.012) and hormone replacement therapy (P=0. 007). The practices with the greatest increases in costs had particularly large increases for proton pump inhibitors, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and modified release products. Compared with the other groups these practices had larger increases in costs for "expensive hospital initiated drugs" (P=0.009). CONCLUSION: General practices vary in their growth in prescribing costs in many ways, with growth in costs for "new and expensive" drugs being particularly important.

Drug Costs↗
PubMed2000

Inhaled corticosteroid use and bone-mineral density in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids are absorbed into the systemic circulation, but the extent to which they have adverse effects on bone is uncertain. The question is important since 3% of the European population take an inhaled corticosteroid regularly and may do so for many years. METHODS: We studied the dose-response relation between cumulative inhaled corticosteroid dose and bone-mineral density at the lumbar spine and proximal femur in 196 adults (119 women) with asthma aged 20-40 years. Patients had taken an inhaled corticosteroid regularly for at least 6 months, and had had limited exposure to systemic steroids. Cumulative dose of inhaled corticosteroid was calculated from questionnaires and computerised and written general-practice records, and its effect on bone-mineral density was estimated by multiple regression analysis. FINDINGS: Median duration of inhaled corticosteroid treatment was 6 years (range 0.5-24), and median cumulative dose was 876 mg (87-4380). There was a negative association between cumulative dose of inhaled corticosteroid and bone-mineral density at the lumbar spine (L2-L4), femoral neck, Ward's triangle, and trochanter, both before and after adjustment for the effects of age and sex. A doubling in dose of inhaled corticosteroid was associated with a decrease in bone-mineral density at the lumbar spine of 0.16 SD (95% CI 0.04-0.28). Similar decreases were found at the femoral neck, Ward's triangle, and trochanter. Adjustment for potential confounding factors including physical activity and past oral, nasal, dermal, and parenteral corticosteroids did not weaken the associations. INTERPRETATION: This study provides evidence of a negative relation between total cumulative dose of inhaled corticosteroid and bone-mineral density in patients with asthma.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2000

Association between teenage pregnancy rates and the age and sex of general practitioners: cross sectional survey in Trent 1994-7.

OBJECTIVE: To examine variations in teenage pregnancy rates in Trent region and to determine possible associations with local general practice characteristics such as the age and sex of the doctors. DESIGN: Cross sectional survey. SETTING: All 826 general practices in Trent region in existence between 1994 and 1997. SUBJECTS: All pregnancies of teenagers aged 13 to 19 between 1994 and 1997 that resulted in an admission to an NHS hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pregnancy rates for teenagers aged 13 to 19 and general practice characteristics: presence of a female or young doctor (under 36 years old), number of whole time equivalent practice nurses, Townsend score, vocational training status, list size per whole time equivalent doctor, fund-holding status, and partnership size. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, lower teenage pregnancy rates were associated with the presence of a female or young doctor and more nurse time. Practices in deprived areas had higher teenage pregnancy rates. CONCLUSION: General practices with female doctors, young doctors, or more nurse time had lower teenage pregnancy rates. The findings may have implications for the mix of health professionals within primary care.

Abortion, Therapeutic↗
PubMed2000

Significant event auditing.

Significant event auditing has been described for 5 years and it is slowly gaining credibility as an effective method of quality assurance in British general practice. This paper describes what it is, what its background is, how it is done and whether it is effective. While it needs a positive team culture - and therefore may not suit every practice - where it is used it appears to be a useful adjunct to a clinical audit programme.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Time changes in new cases of ischaemic heart disease in general practice.

