Clinical Commissioning Groups Research Articles

Intercontinental translatability of a peer-led GP education model from New Zealand to the United Kingdom: a pilot study.

Pegasus Small Group education for General Practitioners (GPs) is a professional development programme that has been delivered in Canterbury, New Zealand for over 30 years. Peer developed content is delivered in small groups supporting interactive discussions informed by evidence and locally relevant data. An international collaboration between South Tyneside Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) in the UK and Pegasus Health in Canterbury New Zealand aimed to determine whether the Canterbury model of Small Group (SG) professional development for GPs was transferrable to the South Tyneside context. This was a pilot qualitative study testing proof of concept for the Pegasus Small Group GP education model of professional development in another country. To test the concept, three pilot sessions on Persistent Pain, Screening, and Optimising Treatment were delivered between November 2021, and March 2022. Four UK GPs were trained as SG leaders and a member of the Pegasus team liaised with various UK GPs in South Tyneside to adapt topics for the local context. The use of videoconferencing (MSTeams, Zoom) to deliver support, training, and the programme itself had been developed and refined in the pandemic so that it could be run entirely online without losing its core components or interactive nature. Thirty-one, 50 and 61 GPs respectively from the 68 registered GPs attended the three sessions, 90% of whom rated the overall quality as good or excellent. These results and other positive feedback from attendees provided a mandate for a further extension over the following months. The pilot proved the potential for health systems to collaborate globally despite geographical distance. A wider evaluation to assess the impact of the education initiative is needed to determine the impact on patient care and to demonstrate the benefits of supporting the small group peer education model.

Sex-based analysis of NSTEMI processes of care and outcomes by hospital: a nationwide cohort study.

Contemporary studies demonstrate that non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) processes of care vary according to sex. Little is known regarding variation in practice between geographical areas and centers. We identified 305014 NSTEMI admissions in the United Kingdom (UK) Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP), 2010-2017, including female sex (110209). Hierarchical, multivariate logistic regression models were fitted assessing for differences in primary outcomes according to sex. Risk standardized mortality rates (RSMR) were calculated for individual hospitals to illustrate correlation with variables of interest. 'Heat-maps' were plotted to show regional and sex-based variation in opportunity-based quality-indicator score (surrogate for optimal processes of care). Women presented older (77y vs. 69y, P<0.001) and were more often Caucasian (93%vs. 91%, P<0.001). Women were less frequently managed with an invasive coronary angiogram (ICA) (58%vs. 75%, P<0.001) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (35%vs. 49%, P<0.001)). In our hospital-clustered analysis, we show positive correlation between the RSMR and increasing proportion of women treated for NSTEMI (R2=0.17, P<0.001). There was clear negative correlation between proportion of women who had an optimum OBQI score during their admission and RSMR (R2=0.22, P<0.001), with weaker correlation in men (R2=0.08, P<0.001). Heat-maps according to clinical commissioning group (CCG) demonstrate significant regional variation in OBQI score, with women receiving poorer quality care throughout the UK. There was a significant in variation of the management of patients with NSTEMI according to sex, with widespread geographical variation. Structural changes are required to enable improved care for women.

Identification of patients at risk of cardiovascular disease in greater Manchester in the VICTORION-Spirit study

Background: Inclisiran is a cholesterol-lowering small interfering RNA treatment licensed in the UK for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). VICTORION-Spirit (NCT04807400) is an implementation science study designed to provide evidence for inclisiran implementation within the National Health Service. The aim was to describe the process of patient identification employed in VICTORION-Spirit. Methods: A Phase IIIb, multicentre, randomised controlled study, VICTORION-Spirit is evaluating inclisiran implementation in participants with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or ASCVD-risk equivalents and elevated LDL-C. Feasibility Assessment and Recruitment System for Improving Trial Efficiency (FARSITE) software utilising natural language search functions identified patients who may benefit from inclisiran. FARSITE searches were performed within Salford, Manchester, Trafford and Bury Clinical Commissioning Groups to identify individuals with elevated LDL-C or total cholesterol and pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) or at risk of ASCVD. Results: FARSITE used ‘total cholesterol &gt;4 mmol/l’ terminology rather than ‘LDL-C’; the former yielded &gt;3 times the number of eligible patients. The search for individuals with pre-existing CVD identified 24,196 people in a population of 560,969 (4.3%); including ‘total cholesterol &gt;4 mmol/l’ identified 10,431 individuals with pre-existing CVD and elevated total cholesterol. Searches for individuals at risk of ASCVD identified 65,457 people, narrowing to 26,580 at risk of ASCVD plus elevated total cholesterol. The most discriminatory SNOMED concept codes and their prevalence within the dataset can inform national approaches to develop similar searches. Conclusions: FARSITE searches employed in VICTORION-Spirit identified a population at risk of ASCVD in Greater Manchester, England, who may benefit from a cholesterol-lowering medication such as inclisiran.

