Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership Research Articles

Suicide in individuals with eating disorders who had sought mental health treatment in England: a national retrospective cohort study

Although studies have suggested a high risk of suicide in people with eating disorders, most studies have focused on suicidal ideation and attempts. There is little research on the characteristics of people with eating disorders who died by suicide, nor investigation of trends over time. We aimed to compare the characteristics of patients with eating disorders who died by suicide versus patients with other mental health diagnoses who died by suicide in England and to examine the trends in rates. In this national retrospective cohort study, data on all people (aged ≥10 years) who died by suicide in England, UK, between Jan 1, 1997, and Dec 31, 2021, while under the care (within the previous 12 months) of mental health services were obtained from the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health (NCISH), in which clinical information is collected via a questionnaire completed by the mental health professional responsible for the patient's care. Incidence of suicide in, and demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics of, patients with a diagnosis of eating disorder (as recorded by the treating clinician) who died by suicide were compared with patients with other mental health diagnoses who died by suicide within the same timeframe using univariable logistic regression analysis. People with related lived experience were involved in the study design, implementation, interpretation, and writing of the manuscript. Of 119 446 people for whom NCISH were notified of dying by suicide in England, 30 795 were under the recent care of mental health services, of whom 30 246 had known diagnoses and were included in analyses. Of these individuals, 10 373 (34%) were female and 19 873 (66%) were male; 2236 (8%) were of minority ethnicity; 382 (1%) had a diagnosis of eating disorder and 29 864 (99%) had another mental health diagnosis. Compared with patients with other mental health diagnoses who died by suicide, patients with eating disorders were younger (median age 33 years [range 15-90] vs 45 years [10-100]), more often female (343 [90%] female and 39 [10%] male in the eating disorders group; 10 030 [34%] female and 19 834 [66%] male in the other diagnoses group), and less likely to have evidence of conventional risk factors for suicide such as living alone (odds ratio [OR] 0·68, 95% CI 0·55-0·84). 22 (6%) of 382 were from a minority ethnic group. Patients with an eating disorder were characterised by a greater clinical complexity (eg, self-harm [OR 2·31, 95% CI 1·78-3·00], comorbidity [9·79, 6·81-14·1], and longer duration of illness [1·95, 1·56-2·43]), and were more likely to have died following overdoses (2·00, 1·62-2·45) than patients with other diagnoses. Childhood abuse (52 [37%] of 140) and domestic violence (18 [20%] of 91) were common in patients with eating disorders. Similar to patients with other diagnoses, most (244 [75%] of 326) of those with eating disorders who died by suicide were rated as low risk by clinicians at last contact. The number of suicide deaths in patients with eating disorders rose between 1997 and 2021 (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1·03, 95% CI 1·02-1·05; p<0·0001), but rates fell when accounting for the greater number of patients entering mental health services (IRR 0·97, 0·95-1·00; p=0·033). This study was focused on people who sought help from mental health services. It did not consider subtypes of eating disorders or include a control group, but it does highlight possible areas for intervention. The comprehensive provision of evidence-based treatment for eating disorders and underlying conditions to address the clinical complexity in these patients might help to reduce suicide. Recognising limitations in clinical risk assessment, addressing early life experiences and current adversities, and appropriate prescribing might also be of benefit. Suicide prevention must remain a priority for eating disorder services and mental health care more widely. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

OA42 Effect of intra-articular corticosteroid injections for osteoarthritis on subsequent use of pain medications: an instrumental variable and propensity score analysis

