Access by general practitioners to physiotherapy department of a district general hospital.

There has been much opposition, voiced most notably in the Tunbridge Report, to general-practitioner access to hospital rehabilitation services. Co-operation between general practitioners, physiotherapists, and the consultant with responsibility for the physiotherapy department at a general district hospital has provided an efficient open-access service. This service has been welcomed by the general practitioners because it supplies prompt treatment for their patients and by the physiotherapists because it enables them to minimise disability by treating musculoskeletal problems at an early stage.     

Ten year mortality in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE--To describe the 10 year mortality in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN--Follow up of all patients below 76 years of age admitted with acute chest pain to 16 coronary care units participating in the Danish verapamil infarction trial in 1979-81. SUBJECTS--Of the 5993 patients included, 2586 had definite infarction, 402 had probable infarction, and 3005 did not have infarction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Death and cause of death. Standardised mortality ratio (observed mortality/expected mortality in background population). RESULTS--The estimated 10 year mortalities were 58.8%, 55.5%, and 42.8% in patients with definite, probable, and no infarction, respectively (P < 0.0001). Stratified Cox''s analysis identified a hazard ratio for mortality of 1.25 (95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.44) for probable infarction compared with no infarction and of 1.15 (1.00 to 1.32) for definite compared with probable infarction. The standardised mortality ratio in the first year was 7.1 (6.5 to 7.8) for definite infarction, 5.0 (3.6 to 6.3) for probable infarction, and 4.7 (4.2 to 5.2) for no infarction. From the second year and onwards the annual standardised mortality ratio in the three groups did not differ significantly. Cardiac causes of deaths were recorded in 89%, 84%, and 71% of the deaths in patients with definite, probable, and no infarction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS--The 10 year mortality of patients with and without infarction is significantly higher than in the background population. Most deaths are caused by coronary heart disease, and these patients should consequently be further evaluated at the time of discharge and followed up closely.     

Home based care and standard hospital care for patients with severe mental illness: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE--To compare the efficacy of home based care with standard hospital care in treating serious mental illness. DESIGN--Randomised controlled trial. SETTING--South Southwark, London. PATIENTS--189 patients aged 18-64 living in catchment area. 92 were randomised to home based care (daily living programme) and 97 to standard hospital care. At three months'' follow up 68 home care and 60 hospital patients were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Use of hospital beds, psychiatric diagnosis, social functioning, patients'' and relatives'' satisfaction, and activity of daily living programme staff. RESULTS--Home care reduced hospital stay by 80% (median stay six days in home care group, 53 days in hospital group) and did not increase the number of admissions compared with hospital care. On clinical and social outcome there was a non-significant trend in favour of home care, but both groups showed big improvements. On the global adjustment scale home care patients improved by 26.8 points and the hospital group by 21.6 points (difference 5.2; 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 12). Other rating scales showed similar trends. Home care patients required a wide range of support in areas such as housing, finance, and work. Only three patients dropped out from the programme. CONCLUSIONS--Home based care may offer some slight advantages over hospital based care for patients with serious mental illness and their relatives. The care is intensive, but the low drop out rate suggests appreciation. Changes to traditional training for mental health workers are required.     

Myocardial infarction: a comparison between home and hospital care for patients.

To compare the results of home and hospital treatment in men aged under 70 years who had suffered acute myocardial infarction within 48 hours 1895 patients were considered for study in four centres in south-west England. Four-hundred-and-fifty patients were randomly allocated to receive care either at home by their family doctor or in hospital, initially in an intensive care unit. The randomised treatment groups were similar in age, history of cardiovascular disease, and incidence of hypotension when first examined. They were followed up for up to a year after onset. The mortality rate at 28 days was 12% for the random home group and 14% for the random hospital group; the corresponding figures at 330 days were 20% and 27%. On average, older patients and those without initial hypotension fared rather better under home care. The patients who underwent randomisation were similar to those whose place of care was not randomised, except that the non-randomised group contained a higher proportion of initially hypotensive patients, whose prognosis was poor wherever treated. These results confirm and extend our preliminary findings. Home care is a proper form of treatment for many patients with acute myocardial infarction, particularly those over 60 years and those with an uncomplicated attack seen by general practitioners.     

Referrals to hospital by general practitioners: a study of compliance and communication.

To determine the extent of non-attendance at first hospital appointments 269 hospital referrals made in one practice over 14 weeks were analysed retrospectively. Non-attendance was more likely among patients referred to outpatient departments than to casualty or for admission. Fifteen per cent (41/269) of all patients and 20% (33/167) of outpatients failed to keep their initial appointments. Prolonged waiting times from referral to appointment were significantly related to non-attendance. Twenty weeks after the last referral had been made no communication had been received by the practice for 24% (61/252) of all referral letters received by the hospital. Minimum delays to appointments and improved communication between hospitals and general practitioners would help general practitioners to make appropriate referrals and improve compliance.     

Ambulant management of patients with recent myocardial infarction.