What helps patients access web-based services in primary care? Free-text analysis of patient responses to the Di-Facto questionnaire

BackgroundThe National Health Service (NHS) and general practice are increasingly adopting digital services. These services can impact both positively and negatively upon patient experiences, and access to digital services is not equal amongst all groups. Within a wider project examining digital facilitation (the Di-Facto study) our team conducted a patient survey amongst English primary care practices aiming to investigate patient views of what supports uptake and use of web-based services. This paper reports on the analysis of the free-text responses from the patient survey.MethodsThe Di-Facto patient survey was distributed to practices in eight clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England between 2021–2022. We examined free-text responses to two questions relating to access to primary care web-based and support for web-based services. We used qualitative reflexive thematic analysis based on a six-stage process to analyse responses.ResultsOf the 3051 patients who responded to the Di-Facto survey, 2246 provided a free-text response. We present our findings in two major themes: systems and structures and their impact on use of web-based services, and ‘what works for me’, a description of how respondents described what worked, or did not work in terms of their interactions with web-based services. Respondents described how the technology, such as poor practice website design, confusion over multiple digital apps, data security and concerns about eConsultation offerings impacted on use of web-based services. Respondents described practice level barriers, such as a lack of or inconsistent provision, which prevented optimal use of web-based services. Respondents described personal and technical barriers that impacted on their use of digital services, and described which web-based services worked well for them. Respondents felt that web-based services were not a replacement for face-to-face interactions with a doctor.ConclusionsThis analysis of free-text responses from a large patient survey highlights the system, practice, and person level barriers and facilitators to use of digital services in primary care. With an increasing push towards digital solutions in NHS primary care, practices should consider the design, rollout and communication of their web-based services to support patient access.

Effect of the Children and Young People's Health Partnership model of paediatric integrated care on health service use and child health outcomes: a pragmatic two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial.

Paediatric health systems across high-income countries are facing avoidable adverse outcomes and increasing demands and costs. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of an enhanced usual care model with that of an integrated health-care model that offers local health clinics for general paediatric problems and early intervention and care for children and young people with tracer conditions. In this pragmatic two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, we compared the Children and Young People's Health Partnership (CYPHP) model of care versus enhanced usual care (EUC) among children registered at general practices in south London, UK. The CYPHP trial intervention was delivered between April 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021, and children younger than 16 years during the intervention period and registered at study practices on June 30, 2021, were included in the analysis. A restricted randomisation (1:1) following a computer-generated sequence was done by a masked independent statistician at the level of general practice cluster, stratified by borough (Lambeth or Southwark). Cluster allocation and data collection were masked, with unmasking of trial statisticians before analysis. The CYPHP model comprised all elements of EUC (electronic decision support, a primary care hotline, health checks, self-management support and health promotion, and resilience building and mental health first aid) plus local child health clinics delivered by paediatricians and general practitioners, and a nurse-led early intervention service for children with tracer conditions (asthma, eczema, and constipation). Primary outcomes were non-elective admissions (NELA; admissions coded as an emergency) among the whole trial population up to June 30, 2021, and paediatric quality of life (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory [PedsQL]) among participants with tracer conditions at 6 months after recruitment. Secondary outcomes were primary and secondary care use, child mental health, parental wellbeing, standardised symptom scores for asthma, eczema, and constipation, health-care quality, and child absences from school and parent absences from work. The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03461848, and is complete. The trial was conducted between April 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2021. In total, 23 general practice clusters, consisting of 70 practices with 97 970 registered children, were randomised to CYPHP (n=11) or EUC (n=12). We found no effect, at the population level, of CYPHP versus EUC on non-elective admissions during the intervention period (adjusted mean incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1·00 [95% CI 0·91 to 1·10], p=0·99). Among children with tracer conditions, we found no difference in paediatric quality of life (PedsQL score) at 6 months (adjusted mean difference -0·033 [95% CI -0·122 to 0·055], p=0·46). As a secondary outcome, among children with tracer conditions and requiring care, NELA rates at 12 months did not differ between the CYPHP and EUC groups (66·1 per 1000 person-years vs 75·3 per 1000 person-years; adjusted mean IRR 0·87 [0·61-1·22], p=0·42). In children requiring care, a statistically significant improvement was observed in eczema symptoms at 6 months from baseline in the CYPHP group versus the EUC group (adjusted mean difference -1·370 [-2·630 to -0·122], p=0·032). Quality of asthma care significantly improved among children in the CYPHP group compared with children in the EUC group. No significant improvement was seen for all other secondary outcomes. Although the CYPHP trial found a null effect for the primary outcomes, we found clinically important improvements in some secondary outcomes including care quality. Previous research has shown that large-scale system change requires time to observe a potential positive effect. Guy's and St Thomas Charity, the Lambeth and Southwark Clinical Commissioning Groups, and Evelina London Children's Hospital.