Abstract Background/Aims Intra-articular corticosteroid injections (IACI) are recommended in the UK by NICE as an adjunctive treatment for uncontrolled pain from osteoarthritis (OA). NICE guidance states there is no evidence for therapeutic benefit lasting beyond three months, and that more evidence is needed on effectiveness at non-knee joints. We therefore aimed to assess the longer-term effect of IACI use on pain medication prescriptions among people with hand, hip, knee or shoulder OA. Methods We conducted a cohort study using UK primary care (CPRD GOLD) data for patients aged ≥20 years with a first diagnosis of OA during 2005-2019, excluding those with prior orthopaedic surgery referral or OA diagnosed at multiple joints. Exposure to IACI was defined using Read codes. The primary outcome was incident prescribing of pain medication: oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, oral corticosteroids, paracetamol, partial opioids, and topical NSAIDs. In main analyses, an instrumental variable (IV) approach was used. Index date was six months after OA diagnosis date and IV was defined as practice preference for IACI use in the year prior to index date (single and recurrent use considered separately). Outcomes were measured over five years from index date. Covariate balance was assessed, and two-step Poisson regression used where assumptions met. In secondary analyses, propensity score (PS) matching was carried out and time-varying exposure Cox models used to estimate treatment effect. Results Of 181,818 eligible patients, 92,157 (50.7%) were retained in IV analyses of single IACI and 89,103 (49.0%) of repeat IACI. Covariates were well balanced (SMD ≤0.1) across IV groups for hand (single IACI only) and knee OA, but not hip or shoulder OA. In IV analyses of hand OA, single IACI was associated with lower 5-year cumulative incidence of several pain medications including oral corticosteroids (relative risk [RR] 0.27 [95% CI 0.10, 0.76], paracetamol (RR 0.27 [0.09, 0.78] and partial opioids (RR 0.24 [0.10, 0.60]). IACI for knee OA was associated with lower 5-year cumulative incidence of most pain medications, e.g., for partial opioids a RR 0.46 [95% CI 0.34, 0.61] and RR 0.33 [0.21, 0.51] for single and recurrent IACI, respectively. Most PS matched analyses had &amp;gt;20,000 included patients (all joints combined), with covariates well balanced across IACI exposure status. PS matching confirmed a reduction in incidence of several pain medications associated with single IACI, e.g., lower incidence of partial opioids following IACI for any of hand, hip, knee or shoulder OA. Conclusion Our main findings suggest IACI use for hand or knee OA may reduce subsequent need for analgesics. Among knee OA patients, generally larger reductions were observed following recurrent than single IACI. In secondary analyses, single IACI for hand, hip, knee or shoulder OA was associated with lower subsequent use of partial opioids. Disclosure S. Hawley: None. A. Prats-Uribe: Grants/research support; European Medicines Agency. G. Matharu: Grants/research support; National Institute of Health and Care Research, Academy of Medical Sciences. A. Delmestri: None. D. Prieto-Alhambra: Consultancies; AstraZeneca, UCB Biopharma. Grants/research support; European Medicines Agency, Innovative Medicines Initiative, Amgen, Chiesi-Taylor, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB Biopharma. Other; Amgen, Astrellas, Janssen, Synapse Management Partners, UCB Biopharma. A. Judge: Grants/research support; National Institute of Health and Care Research, Health Data Research UK, Versus Arthritis, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), Royal College of Physicians (RCP), Tommy's, The Health Foundation. M. Whitehouse: Royalties; Taylor Francis. Member of speakers’ bureau; Heraeus. Grants/research support; National Institute of Health and Care Research, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), Ceramtec.

Ten-year review of trends in children with type 1 diabetes in England and Wales.

This review describes the prevalence, incidence, and demographics of children and young people (CYP) with type 1 diabetes in England and Wales using data from the United Kingdom National Paediatric Diabetes Audit (NPDA) and has almost 100% submission from all paediatric diabetes centres annually. It is a powerful benchmarking tool and is an essential part of a long-term quality improvement programme for CYP with diabetes. Clinical characteristics of this population by age, insulin regimen, complication rates, health inequalities, access to diabetes technology, socioeconomic deprivation and glycaemic outcomes over the past decade is described in the review. The NPDA for England and Wales is commissioned by the United Kingdom Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership as part of the National Clinical Audit for the United Kingdom National Service Framework for Diabetes. The rising incidence of Type 1 diabetes is evidenced in the past decade. Reduction in national median glycated hemoglobin for CYP with diabetes is observed over the last 10 years and the improvement sustained by various initiatives and quality improvement pro-grammes implemented with universal health coverage.

Summary of the third annual HQIP CVDPREVENT audit report

The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) CVDPREVENT audit was set up to monitor and support improvements in cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care in England. This article summarises the findings of its third annual audit report, which includes data up to March 2022.

Suicide among psychiatric patients who migrated to the UK: a national clinical survey.

Within the UK, limited research has examined migration and suicide risk. To assist with tailoring mental health care to the needs of different migrant groups, it is important to identify the clinical profile and antecedents to suicide. We focussed on two groups of migrants: those resident in the UK for less than 5 years (recent migrants) and those seeking permission to stay in the UK. Data on mental health patients who died by suicide in the UK between 2011 and 2019 were obtained as part of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health. 13,948 patients died by suicide between 2011 and 2019: 593 were recent migrants with 48 seeking permission to stay in the UK. The overall suicide rate between 2011 and 2017 for patients seeking to stay was 23.8/100,000 (95% CI 17.3-32.1). There was some uncertainty around this estimate but it appeared higher than the general population suicide rate of 10.6/100,000 population (95% CI 10.5-10.7; p=.0001) for the same period. A higher proportion of migrants were from an ethnic minority group (15% recent migrants vs. 70% seeking to remain vs. 7% non-migrants) and more were viewed as at low long-term risk of suicide (63% recent migrants vs. 76% seeking to remain vs. 57% non-migrants). A higher proportion of recent migrants died within three months of discharge from psychiatric in-patient care (19% vs. 14%) compared to non-migrants. Proportionally more patients seeking to remain had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and other delusional disorders (31% vs. 15%) and more had experienced recent life events compared to non-migrants (71% vs. 51%). A higher proportion of migrants had severe or acute illness at the time of their suicide. This may be linked to a range of serious stressors and/or lack of connection with services that could have identified signs of illness early. However, clinicians often viewed these patients as low risk. Mental health services should consider the breadth of stressors migrants may face and adopt a multi-agency approach to suicide prevention. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

Evaluation of the ICD-10 system in coding revascularisation procedures in patients with peripheral arterial disease in England: A retrospective cohort study using national administrative and clinical databases.