BACKGROUND: There are no recent studies of the presentation of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) in general practice. What information exists is derived from the secondary care setting, where seasonal and daily variation has been reported in admissions for IHD. There are epidemiological studies that show a falling incidence and mortality for IHD. It is not clear, however, if this is also the case in clinical general practice. OBJECTIVES: The aims of the present study were to (i) estimate the number of cases of IHD in general practice populations; (ii) determine the recorded diagnosis and time of first presentation of IHD during a 5 year period; and (iii) perform time series analysis on the above data. METHODS: The design of the study was a retrospective survey, using MIQUEST software, of computer databases in five general practices with a combined population of nearly 40,000 patients. The five practices were selected randomly from volunteering practices in the Trent Focus Collaborative Research Network. All patients with a new diagnosis of IHD recorded between January 1993 and December 1997 inclusive were included in the study. The number of new cases of IHD, the recorded diagnosis and time of first presentation of IHD were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 644 new cases of IHD were identified during the study period: 54.0% 'angina pectoris', 26. 9% 'acute myocardial infarction', 18.8% 'ischaemic heart disease', 0. 3% 'coronary atherosclerosis'. Time series analysis reveals a seasonal and weekly pattern to new cases of IHD, with peak cases occurring in January and on Mondays/Fridays. A downward trend was detected for new cases of IHD (all diagnoses) over the 5 year period, and for new cases of IHD (excluding acute myocardial infarction). An upward trend was observed for new cases of acute myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION: Presentation of IHD in general practice varies according to season and day of the week. The proportion of new cases recorded as 'angina pectoris' or 'ischaemic heart disease' is falling, and this decline masks a rise in the incidence recordings of 'acute myocardial infarction'.

Age Distribution↗
PubMed2000

Inequalities in access to coronary angiography and revascularisation: the association of deprivation and location of primary care services.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery surgery reduces re-infarction rates and mortality in patients with ischaemic heart disease. This study examines inequality in relation to primary care services. AIM: To determine the effect of primary care services on access to coronary angiography and revascularisation. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey of all 180 Nottinghamshire practices in the Trent region that were in existence between 1993 and 1997. The numbers of coronary bypass grafts, angioplasties, and angiographies were determined from the regional National Health Service database and linked to a database of general practice characteristics. Poisson regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between the angiography and revascularisation rates and the following practice characteristics: deprivation score, distance from nearest secondary or tertiary referral centre, medical cardiology admission rate for ischaemic heart disease, fundholding status, and partnership size. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between practice characteristics and the waiting times for revascularisation and angiography. RESULTS: Practices with high deprivation scores had significantly lower rates of utilisation of angiography and revascularisation procedures. Their patients also waited longer for angiography. Practices that were 20 km or further from a revascularisation centre had significantly lower angiography and revascularisation rates. On average, their patients had to wait more than twice as long for an angiography compared with patients from nearer practices. Fundholding practices had higher angiography rates but similar revascularisation rates compared with non-fundholding practices. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that there may be some under-investigation and/or treatment of patients with ischaemic heart disease from 'deprived' practices and for those from practices far from a secondary or tertiary referral centre.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗
PubMed2000

The cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering in patients with ischaemic heart disease: an intervention and evaluation in primary care.

BACKGROUND: There has been a major revolution in the recommended treatment of hyperlipidaemia in patients with ischaemic heart disease following the publication of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. This was the first major study to demonstrate that lipid-lowering drugs reduced mortality and morbidity in patients with ischaemic heart disease. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of screening and treating hyperlipidaemia in patients with ischaemic heart disease in primary care. METHOD: A study conducted in a rural dispensing training practice on the border of Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire involving 327 patients with ischaemic heart disease who were registered with the practice on 1 January 1996. RESULTS: Eighty per cent of patients with ischaemic heart disease were considered eligible for screening and 80% of those attended for screening. The majority of patients who were screened had hyperlipidaemia that persisted after dietary advice. Despite lipid-lowering drugs, few patients had serum lipid concentrations in the target range at the end of six months. The costs of identifying and treating 83 patients with lipid-lowering drugs over five years is estimated at 105,318 Pounds at 1996 prices, or 94,257 Pounds assuming a 6% discount rate per annum. Two-thirds of this is owing to the cost of lipid-lowering drugs. The discounted cost per coronary event prevented would be 17,138 Pounds (95% CI = 12,568 Pounds-26,183 Pounds). The discounted cost per coronary death prevented would be 32,502 Pounds (95% CI = 23,564 Pounds-55,445 Pounds). There were no important adverse effects of lipid-lowering drugs on quality of life or mood. CONCLUSION: Such a programme is feasible and acceptable within primary care, although the ongoing cost implications need to be considered against the costs and benefits of other interventions.

Aged↗