Outcomes and GP perceptions of reviewing patients at risk of harm from opioids

Abstract Introduction The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Medicines Optimisation workplan for 2021-22 had a focus on reducing harm from opioids.1,2 In particular, asking GP practices to identify and review two cohorts of patients: those on a combination of oxycodone and amitriptyline or similar high-risk combinations, and those over the age of 65 prescribed fentanyl transdermal patches. Practices were then expected to consider actions on how to reduce the risk for patients and also to provide feedback to the CCG on how the reviews had progressed. Aim We aimed to understand the outcomes, challenges and learning points experienced by practices in reviewing these patients. Methods Sixty practices were invited to participate. A feedback form was received from each practice that completed either or both reviews (covering anonymised outcomes of each review, challenges encountered, and practice-level learning points / changes made). Quantitative data were collated for each action, and feedback comments were categorised into broad groups. No patient details were collected. As this project was a service evaluation, ethical approval was not required. Results Forty-three practices completed the review of the combination of oxycodone and amitriptyline, though 5 of these had no patients to review. Overall, 185 patients were identified. Of these, 21 (11%) patients had the combination prescribing ceased, 22 (12%) were commenced on a reduction plan, and another 46 (25%) have been made aware of the risk and to report respiratory symptoms. Forty-three practices completed the fentanyl review, though one of these had no patients to review. Overall, 272 patients over 65 years were identified with 64 (24%) invited for a review with their GP or other allied health professional, 39 (14%) patients were put on a fentanyl patch dose reduction plan, and 14 (5%) had prescribing ceased. Practices reported various difficulties encountered with these reviews, including patient engagement in making changes to their pain medication which patients are reluctant to reduce; counselling and raising awareness of long-term effects of opioids to help gain patient understanding; how to manage complex patients who had been stable on their regimen over many years; and that it was time consuming to regularly check in with the patient and plan reduction regimens. Changes made by practices included recording risks discussed with patient in their medical record for easier future review; ensuring regular reviews, including by practice-based pharmacists, of patients prescribed opioids; trying to make time to see patients face to face; raising awareness of the risks of prescribing amitriptyline alongside oxycodone e.g. serotonin syndrome; and recognising that a collaborative process and patient engagement is necessary. Discussion/Conclusion The actions undertaken by practices link into national recommendations,1 with some GP feedback similar to the challenges and opportunities to improve patient safety on opioid use as reported elsewhere.3 Even with this small targeted patient cohort, this work demonstrates difficulties encountered by GPs in refraining from opioid prescribing. Other limitations of this small-scale review include lack of certainty whether reductions in opioid prescribing were always clinically appropriate, and reliance on practice feedback.

Estimating productivity levels in primary medical services across clinical commissioning groups in England and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: a data envelopment analysis

ObjectivesTo assess the relative productivity of primary medical services in England and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity levels.SettingPrimary medical services for 59 million patients (98% of the population in England), in 101 clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), across two time periods: period 1, pre-pandemic, April to December 2019 and period 2, pandemic, April to December 2020.MethodsWe use data envelopment analysis (DEA) to assess relative productivity with four input measures (the number of full-time equivalent general practitioners, nurses, other direct patient contact staff and administrators), and five output measures (face-to-face appointments, remote consultations, home visits, referrals to secondary care and prescriptions). Our units of analysis were CCGs. DEA assigns an efficiency score to a CCG, taking a value between 0 and 100%, by benchmarking it against the most productive CCGs. We use Tobit regression to examine the association between productivity and other factors.ResultsThe mean bias-corrected efficiency score of primary medical services in CCGs was 92.9% (interquartile range 92.0% to 95.7%) in period 1, falling to 90.6% (interquartile range 86.8% to 95.2%) in period 2. In period 1, CCGs with a higher proportion of registered patients aged over 65 years, higher levels of deprivation, lower levels of disease prevalence, higher nurse to GP ratios and higher GP to other direct patient contact staff ratios, achieved statistically significantly higher general practice efficiency scores (p < 0.05). In period 2, only the ratio of GP to other direct patient contact staff was associated with efficiency scores (p > 0.05).ConclusionsOur analysis indicates only modest geographic variation in productivity of primary medical services when measured at the level of clinical commissioning groups and a small reduction in productivity during the pandemic. Further work to establish relative productivity of individual GP practices is warranted once sufficient data on appointment rates by GP practice is available.