Many studies evaluating care in hospitals in England use the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) administrative database. The aim of this study was to explore whether the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) system used by HES supported the evaluation of care received by patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) who had revascularisation. This retrospective cohort study used records on patients who had revascularisation for PAD between 1st January 2017 and 31st December 2019 in England, collected prospectively in the National Vascular Registry (NVR) and linked to HES. Patients were excluded if their NVR record did not have a match in HES, due to lack of consent or different admission and procedure dates. Agreement between different presentations of PAD recorded in the NVR and the ICD-10 diagnostic codes recorded in HES was evaluated using the unweighted Kappa statistic and sensitivity and specificity. Agreement between the NVR and HES was also assessed for gender, age, comorbidities, mode of admission, and procedure type and side. In total, 20,603 patients who had 24,621 admissions were included in the study. Agreement between NVR and HES on patient gender (Kappa=0.98), age (Kappa=0.98), mode of admission (Kappa=0.80), and procedure type and side (Kappa=0.92 and 0.87, respectively) was excellent. When all diagnostic fields in HES were explored, substantial agreement was observed for chronic ischaemia with tissue loss (Kappa=0.63), but it was lower for chronic ischaemia without tissue loss (Kappa=0.32) and acute limb ischaemia (Kappa=0.15). Agreement on comorbidities was mixed; excellent for diabetes (Kappa=0.82), moderate for chronic lung disease (Kappa=0.56), chronic kidney disease (Kappa=0.56), and ischaemic heart disease (Kappa=0.45) and fair for chronic heart failure (Kappa=0.35). The diagnostic ICD-10 codes currently used in HES cannot accurately differentiate between stages of PAD. Therefore, studies using HES to examine patterns of care and outcomes for patients with PAD are likely to suffer from misclassification bias. Adopting an extended ICD-10 system or the ICD-11 version released to the World Health Organisation member states in 2022, may overcome this problem. Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP).

STATISTICAL METHODS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF CLINICAL AUDIT RESULTS

The research aims at improving the quality assessment of clinical audit results in Ukraine using the complex of statistical methods and studying statistical methods in foreign reports of the clinical audit and personal experience.&#x0D; Materials and Methods. The research was performed by analyzing the reports of clinical audit (n=62), held during 2021 by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership. The spectrum of statistical methods was extended by the analysis of the example of a sociological survey of patients (n=405) regarding the quality assessment of medical care. The methods applied in the current study included systemic approach and analysis, structural and logical analysis, correlation and regressive analysis, calculation of relative values.&#x0D; Results and Discussion. All 100% clinical audit reports, carried out by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership were based on the results of the statistical calculations. The most common method of processing results is the epidemiological statistics (93.5%), ratio of chances/risks (30.6%), probability assessment by Х2 Pearson's method (21.0%). It is noteworthy that for pointing the central tendency almost in half of the cases (46.8 %) the median and the Interquartile Range were used. Complex mathematical methods such as the survival assessment by Kaplan- Meier and method multiple regression were used in 6.5 % та 4.8 % reports, accordingly.&#x0D; Conclusions. Based on our own experience, we suggested implementation of standardization methods, a detailed correlation and regressive analysis, neuro networks and power analysis into the methodology (technique) of the clinical audit. Implementation of spectrum of evidentially substantiated methods of statistical analysis will allow to increase the evidence level and to deepen the statistical analysis of databases when conducting the clinical audit, аnd therefore, the quality assessment of clinical audit results will increase.

A scoping review of local quality improvement using data from UK perioperative National Clinical Audits

BackgroundSignificant resources are invested in the UK to collect data for National Clinical Audits (NCAs), but it is unclear whether and how they facilitate local quality improvement (QI). The perioperative setting is a unique context for QI due to its multidisciplinary nature and history of measurement. It is unclear which NCAs evaluate perioperative care, to what extent their data have been used for QI, and which factors influence this usage.MethodsNCAs were identified from the directories held by Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), Scottish Healthcare Audits and the Welsh National Clinical Audit and Outcome Review Advisory Committee. QI reports were identified by the following: systematically searching MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar and HMIC up to December 2019, hand-searching grey literature and consulting relevant stakeholders. We charted features describing both the NCAs and the QI reports and summarised quantitative data using descriptive statistics and qualitative themes using framework analysis.ResultsWe identified 36 perioperative NCAs in the UK and 209 reports of local QI which used data from 19 (73%) of these NCAs. Six (17%) NCAs contributed 185 (89%) of these reports. Only one NCA had a registry of local QI projects. The QI reports were mostly brief, unstructured, often published by NCAs themselves and likely subject to significant reporting bias. Factors reported to influence local QI included the following: perceived data validity, measurement of clinical processes as well as outcomes, timely feedback, financial incentives, sharing of best practice, local improvement capabilities and time constraints of clinicians.ConclusionsThere is limited public reporting of UK perioperative NCA data for local QI, despite evidence of improvement of most NCA metrics at the national level. It is therefore unclear how these improvements are being made, and it is likely that opportunities are being missed to share learning between local sites. We make recommendations for how NCAs could better support the conduct, evaluation and reporting of local QI and suggest topics which future research should investigate.Trial registrationThe review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42018092993).