Thirty-two patients who had remained ambulant and active after suffering an acute myocardial infarction were observed for 6 months. Complications were present initially in 11 but proved transient. One patient died of a new coronary thrombosis 15 weeks after the initial episode. There were no recurrences among the 31 surviving patients. After the 6 months all but two patients were as well as before the attack; 21 were free of symptoms and there was no undue incidence of objective findings that could be attributed to failure to rest after the attack. It is therefore concluded that, for patients who suffer an acute myocardial infarction, immediate diagnosis and admission to a coronary care unit need not be equated invariably with immobilization in bed. Our experience suggests that selected patients can be allowed moderate activity without ill effects and thus avoid the undesirable consequences of enforced bed rest.     

Study of the management of suspected cardiac infarction by British immediate care doctors.

A study of the management by immediate care general practitioners of 511 patients suspected of suffering from acute myocardial infarction showed that the median time of arrival after the onset of chest pains was 60.2 minutes. One hundred and eleven patients died of cardiac infarction within 48 hours of the onset of chest pain; 23 died in the presence of the general practitioner.     

Heroin users: notifications to the Home Office Addict's Index by general practitioners.

In a study of 113 heroin users who attended a Scottish general practice of 11 doctors information was gathered retrospectively regarding notification of these patients to the Home Office. The doctors were questioned about their practices for notification. Surprisingly few of the patients had been correctly notified and renotified where appropriate, and there was great variation in the doctors'' notification practices, particularly with respect to defining addiction. General practitioners are now the largest source of notifications of controlled drug users, and the statistics issued by the Home Office must be interpreted in the light of their notification practices.     

Indicators of quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction

Background

There is a wide practice gap between optimal and actual care for patients with acute myocardial infarction in hospitals around the world. We undertook this initiative to develop an updated set of evidence-based indicators to measure and improve the quality of care for this patient population.

Methods

A 12-member expert panel was convened in 2007 to develop an updated set of quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction. The panel identified a list of potential indicators after reviewing the scientific literature, clinical practice guidelines and other published quality indicators. To develop the new list of indicators, the panel rated each potential indicator on 4 dimensions (reliability, validity, feasibility and usefulness in improving patient outcomes) and discussed the top-ranked quality indicators at a consensus meeting.

Results

Consensus was reached on 38 quality indicators: 17 that would be measurable using chart-abstracted data and 21 that would be measurable using administrative data. Of the 17 chart-review indicators, 13 address pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic care delivered to patients in hospital. In-hospital mortality was recommended as a key outcome indicator. Three system indicators were recommended to measure the collaborative responsiveness of the health care system from the call for help to intervention. It was recommended that hospitals strive for a minimum target benchmark of 90% or greater on process-of-care indicators.

Interpretation

Implementation of strategies by clinicians and hospitals to meet target benchmarks on these quality indicators could save the lives of many individuals with acute myocardial infarction.There is a large practice gap between optimal and actual patterns of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction in hospitals around the world.¹ Acute myocardial infarction is a highly treatable condition for which many advances in treatment have occurred over the past several decades. However, the uptake of many of these advances and their incorporation into routine clinical practice has often lagged behind their development and publication in clinical journals by many years.^2–4 To reduce this gap and improve quality of care, many jurisdictions are using indicators of the quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. These quality indicators are intended to measure adherence to selected key clinical practice guidelines in routine clinical care and serve as a foundation for efforts to improve quality.⁵ They define the minimum standard of care that might be expected for all “ideal” patients who meet certain criteria and have no contraindications for a given health care intervention.National organizations in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and other OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries have all developed indicators to measure and improve the quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction both within and across countries, regions and hospitals.^6–9 In 2003, the Canadian Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Team (a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Interdisciplinary Health Research Team) worked in association with the Canadian Cardiovascular Society to develop and publish the first set of quality indicators for myocardial infarction in Canada.⁶ The Canadian Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Team comprises more than 30 leading outcome researchers who work together on projects to measure and improve cardiac care. From the outset, we recognized that the indicators would need to be modified over time to reflect changes in practice guidelines and clinical evidence. In 2007, a Canadian expert panel was convened by the Canadian Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Team to develop and recommend a set of quality indicators that took into account the best indicators developed elsewhere and that also included some unique indicators that were felt to be of particular relevance and use to Canadian clinicians and hospitals.     

Reported management of threatened miscarriage by general practitioners in Wessex.

Questionnaires were sent to all 1432 general practitioners in the Wessex region to obtain information about their current management of bleeding in early pregnancy. A total of 1290 (90%) returned completed questionnaires. These showed widely varying views about the prognostic importance of particular symptoms and physical signs and about elements of management. Although 96% of the respondents prescribed bed rest more or less routinely for heavy bleeding in early pregnancy, only 17% felt it was mandatory, and 32% admitted that they did not believe it affected the outcome. Of the 13% of respondents who prescribed progestogens for threatened miscarriage, most did so on the advice of their local obstetrician. Seventeen per cent of the doctors always admitted women with apparently complete miscarriages to hospital. Twenty nine per cent of the respondents never gave anti-D immunoglobulin to rhesus negative women after a complete miscarriage. Bleeding in early pregnancy is a common problem and more research is required to improve management, particularly the assessment of fetal viability.