Contraception prescribing in England during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundNational lockdowns in England due to COVID-19 resulted in rapid shifts in healthcare provision, including in primary care where most contraceptive prescriptions are issued. This study aimed to investigate contraception...

333 Inequity of Access to Investigations and Treatment of Varicose Veins by Clinician Grade: A Single Centre Retrospective Audit

Abstract Aim Following COVID-19, restrictions on investigations and theatre capacity led to a change in the Norfolk &amp; Waveney Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) referral to treatment (RTT) criteria for varicose veins (VV); Only &amp;gt;C4 disease should be treated. An audit was performed to check for variability in outcomes between grade of surgeon. Method Retrospective audit of all VV referrals between 01/04/21-28/02/22. Case notes were reviewed assessing compliance with CCG criteria by surgeon grade and subsequent referrals for investigations and treatment. Results 250 VV referrals were made, 43.5% Male, mean (±SD) age 54.8 (16.9) years. 71 were rejected outright, 158 should have been rejected and 70 were subsequently reviewed in clinic. 20 were seen by SpRs and 50 by consultants. 62.9% (22) of ineligible patients attending clinic went on to have investigations. Of those seen in clinic, 35 did not meet the RTT criteria and should have been discharged. Significant differences in discharges were seen between SpRs &amp; Consultants (13.3% vs. 45% respectively (p = 0.046)). Duplex scans organised by SpRs (75%) were more likely to not meet the RTT criteria than Consultants (30.3%), p = 0.003. However, once a scan was performed there were no significant differences in proportion of these patients listed for treatment (64.3% vs. 29.4% (p = 0.247)). Conclusions SpRs are less likely to discharge patients from clinic who don’t meet RTT criteria than consultants and are more likely to request unnecessary investigations and treatment compared to consultants demonstrating inequity of care. SpRs should be educated on RTT criteria changes when working in different hospitals.

P08 Preventing and managing urinary tract infections: using thematic analysis to explore interventions and strategies implemented by NHS commissioning organizations in English primary care, 2017–22

Abstract Objectives To identify and explore strategies, interventions and activities used by English Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) to improve prevention and management of urinary tract infections (UTIs) from 2017–22. Methods Online questionnaires were sent to primary care chief nurses and medicines optimization leads via regional infection prevention control (IPC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) leads August–September 2022. Qualitative data were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results Response rate was 14.1% (56/397 participants approached), with representation from 29.2% (31/106) English CCGs. Respondents provided 201 examples of UTI interventions. Themes identified included: (i) populations and settings; (ii) aspects of UTI targeted; (iii) types and functions of interventions and activities; (iv) resources, tools and policies; and (v) implementation strategies. Education and training were the most used type of intervention, while changing the environment to facilitate ideal behaviours was the least used intervention type. Most interventions targeted general practice staff and patients accessing primary care, followed by care home staff and residents and their families. The most used success measures included reduction in antibiotic prescribing (54.5%, 97/178 intervention examples); positive feedback from stakeholders (42.1%, 75/178); and increased adherence to national diagnostic guidelines (32.6%, 58/178). However, 48.8% (20/41) stated their team’s UTI activities had not been evaluated, indicating that success was determined using informal data or perceived outcomes. Barriers to implementation of UTI interventions included: lack of resources and time; low staff engagement, inaccurate data due to lack of clinical coding; inconsistent systems and processes; and lack of dedicated roles. Facilitators to implementation included: availability of tools; financial incentives; multidisciplinary collaboration; sharing of information; staff motivation; embedding resources into systems; digitalization; and dedicated roles. Conclusions Multidisciplinary teams and cross-sector collaboration are key facilitators for implementation of UTI interventions. Although some teams are already using robust success measures, there is a need to improve how interventions are evaluated to inform resource allocation and planning. Education and training interventions should address or leverage the barriers and facilitators identified, including clinical coding skills, embedding resources and tools into existing systems and auditing adherence to diagnostic and antibiotic prescribing guidance. There may be missed opportunities for intervention types that are less widely used e.g. changing environmental factors.