How long do revised and multiply revised hip replacements last? A retrospective observational study of the National Joint Registry.

Hip replacements are common and effective operations but patients that undergo this intervention are at risk of the replacements failing, requiring costly and often complex revision surgery with poorer outcomes than primary surgery. There is paucity of reliable data examining the treatment pathway for hip replacements over the life of the patient in terms of risk of revision and re-revisions. We aim to provide detailed information on the longevity of hip revision surgery. We did a retrospective observational registry-based study of the National Joint Registry, using data on hip replacements from all participating hospitals in England and Wales, UK. We included data on all first revisions, with an identifiable primary procedure, with osteoarthritis as the sole indication for the original primary procedure. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the cumulative probability of revision and subsequent re-revision after primary hip replacement. Analyses were stratified by age and gender, and the influence of time from first to second revision on the risk of further revision was explored. Between April 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2019, there were 29 010 revision hip replacements with a linked primary episode. Revision rates of revision hip replacements were higher in patients younger than 55 years than in older age groups. After revision of primary total hip replacement, 21·3% (95% CI 18·6-24·4) of first revisions were revised again within 15 years, 22·3% (20·3-24·4) of second revisions were revised again within 7 years, and 22·3% (18·3-27·0) of third revisions were revised again within 3 years. After revision of hip resurfacing, 23·7% (95% CI 19·6-28·5) of these revisions were revised again within 15 years, 21·0% (17·0-25·8) of second revisions were revised again within 7 years, and 19·3% (11·9-30·4) of third revisions were revised again within 3 years. A shorter time between revision episodes was associated with earlier subsequent revision. Younger patients are at an increased risk of multiple revisions. Patients who undergo a revision have a steadily increasing risk of further revision the more procedures they undergo, and each subsequent revision lasts for approximately half the time of the previous one. Although hip replacements are effective for improving pain and function and usually last a remarkably long time, if they are revised, successive revisions are progressively and markedly less successful. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership; and the National Joint Registry.

Suicide rates by ethnic group among patients in contact with mental health services: an observational cohort study in England and Wales

Recent evidence on suicide rates among psychiatric patients from minority ethnic backgrounds is scarce. We aimed to examine suicide rates among minority ethnic psychiatric patients and describe their social and clinical characteristics. We did a retrospective observational cohort study on a national case-series of patients in England and Wales who died by suicide within 12 months of contact with mental health services between 2007 and 2018. Data were collected as part of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health. Suicide rates and standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) were estimated for South Asian (Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi), Black African, Black Caribbean, Chinese, and White patients. A total of 698 patients in the four minority ethnic groups of South Asian, Black Caribbean, Black African, and Chinese were included (482 [69%] men; 216 [31%] women; mean age 41 years [SD 14·9, range 12-91] and compared with 13 567 White patients (9030 [66·6%] men; 4537 [33·4%] women; mean age 48 years [SD 15·8, range 10-100]). Rates and SMRs for suicide among minority ethnic patients were lower than for White patients (2·73 deaths, 95% CI 2·68-2·78) per 100 000 population. Differences were found between ethnic groups with higher suicide rates in Black Caribbean patients (1·89 deaths [95% CI 1·55-2·23] per 100 000 population) and lower rates in South Asian patients (1·49 deaths [1·33-1·64] per 100 000 population). There was an increase in rates among White patients in 2007-12 followed by a fall but no change among other ethnic groups. Schizophrenia was more common among Black African patients (54%) and Black Caribbean patients (44%), while affective disorder was more common among South Asian patients (41%). Minority ethnic patients overall showed markers of social adversity and received higher intensity care yet were viewed by clinicians as at lower risk than White patients. Effective approaches to prevention might differ between minority ethnic groups. Clinicians and the services in which they work should be aware of the common and distinct social and clinical needs of minority ethnic patients with mental illness. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

Adverse pregnancy outcomes attributable to socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities in England: a national cohort study

