Mercerbasse6046

Results In total, 251 (76%, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 71 to 80%) of 331 tested devices passed all tests (monitors and cuffs), and 86% (CI] = 82 to 90%) passed the static pressure test; deficiencies were, primarily, because of monitors overestimating BP. A total of 40% of testable monitors were not validated. The pass rate on the static pressure test was greater in validated monitors (96%, 95% CI = 94 to 98%) versus unvalidated monitors (64%, 95% CI = 58 to 69%), those retailing for >£10 (90%, 95% CI = 86 to 94%), those retailing for ≤£10 (66%, 95% CI = 51 to 80%), those in use for ≤4 years (95%, 95% CI = 91 to 98%), and those in use for >4 years (74%, 95% CI = 67 to 82%). All in all, 12% of cuffs failed. Conclusion Patients' own BP monitor failure rate was similar to that demonstrated in studies performed in professional settings, although cuff failure was more frequent. Clinicians can be confident of the accuracy of patients' own BP monitors if the devices are validated and ≤4 years old.Background Demand for GP services in the Republic of Ireland (RoI) is increasing, and the resultant escalation in workload demands is an issue of growing concern. Accordingly, the accurate measurement and description of GP workload is essential to inform future healthcare planning. Aim To provide a real-time measurement of GP workload with respect to hours worked and of proportional time expenditure on typical workload activities. Design and setting A prospective study among GPs in the RoI that took place from January 2019 to March 2019. Method Participants were invited to enrol in the study by direct email invitation and via notifications posted within GP-specific monthly journals; online forums; and a social media platform. Participants used a time-management software program to self-record workload activity in real time over 6 weeks. Results In total, 123 GPs were included for final analyses with a total of 8930 hours of activity recorded. The mean duration of a two-session day (excluding break-time) was 9.9 hours (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.7 to 10.0; interquartile range [IQR] 7.9 to 13.9). Of this time, 64% was spent on clinical consultations. In total, 25.4% of activity was recorded outside the hours of 9.00 am and 5.00 pm. An average of 12.4 face-to-face consultations were completed per session of activity. The mean duration of a 10-session week was greatest for the partner (50.8 hours; 95% CI = 49.8 to 51.9) and >55-year-old (50.8 hours; 95% CI = 49.3 to 52.2) demographics, relative to their respective colleagues. Conclusion To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to provide an objective, accurate, and granular real-time measurement of GP workload in the RoI, demonstrating the significant volume and variety of work undertaken by GPs in the RoI.Background Cluster headache is a severe primary headache with a similar prevalence to that of multiple sclerosis. Cluster headache is characterised by unilateral trigeminal distribution of pain, ipsilateral cranial autonomic features, and a tendency to circadian and circannual periodicity. Aim To explore the perceptions, experiences, and understandings of cluster headache among GPs and neurologists. Design and setting Qualitative interview study in primary care surgeries and neurology departments in the north of England. Method Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs and neurologists, recorded, and transcribed. A thematic analysis was applied to the dataset. Results Sixteen clinicians participated in this study eight GPs and eight neurologists. Four main themes were identified following thematic analysis challenges with the cluster headache diagnosis; impact of cluster headache; challenges with treatment; and appropriateness of referrals to secondary care. Clinicians recognised the delays in the diagnosis of cluster headache, misdiagnosis, and mismanagement, and were aware of the potential impact cluster headache can have on patients' mental health and ability to remain in employment. Findings highlighted tensions between primary and secondary care around the cost of medication and the remit of prescribing treatment regimens. Patients' anxiety, their need for reassurance, and their insistence about seeing a specialist are some of the reasons for referrals. Conclusion Clinicians acknowledged delays in diagnosis, misdiagnosis, and mismanagement of cluster headache. The responsibility of prescribing causes ongoing tensions between primary and secondary care. Clear referral and management pathways for primary headaches are required to improve patient outcomes and healthcare costs.Background Older patients with cancer often find it difficult to take part in shared decision making. Aim To assess the utility of the Outcome Prioritisation Tool (OPT), designed to aid discussion with a patient in regards to their treatment goals, to empower patients with cancer through structured conversations about generic treatment goals with GPs. Design and setting A randomised controlled trial of 114 Dutch participants recruited between November 2015 and January 2019, aged ≥60 years with non-curable cancer who had to make a treatment decision with an oncologist. The intervention group used the OPT while the control group received care as usual. selleck inhibitor Method The primary outcome was patient empowerment using the score on the decision self-efficacy (DSE) scale. Secondary outcomes were symptoms measures of fatigue, anxiety, and depression. The experiences of participants were also explored. Results No effect was found on patient empowerment between the OPT group (n = 48; DSE 86.8; standard deviation [SD] = 18.2) and the control group (n = 58; DSE 84.2; SD = 17.6; P = 0.47). In the OPT group, although statistically non-significant, fewer patients had low empowerment (18.8%, n = 9 versus 24.1%, n = 14; P = 0.50), but they did have statistically significant lower mean anxiety scores (6.0, SD = 4.6 versus 7.6, SD = 4.4; P less then 0.05) and less mild fatigue (58.8%, n = 30 versus 77.2%, n = 44; P = 0.05). Overall, 44.8% (n = 13) of patients indicated that the OPT-facilitated conversation helped them make a treatment decision, and 31.1% (n = 14) of the GPs reported that they gained new insights from the conversation. Conclusion An OPT-facilitated conversation about generic treatment goals between patients and their GPs is associated with less anxiety and fatigue, but did not show statistically significant improvements in patient empowerment. Adding the OPT to routine care might ensure more patient-tailored care.