The rapid access eye clinic's playbook: how to cut eye casualty attendance by 50.

Moorfields Eye Unit at the London Borough of Croydon sees over 47,000 outpatient attendances each year, 5894 of which attended the eye walk-in Urgent Care in the 2017- 2018 year, which has become unsustainable. A recent audit found that referrers and patients had limited experience in managing ophthalmic conditions. If triaged according to clinical need only 22% patients attended required same-day hospital eye care. As such the service needed to bereconfigured. This was achieved through extensive collaboration with our local Clinical commissioning groups (CCG), General Practitioner (GP) body, Optometrists and host hospital at the Croydon University Hospital. The Rapid Access Clinic (RAC) was set up in November 2018 to replace the old-style walk-in pathway and provide a streamlined emergency eye care service for patients. RAC demonstrated an efficient and safe triage system which can improve patient flow. Since the launch date of RAC on the 1st November 2018, a 50% sustained decrease in attendances to urgent care was noted. This was achieved without impacting other eye services, by advising the referrers and redirecting referrals appropriately. At the same time the appropriateness of the attendances to our emergency clinic improved from 32% to 68%. Using a digital platform for referrals and data collection allowed up to continuously perform service evaluation. The forward-online triage and our close relationship with community enabled a safe continuation of providing emergency eye care locally. The controlled booked attendance as well as the advice and guidance system enabled us to prioritise true emergencies.

Adaptation and Implementation of a Shared Decision-Making Tool From One Health Context to Another: Partnership Approach Using Mixed Methods.

Osteoarthritis is a leading cause of pain and disability. Knee osteoarthritis accounts for nearly four-fifths of the burden of osteoarthritis internationally, and 10% of adults in the United Kingdom have the condition. Shared decision-making (SDM) supports patients to make more informed choices about treatment and care while reducing inequities in access to treatment. We evaluated the experience of a team adapting an SDM tool for knee osteoarthritis and the tool's implementation potential within a local clinical commissioning group (CCG) area in southwest England. The tool aims to prepare patients and clinicians for SDM by providing evidence-based information about treatment options relevant to disease stage. This study aimed to explore the experiences of a team adapting an SDM tool from one health context to another and the implementation potential of the tool in the local CCG area. A partnership approach using mixed methods was used to respond to recruitment challenges and ensure that study aims could be addressed within time restrictions. A web-based survey was used to obtain clinicians' feedback on experiences of using the SDM tool. Qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone or video call with a sample of stakeholders involved in adapting and implementing the tool in the local CCG area. Survey findings were summarized as frequencies and percentages. Content analysis was conducted on qualitative data using framework analysis, and data were mapped directly to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Overall, 23 clinicians completed the survey, including first-contact physiotherapists (11/23, 48%), physiotherapists (7/23, 30%), specialist physiotherapists (4/23, 17%), and a general practitioner (1/23, 4%). Eight stakeholders involved in commissioning, adapting, and implementing the SDM tool were interviewed. Participants described barriers and facilitators to the adaptation, implementation, and use of the tool. Barriers included a lack of organizational culture that supported and resourced SDM, lack of clinician buy-in and awareness of the tool, challenges with accessibility and usability, and lack of adaptation for underserved communities. Facilitators included the influence of clinical leaders' belief that SDM tools can improve patient outcomes and National Health Service resource use, clinicians' positive experiences of using the tool, and improving awareness of the tool. Themes were mapped to 13 of the 14 TDF domains. Usability issues were described, which did not map to the TDF domains. This study highlights barriers and facilitators to adapting and implementing tools from one health context to another. We recommend that tools selected for adaptation should have a strong evidence base, including evidence of effectiveness and acceptability in the original context. Legal advice should be sought regarding intellectual property early in the project. Existing guidance for developing and adapting interventions should be used. Co-design methods should be applied to improve adapted tools' accessibility and acceptability.

Was access to video consultations with GPs in England equitable during the early COVID-19 lockdown period?