Socioeconomic deprivation and minority ethnic background are risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to quantify the magnitude of these socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities at the population level in England. In this cohort study, we used data compiled by the National Maternity and Perinatal Audit, based on birth records from maternity information systems used by 132 National Health Service hospitals in England, linked to administrative hospital data. We included women who gave birth to a singleton baby with a recorded gestation between 24 and 42 completed weeks. Terminations of pregnancy were excluded. We analysed data on stillbirth, preterm birth (<37 weeks of gestation), and fetal growth restriction (FGR; liveborn with birthweight <3rd centile by the UK definition) in England, and compared these outcomes by socioeconomic deprivation quintile and ethnic group. We calculated attributable fractions for the entire population and specific groups compared with least deprived groups or White women, both unadjusted and with adjustment for smoking, body-mass index (BMI), and other maternal risk factors. We identified 1 233 184 women with a singleton birth between April 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017, of whom 1 155 981 women were eligible and included in the analysis. 4505 (0·4%) of 1 155 981 births were stillbirths. Of 1 151 476 livebirths, 69 175 (6·0%) were preterm births and 22 679 (2·0%) were births with FGR. Risk of stillbirth was 0·3% in the least socioeconomically deprived group and 0·5% in the most deprived group (p<0·0001), risk of a preterm birth was 4·9% in the least deprived group and 7·2% in the most deprived group (p<0·0001), and risk of FGR was 1·2% in the least deprived group and 2·2% in the most deprived group (p<0·0001). Population attributable fractions indicated that 23·6% (95% CI 16·7-29·8) of stillbirths, 18·5% (16·9-20·2) of preterm births, and 31·1% (28·3-33·8) of births with FGR could be attributed to socioeconomic inequality, and these fractions were substantially reduced when adjusted for ethnic group, smoking, and BMI (11·6% for stillbirths, 11·9% for preterm births, and 16·4% for births with FGR). Risk of stillbirth ranged from 0·3% in White women to 0·7% in Black women (p<0·0001); risk of preterm birth was 6·0% in White women, 6·5% in South Asian women, and 6·6% in Black women (p<0·0001); and risk of FGR ranged from 1·4% in White women to 3·5% in South Asian women (p<0·0001). 11·7% of stillbirths (95% CI 9·8-13·5), 1·2% of preterm births (0·8-1·6), and 16·9% of FGR (16·1-17·8) could be attributed to ethnic inequality. Adjustment for socioeconomic deprivation, smoking, and BMI only had a small effect on these ethnic group attributable fractions (13·0% for stillbirths, 2·6% for preterm births, and 19·2% for births with FGR). Group-specific attributable fractions were especially high in the most socioeconomically deprived South Asian women and Black women for stillbirth (53·5% in South Asian women and 63·7% in Black women) and FGR (71·7% in South Asian women and 55·0% in Black women). Our results indicate that socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities were responsible for a substantial proportion of stillbirths, preterm births, and births with FGR in England. The largest inequalities were seen in Black and South Asian women in the most socioeconomically deprived quintile. Prevention should target the entire population as well as specific minority ethnic groups at high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, to address risk factors and wider determinants of health. Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

How long do revised and multiply revised knee replacements last? An analysis of the National Joint Registry.

Knee replacements are common and effective operations but patients that undergo this intervention are at risk of needing subsequent costly and often complex revision surgery with poorer outcomes than primary surgery. The treatment pathway over the life of the patient in terms of risk of revision and re-revision(s) is poorly described. We aim to provide detailed information on the longevity of revision surgery. This was a retrospective observational registry-based study of the National Joint Registry. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the cumulative probability of revision and subsequent re-revision(s) following primary knee replacement. Analyses were stratified by age and gender and the influence of time from first to second revision on the risk of further revision was explored. There were 33,292 revision knee replacements with a linked primary episode. Revision rates of revision knee replacements were higher in males and younger patients. 19·9% of revisions were revised again within 13 years, 20·7% of second revisions were revised again within 5 years and 20·7% of third revisions were revised again within 3 years. A shorter time between revision episodes was associated with earlier subsequent revision. Males and younger patients are at higher risk of multiple revisions. Patients who undergo a revision have steadily increasing risk of further revision the more procedures they undergo, and each subsequent revision lasts for approximately half the time of the previous one. This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston National Health Service Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. This study was also supported by funding from Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership and the National Joint Registry. Posts of authors of this work are part funded by a grant from the National Joint Registry to conduct statistical analysis for the National Joint Registry. AS was funded by a Medical Research Council Strategic Skills Fellowship MR/L01226X/1.

End of life care in a secure hospital setting

AimsTo measure the standard of care provided to patients who had a natural and expected death whilst in secure care at Roseberry Park Hospital, Middlesbrough.Mallard ward is a low secure psychiatric ward for older aged men suffering from cognitive difficulties and significant physical comorbidity in addition to a severe and enduring mental illness. The patient population is such that it will remain the most appropriate placement for some patients until their death. It is vital that staff members on Mallard ward and indeed all parts of the Trust are aware of the priorities for care of the dying person and ensure that care is provided in accordance with these priorities.The Leadership Alliance for the Care of Dying People (LACDP), a coalition of 21 national organisations, published One Chance to get it Right – Improving people's experience of care in the last few days and hours of life in June 2014. This document laid out five priorities for care of the dying person focussing on sensitive communication, involvement of the person and relevant others in decisions and compassionately delivering an individualised care plan.MethodThe data collection tool was adapted from End of Life Care Audit: Dying in Hospital, a national clinical audit commissioned by Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) and run by the Royal College of Physicians. Data were collected from both electronic and paper records. There were three natural and expected deaths in the last two years.ResultFor all three patients, there was documented evidence that they were likely to die in the coming hours or days.End of life care discussion was held with the nominated persons and not with the patients due to their lack of mental capacity.The needs of the patients and their nominated persons were explored in all three cases.All patients had an individualised care plan which was followed.The palliative care team supported the staff with the care of these patients.The care provided was largely consistent with the priorities listed.ConclusionThe national audit compares performance of only acute NHS Trusts with no data to reflect the performance of mental health hospitals. It is imperative that mental health services work in collaboration with physical health and palliative care services so they are able to continue providing a high level of care to this patient group. Clinicians and staff involved in the care of dying patients also need to be adequately trained.