The COVID-19 pandemic compelled clinicians to change access to primary health care as face-to-face consultations were a risk to patients and staff. Video consultations (VCs) were frequently substituted as a proxy for a clinical examination. We were interested in finding out whether people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds in England had equitable video access to their GPs during the initial COVID-19 lockdown period. There are various VC applications available to GPs. We used publicly available data from one supplier in this study. Data were available for the number of VCs that GP practices from each clinical commissioning group (CCG) in England completed during March 2020. We ranked CCGs and their socioeconomic backgrounds by using Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) data added from GOV.UK resources. In March, there were 77 834 VCs recorded for England, with a range of 4.3 to 45.4 VCs per GP practice per month (interquartile range 13.7-24.3). There was a negative correlation between consultation rate and deprivation (IMD) (Pearson -0.276, P = 0.04), suggesting a nearly 60% difference in VC rate between most and least deprived CCGs, with the least affluent CCGs having fewest VCs. While video use overall was low, patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds had less access to VCs with their GPs in the initial lockdown, which may have had negative impacts on health. The pandemic was an unprecedented event, and primary care rapidly pivoted to online care. However, to mitigate health inequalities, primary care must implement methods to cater for all patients and minimise the risk of digital health exclusion.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial stewardship support for general practices in England: a qualitative interview study.

In England, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) (now replaced by Integrated Care Systems (ICS)) and Primary Care Network (PCN) professionals support primary care prescribers to optimise antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). To explore views and experiences of CCG/PCN staff in supporting AMS, and the impact of COVID-19 on this support. Qualitative interview study in primary care in England. Semi-structured interviews-with staff from CCG/PCNs responsible for AMS-at two time-points, via telephone interviews. These were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Twenty-seven interviews were conducted with 14 participants (nine CCG, five PCN) in Dec 2020/Jan 2021 and Feb/Mar 2021.We found that AMS support was 1) deprioritised- to keep general practice operational and deliver COVID-19 vaccines; 2) disrupted-as social distancing made it harder to build relationships, conduct routine AMS activities, and challenge prescribing decisions; and 3) adapted-with opportunities identified for greater use of technology and from changed patient/public perceptions of viruses and self-care. We also found that resources to support AMS were valued if they were both novel, to counter AMS 'fatigue', and sufficiently familiar to fit with existing/future AMS. AMS needs to be reprioritised in general practice in the post-pandemic era and within the new ICS in England. This should include interventions/strategies that combine novel elements with already familiar strategies to refresh prescribers' motivation and opportunity for AMS. Behaviour change interventions should be aimed at improving the culture and processes for how PCN pharmacists voice concerns about AMS to prescribers in general practice and take advantage of the changed patient/public perceptions of viruses and self-care.

NHS HOSPITALS IN ENGLAND ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE IN PROCURING INTEGRATED CARE BOARD (ICB) CONTRACTS FOR TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY

Clinical commissioning groups (CCG) have been replaced with ICBs that will bring together NHS and social care for the local population. ICBs are allocating contracts for long waiters for total hip replacements (THR) to hospitals that have achieved pre-covid volumes of THR, THR volumes undertaken by hospitals in 2022 should be at 2019 levels or more.Purpose of this study was to identify whether NHS hospitals in England are at a disadvantage in procuring ICB contracts for THR.THR volumes for NHS and independent sector (IND) hospitals from January 2012 to November 2022 were identified via National Joint Registry. Regional and national trend for THR volumes were identified for both NHS and IND hospitals using linear regression analysis.Trends of THR for NHS hospitals showed either stagnation or reduction in volume from 2014–2019. In 2022, nationally THR volume of NHS was 70% of 2019 (Figure 1). Trend of THR volume for IND hospitals nationally was a strong uptrend from 2012 to 2022 with a break only in 2020 due to COVID pandemic (Figure 2). Since the pandemic IND have overtaken NHS hospitals in volumes of THR undertaken. Similar picture of trends evolves when THR trends were assessed on a region by region basis.With NHS hospitals not back to pre-pandemic THR volumes, IND hospitals have a distinct advantage in securing more contracts via ICB. This in turn puts NHS hospitals at risk of taking on more complex and medically unwell patients potentially worsening NJR outcomes for NHS hospitals.The reasons for the lag in NHS hospitals’ THR volumes are multifactorial, not limited to continued bed pressures, increased emergency and unplanned admissions, staff shortages and sickness, pension taxations preventing doctors from undertaking more THR. However, lack of access to contracts from ICB will put NHS hospitals at huge financial and existential risk for elective care.For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly.