Suicide in England in the COVID-19 pandemic: Early observational data from real time surveillance.

BackgroundThere have been concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic may lead to an increase in suicide. The coronial system in England is not suitable for timely monitoring of suicide because of the delay of several months before inquests are held.MethodsWe used data from established systems of "real time surveillance" (RTS) of suspected suicides, in areas covering a total population of around 13 million, to test the hypothesis that the suicide rate rose after the first national lockdown began in England.FindingsThe number of suicides in April-October 2020, after the first lockdown began, was 121•3 per month, compared to 125•7 per month in January-March 2020 (-4%; 95% CI-19% to 13%, p = 0•59). Incidence rate ratios did not show a significant rise in individual months after lockdown began and were not raised during the 2-month lockdown period April-May 2020 (IRR: 1•01 [0•81–1•25]) or the 5-month period after the easing of lockdown, June-October 2020 (0•94 [0•81–1•09]). Comparison of the suicide rates after lockdown began in 2020 for the same months in selected areas in 2019 showed no difference.InterpretationWe did not find a rise in suicide rates in England in the months after the first national lockdown began in 2020, despite evidence of greater distress. However, a number of caveats apply. These are early figures and may change. Any effect of the pandemic may vary by population group or geographical area. The use of RTS in this way is new and further development is needed before it can provide full national data.FundingThis study was funded by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP).The HQIP is led by a consortium of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the Royal College of Nursing, and National Voices. Its aim is to promote quality improvement in patient outcomes, and in particular, to increase the impact that clinical audit, outcome review programs and registries have on healthcare quality in England and Wales. HQIP holds the contract to commission, manage, and develop the National Clinical Audit and Patient Outcomes Program (NCAPOP), comprising around 40 projects covering care provided to people with a wide range of medical, surgical and mental health conditions. The program is funded by NHS England, the Welsh Government and, with some individual projects, other devolved administrations, and crown dependencies.

116 Impact of COVID 19 Pandemic on Hospital Care For People with Dementia—Feedback From Hospital Leads and Carers

IntroductionThe National Audit of Dementia (NAD) is funded by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership to collect data from acute general hospital in England and Wales. In June 2020 NAD circulated optional surveys to leads for dementia in acute hospitals and carers asking about the impact of the pandemic on the organisation and provision of hospital care.MethodsAnonymous survey links were sent to hospital dementia leads directly and circulated to carers of people with dementia via social media and representative organisations. Dementia Leads’ questions included whether they and/or their team had been redeployed during the pandemic and whether wards had access to specialist services. Carers’ questions included whether patients’ needs were discussed, whether they were permitted to visit/how this was communicated, any measures to facilitate communication with their loved ones, and whether they were updated about progress and discharge.Results53 dementia hospital leads completed the questionnaire. 32% had been redeployed to other clinical areas during the pandemic, 45% said the same for members of the dementia team. Specialist support for people with dementia on both Covid and Non-Covid wards was significantly compromised. 32 carers completed the questionnaire. 48% were not asked about the needs of the patient they cared for, 90% not allowed to visit, 43% were not given any explanation about visiting and 48% not given support to keep in touch with their loved one.ConclusionsClinical priorities inevitably meant redeployment of dementia specialist staff, and changes to visiting. However, continuation of specialist support is a requirement for people with dementia admitted to hospital. Liaison with carers/families must be a priority, including facilitating remote support. Hospitals should take note of NHS guidance permitting carer visits to support a person with dementia experiencing distress.

Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods

BackgroundThere is growing interest in the impact of national clinical audit programmes on the quality of healthcare. There is also an evolving evidence-base for enhancing the design and delivery of audit and feedback. We assessed the extent to which a sample of UK national clinical audit feedback reports met a set of good practice criteria over three time points.MethodsWe undertook three cross-sectional content analyses. We developed good practice criteria for the content and delivery of feedback based upon evidence, behavioural theory and expert opinion. We applied these to a feedback reports from 23 national audits listed on the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) website in November 2015. We repeated our assessments in January 2017 for 20 repeat feedback reports, after HQIP had published reporting guidance for national audits, and in August 2019 for a further 14 repeat feedback reports. We verified our assessments, where possible, with audit leads.ResultsFeedback reports consistently included strengths at baseline, including past or planned repeated audit cycles (21; 91%), stating the importance of the topic in relation to patient care (22; 93%), using multi-modal data presentation (23; 100%), and summarising key findings (23; 100%).We observed improvements over subsequent assessments, so that by 2019, at least 13 out of 14 (93%) feedback reports presented easily identifiable key findings and recommendations, linked recommendations to audit standards, and proposed easily identifiable action plans. Whilst the use of regional comparators did not improve, audit leads highlighted that programmes now provide local data via additional means.The main shortcoming was the time lag between data collection and feedback; none of the 14 reports assessed in 2019 presented performance data less than 6 months old. Audit leads highlighted that some of these data might be available via programme websites.ConclusionWe identified increased adherence to good practice in feedback by national clinical audit programmes that may enhance their impact on service delivery and outcomes. There is scope for improvement, especially in the recency of performance data. With further refinements, a criterion-based assessment offers an efficient means of monitoring the quality of national clinical audit feedback reports.