MyCOPD App for Managing Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance for a Digital Health Technology.

myCOPD is a digital tool designed for people to manage their chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It requires a device with an internet connection and incorporates tools for education, self-management, symptom tracking and pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). myCOPD was selected for medical technologies guidance by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2020. The External Assessment Group (EAG) critiqued the company's submission. The evidence comprised four clinical studies (three randomised controlled trials [RCTs] and one observational study) and real-world evidence from 22 documents. The RCTs had small sample sizes, limiting the power to detect statistically significant differences and to match patient characteristics across arms. The company produced two de novo models for two subgroups of people with COPD; people discharged from hospital with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) and people referred for PR. After the EAG updated input parameters and adjusted the model structures, cost savings of £86,297 per clinical commissioning group (CCG) compared with standard care were estimated for the AECOPD population, with myCOPD predicted to be cost saving in 74% of iterations. Cost savings of £22,779 per CCG were estimated for the PR population (with the assumption that the CCG had an existing myCOPD licence), with myCOPD predicted to be cost saving in 86% of the iterations. The Medical Technologies Advisory Committee concluded that although myCOPD has the potential to help manage COPD in adults, further evidence is required to address uncertainties in the current evidence base. NICE published this as Medical Technology Guidance 68 (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). myCOPD for managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2022. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/mtg68/ ).

Telemedicine: the future of personalised atrial fibrillation care in a post pandemic world?

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): The pilot phase of the Virtual Ward was funded by Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Clinical Commissioning Group and supported by a Digital Healthcare Partnership Award from NHS Innovation (now Transformation Directorate). Background The current model of care for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is born out of legacy physician-centred care models. The development and acceptance of digital technology have enabled the advent of novel telemedicine-based models for patients with fast AF. Purpose A virtual AF ward was implemented as a proof-of-concept care model for patients with AF and rapid ventricular response. Methods Patients presenting acutely with AF or Atrial flutter (AFL) to the hospital were onboarded to the virtual ward and managed remotely at home, after being given access to a single-lead ECG device (Kardia), a blood pressure monitor and pulse oximeter with instructions to record daily ECGs, blood pressure, oxygen saturations and complete an online AF symptom questionnaire. Data were uploaded to a digital platform (Dignio) for daily review by the clinical team. Primary outcomes included admission avoidance, re-admission avoidance, and patient satisfaction. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the NHS Friends and Family test (FFT) in addition to narrative feedback. Results There were 50 admissions to the virtual ward between January and August 2022. Twenty-four initial hospital admissions were avoided with patients instead directly enrolled from the outpatient setting and a further 25 re-admissions were appropriately prevented during virtual surveillance, avoiding a total of 49 admissions to hospital beds. Most admissions were in AF 78% (n=39) or AFL 18% (n=9), with two admissions frequently alternating between sinus rhythm and AF 4% (n=2). Mean HR at the time of admission and discharge was 122 ± 26 and 82 ± 27 bpm, respectively. FFT response rate was 90% (n=45), with 100% positive responses. Only one patient declined using the service due to technology related anxiety. None of the patients demanded to unilaterally terminate the monitoring, or stopped using the online platform before being discharged from the virtual ward. Conclusion This is a first real-world experience of an AF virtual ward that demonstrates a potential for reducing the healthcare burden imposed by AF admissions, while providing the holistic and personalised care that AF needs. Work is ongoing to further confirm safety and cost-effectiveness upon progress in a larger patient cohort.

Inequalities in provision of hip and knee replacement surgery for osteoarthritis by age, sex, and social deprivation in England between 2007-2017: A population-based cohort study of the National Joint Registry.

While the United Kingdom National Health Service aimed to reduce social inequalities in the provision of joint replacement, it is unclear whether these gaps have reduced. We describe secular trends in the provision of primary hip and knee replacement surgery between social deprivation groups. We used the National Joint Registry to identify all hip and knee replacements performed for osteoarthritis from 2007 to 2017 in England. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 was used to identify the relative level of deprivation of the patient living area. Multilevel negative binomial regression models were used to model the differences in rates of joint replacement. Choropleth maps of hip and knee replacement provision were produced to identify the geographical variation in provision by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). A total of 675,342 primary hip and 834,146 primary knee replacements were studied. The mean age was 70 years old (standard deviation: 9) with 60% and 56% of women undergoing hip and knee replacements, respectively. The overall rate of hip replacement increased from 27 to 36 per 10,000 person-years and knee replacement from 33 to 46. Inequalities of provision between the most (reference) and least affluent areas have remained constant for both joints (hip: rate ratio (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [0.56, 0.60] in 2007, RR = 0.59 [0.58, 0.61] in 2017; knee: RR = 0.82 [0.80, 0.85] in 2007, RR = 0.81 [0.80, 0.83] in 2017). For hip replacement, CCGs with the highest concentration of deprived areas had lower overall provision rates, and CCGs with very few deprived areas had higher provision rates. There was no clear pattern of provision inequalities between CCGs and deprivation concentration for knee replacement. Study limitations include the lack of publicly available information to explore these inequalities beyond age, sex, and geographical area. Information on clinical need for surgery or patient willingness to access care were unavailable. In this study, we found that there were inequalities, which remained constant over time, especially in the provision of hip replacement, by degree of social deprivation. Providers of healthcare need to take action to reduce this unwarranted variation in provision of surgery.

'It is still coming from the centre and coming out': The material conditions adding to over-bureaucratised patient and public involvement for commissioning health and care in England.

To understand how materiality affects patient and public involvement (PPI) for commissioning and leading health and care services in the English National Health Service (NHS) context. From April 2013 groups of general practitioners (GPs) became members of NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to assess needs and procure core health services for and with local communities. Since July 2022, integrated care systems (ICSs) have subsumed this responsibility. NHS reorganisations have been driven by the promise of more effective and efficient health care and have led to a long history of PPI on economic, political, and moral grounds. Few studies researching PPI in clinical commissioning exist and fewer still have explored a more agentic understanding of materiality and its impact on PPI. A focused ethnography was used to examine PPI for clinical commissioning within two CCG case study sites in England. Three CCG Governing Body lay representatives, nine GP commissioners and seven service user representatives took part in focus groups and/or were interviewed. Fifteen nonparticipant observations were also carried out at CCG meetings and the associated materiality was examined. The materiality of activities involved in clinical commissioning influences and shapes the nature of PPI. These forms of materiality may dilute and subvert meaningful engagement and involvement that relies on trust, leadership, learning, and partnership working. System leaders in ICSs should consider the significance of materiality in centrally driven processes involved in PPI commissioning to reduce barriers and ensure meaningful partnerships within local communities. The study design ensured PPI throughout the research process in keeping with contemporary research practice guidance. The project steering committee included service users with current or recent PPI clinical commissioning experience outside of the study sites. There was PPI involvement in the original study proposal and its development including the bid for doctoral funds on which this study is based. All were involved in assessing the rigour of the data collection, interpretation of the findings and ensuring the project remained true to the aims of the study. Two members have also participated in presentation of the study findings.

P138 Inequity in Clinical Commissioning Group funding across England for high-cost biologic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis

Abstract Background/Aims Biologic, and targeted, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs/tDMARDs) are recommended for patients in England with high disease activity score rheumatoid arthritis (HDAS-RA) who do not respond to two or more conventional synthetic DMARDs. To prescribe bDMARDs/tDMARDs in England, prescribers must apply for funding via their local clinical commissioning group (CCG). The project aim was to review whether CCGs across England had defined high cost drugs pathways for bDMARDs/tDMARDs use in HDAS-RA and if so, what this pathway looked like regarding drug choice, order of availability, and ability to prescribe as monotherapy. Methods We submitted a freedom of information (FOI) request in October 2021 to all CCGs within England to obtain their high cost drug pathway for bDMARDs/tDMARDs use in HDAS-RA. We then manually reviewed the pathways to determine whether the CCG specified an order of drug prescribing. Data was also gathered on whether CCGs allowed abatacept (ABT), rituximab (RTX), and golimumab (GOL) to be prescribed as monotherapy. Results All 107 CCGs in England responded to the FOI request. 69 out of 107 CCGs (65%) had a pathway for bDMARDs/tDMARDs prescribing. 60 out of 69 CCGs (87%) specified an order for drug prescribing in RA. Within their pathways, CCGs generally fell into 3 prescribing preferences. Table 1 summarises these pathway recommendations. 39 (57%), 59 (86%), and 6 (9%) CCGs allowed ABT/RTX/GOL to be prescribed as monotherapy respectively. RTX monotherapy was specifically allowed outside of special indications such as cancer, interstitial lung disease and multiple sclerosis. Conclusion These findings show there is significant variation across England regarding which bDMARDs/tDMARDs patients can receive for HDAS-RA resulting in a postcode lottery. Several studies support the use of ABT/RTX/GOL as monotherapy and registry data shows that 30-40% of RA patients are administered ABT/RTX/GOL as monotherapy for methotrexate intolerance/contraindication. Lack of NICE appraisal, however, means some CCGs mandate individual funding requests for monotherapy prescribing. We would like to use these results to help negotiate equitable access to bDMARDs/tDMARDs nationwide. Disclosure O. Buckeldee: None. R. Khanna: None. L. Snell: None. L. Attipoe: None.