Suicide risk assessment in UK mental health services: a national mixed-methods study

Risk assessments are a central component of mental health care. Few national studies have been done in the UK on risk assessment tools used in mental health services. We aimed to examine which suicide risk assessment tools are in use in the UK; establish the views of clinicians, carers, and service users on the use of these tools; and identify how risk assessment tools have been used with mental health patients before suicide. We did a mixed-methods study involving three components: collection and content analysis of risk assessment tools used by UK mental health services; an online survey of clinicians, service-users, and carers; and qualitative telephone interviews with clinicians on their use of risk assessment tools before a suicide death and their views of these tools. The online survey was advertised through the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health's (NCISH) website and social media, and it included both quantitative and open-ended qualitative questions, and respondents were recruited through convenience sampling. For the telephone interviews, we examined the NCISH database to identify clinicians who had been responsible for the care of a patient who died by suicide and who had been viewed as being at low or no immediate risk of suicide. We obtained 156 risk assessment tools from all 85 National Health Service mental health organisations in the UK, and 85 (one per each organisation) were included in the analysis. We found little consistency in use of these instruments, with 33 (39%) of 85 organisations using locally developed tools. Most tools aimed to predict self-harm or suicidal behaviour (84 [99%] of 85), and scores were used to determine management decisions (80 [94%]). Clinicians described positive aspects of risk tools (facilitating communication and enhancing therapeutic relationships) but also expressed negative views (inadequate training in the use of tools and their time-consuming nature). Both patients and carers reported some positive views, but also emphasised little involvement during risk assessment, and a lack of clarity on what to do in a crisis. Assessment processes need to be consistent across mental health services and include adequate training on how to assess, formulate, and manage suicide risk. An emphasis on patient and carer involvement is needed. In line with national guidance, risk assessment should not be seen as a way to predict future behaviour and should not be used as a means of allocating treatment. Management plans should be personalised and collaboratively developed with patients and their families and carers. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

Temporal variations in quality of acute stroke care and outcomes in London hyperacute stroke units: a mixed-methods study

Background Seven-day working in hospitals is a current priority of international health research and policy. Previous research has shown variability in delivering evidence-based clinical interventions across different times of the day and week. We aimed to identify factors influencing such variations in London hyperacute stroke units. Objectives To investigate variations in quality of acute stroke care and outcomes by day and time of admission in London hyperacute stroke units, and to identify factors influencing such variations. Design This was a prospective cohort study using anonymised patient-level data from the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme. Factors influencing variations in care and outcomes were studied through interview and observation data. Setting The setting was acute stroke services in London hyperacute stroke units. Participants A total of 7094 patients with a primary diagnosis of stroke took part. We interviewed hyperacute stroke unit staff (n = 76), including doctors, nurses, therapists and administrators, and 31 patients and carers. We also conducted non-participant observations of delivery of care at different times of the day and week (n = 45, ≈102 hours). Intervention Hub-and-spoke model for care of suspected acute stroke patients in London with performance standards was designed to deliver uniform access to high-quality hyperacute stroke unit care across the week. Main outcome measures Indicators of quality of acute stroke care, mortality at 3 days after admission, disability at the end of the inpatient spell and length of stay. Data sources Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme data for all patients in London hyperacute stroke units with a primary diagnosis of stroke between 1 January and 31 December 2014, and nurse staffing data for all eight London hyperacute stroke units for the same period. Results We found no variation in quality of care by day and time of admission across the week in terms of stroke nursing assessment, brain scanning and thrombolysis in London hyperacute stroke units, nor in 3-day mortality nor disability at hospital discharge. Other quality-of-care measures significantly varied by day and time of admission. Quality of care was better if the nurse in charge was at a higher band and/or there were more nurses on duty. Staff deliver ‘front-door’ interventions consistently by taking on additional responsibilities out of hours, creating continuities between day and night, building trusting relationships and prioritising ‘front-door’ interventions. Limitations We were unable to measure long-term outcomes as our request to the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme, the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership and NHS Digital for Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme data linked with patient mortality status was not fulfilled. Conclusions Organisational factors influence 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (24/7), provision of stroke care, creating temporal patterns of provision reflected in patient outcomes, including mortality, length of stay and functional independence. Future work Further research would help to explore 24/7 stroke systems in other contexts. We need a clearer understanding of variations by looking at absolute time intervals, rather than achievement of targets. Research is needed with longer-term mortality and modified Rankin Scale data, and a more meaningful range of outcomes. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The effect of advisory documents on mid-urethral sling case acquisition to the British Society Urogynaecology (BSUG) database in England.

Many advisory documents have recommended uploading of all mid-urethral sling (MUS) cases onto the British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) or British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) database. The aim of this study was to determine whether these documents have resulted in an increase in database case acquisition for MUS surgery. We determined the number of cases uploaded onto the BSUG and BAUS databases and cases acquired by Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) over the period January 2011-March 2017 for the 6 months prior to each document and 6 months afterwards. There was an upsurge in data acquisition in 2013, which then declined after year end. There was a significant upsurge in case acquisition associated with the following documents: NHS Medical Director letter (p < 0.00001), the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) audit (p < 0.00001). There was a significant drop in case acquisition following the end of the HQIP audit (p < 0.00001) and the Mesh Working Group Interim report (p = 0.00325). There was a significant increase in case acquisition with the HQIP audit and decline after it. The significant increase in case acquisition seen after the NHS MD letter in November 2012 may have been due to an overlap in the data capture between it and the HQIP audit. The levels of case acquisition do not compare to registries that are essentially compulsory and therefore we believe that voluntary databases are not effective for device post-market surveillance.

Outcomes in Relation to Early Parenteral Nutrition Use in Preterm Neonates Born between 30 and 33 Weeks Gestation: A Propensity Score Matched Observational Study

Importance: Preterm neonates are among the highest users of parenteral nutrition (PN). Randomised trials in critically ill older children show that harms, such as nosocomial infection, outweigh benefits of early PN administration; there is a paucity of similar randomised trial data in neonates. Objective: To evaluate whether in preterm neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks+days, PN use in the first seven postnatal days, compared with no PN use, is associated with differences in survival and other important morbidities. Design: Retrospective cohort study using propensity matching including 35 maternal, infant and organisational factors to minimise bias and confounding. Routinely recorded clinical data obtained from the UK National Neonatal Research Database. Setting: National population-level data from all National Health Service neonatal units in England and Wales. Participants: 35,362 neonates born over the period January 2012 to December 2017 and admitted to a neonatal unit; 16,292 neonates were compared in propensity score matched analyses. Exposure: The exposure was PN administered in the first seven days of postnatal life; the comparator was no PN in the first seven days. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was survival to discharge from neonatal care. Secondary outcomes comprised the neonatal core outcome set (including necrotising enterocolitis, bronchopulmonary dysplasia and late-onset sepsis). Results: Compared with matched neonates not given PN in the first postnatal week, neonates who received PN had higher survival to discharge (absolute rate increase 0.91%; 95% CI 0.53% to 1.30%), but higher rates of necrotising enterocolitis (absolute rate increase 4.6%; 95% CI 3.9% to 5.3%), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (absolute rate increase 3.9%; 95% CI 3.2% to 4.7%), late-onset sepsis (absolute rate increase 1.5%; 95% CI 1.1% to 1.8%) and need for surgical procedures (absolute rate increase 0.92%; 95% CI 0.57% to 1.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: In neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks gestation, those given PN in the first postnatal week had higher rates of survival but higher rates of important neonatal morbidities. Prospective, randomised trials powered for important outcomes are needed to identify in which neonates the benefits of early PN use outweigh the harms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03767634, Prospectively Registered: 06/12/2018. Funding Statement: The NNRD is funded and maintained from awards to NM. These include costs for data transfer, storage, cleaning, merging, administration and regulatory approvals. The extraction of study data from the NNRD and analysis for this study was funded through a Mason Medical Research Fellowship awarded to JW. CG was funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) through a Clinician Scientist Fellowship award. Declaration of Interests: JW has received support from Chiesi Pharmaceuticals to attend an educational conference and has received a research grant from Mason Medical Research Foundation. SU has received funding from the National Institute of Health Research, the Department of Health and Prolacta Life Sciences. SU has been on the Advisory Board of Fresenius Kabi and received honoraria and travel expenses for speaking at study days organised by Fresenius Kabi. SU is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Parenteral Nutrition Guideline Development Committee. NM is the Chief Investigator for the National Neonatal Research Database and Director of the Neonatal Data Analysis Unit at Imperial College London. In the last five years NM has served on the Board of Trustees of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, David Harvey Trust, Medical Women’s Federation and Medact; and is a member of the Nestle Scientific Advisory Board. NM has received research grants from the British Heart Foundation, Medical Research Council, National Institute of Health Research, Westminster Research Fund, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health and Care Northwest London, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, Bliss, Prolacta Life Sciences, Chiesi, Shire and HCA International; travel and accommodation expenses from, Nutricia, Prolacta, Nestle and Chiesi; honoraria from Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Alexion Pharmaceuticals for contributions to expert advisory boards, and Chiesi for contributing to a lecture programme. CG is part of an international team developing reporting guidance (a CONSORT extension) for clinical trials using cohorts and routinely collected health data. He has received support from Chiesi Pharmaceuticals to attend an educational conference; in the past 5 years he been investigator on received research grants from Medical Research Council, National Institute of Health Research, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Department of Health in England, Mason Medical Research Foundation, Westminster Medical School Research Trust and Chiesi Pharmaceuticals, and has been an unremunerated member of the Neonatal Data Analysis Unit Board, which oversees the NNRD. The authors declare no other competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: Obtained study-specific research ethics committee, Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales approval (18/NI/0214).