To evaluate a medicines reablement initiative involving health and social care, to include consideration of the training package, proportion of patients reabled successfully, and patient and staff perspectives of the service.

Intermediate care services provide short-term intervention to support patients with chronic conditions transition from hospital to community-based services and involves maximising patients’ independence through reablement. The term ‘medicines reablement’ describes the process of rehabilitating patients to be independent with their medication.

Pharmacy technicians led the medicines reablement initiative. They delivered a competency-based training programme for frontline health and social care staff. They assessed and set goals with patients to facilitate independence in self-administration of their medication. The pharmacy technicians provided on-going support to staff helping patients to reable. They reassessed patients after six weeks to determine if medicines reablement had been successful or whether further input was needed. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with pharmacy technicians, frontline staff, managers, and patients.

Twenty per cent of patients discharged from hospital to intermediate care were assessed to be suitable for medicines reablement. Of these patients, 44% were successfully reabled and a further 25% benefited from the input of a pharmacy technician. Patients and staff were positive about medicines reablement, emphasising the importance of patients attaining independence for self-administration of medication. Although following training, health and social care staff felt confident in facilitating medicines reablement they valued on-going access to pharmacy technicians for timely support, help with problem solving, and advice throughout the reablement process.

Medicines reablement can lead to patients becoming independent with taking medication and contribute to staff satisfaction. Pharmacy technicians can play an important part in delivering medicines reablement training to frontline staff and overseeing the reablement process. Further research examining medicines reablement is needed to develop a stronger evidence base.

To identify education priorities for practice nursing across eight London Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs); to identify the education, training, development and support needs of practice nurses in undertaking current and future roles.

The education needs of practice nurses have long been recognised but their employment status means that accessing education requires the support of their GP employer. This study scopes the educational requirements of the practice nurse workforce and working with educational providers and commissioners describes a coherent educational pathway for practice nurses.

A survey of practice nurses to scope their educational attainment needs was undertaken. Focus groups were carried out which identified the education, training, development and support needs of practice nurses to fulfil current and future roles.

A total of 272 respondents completed the survey. Practice nurses took part in three focus groups (n=34) and one workshop (n=39). Findings from this research indicate a practice nurse workforce which lacked career progression, role autonomy or a coherent educational framework. Practice nurses recognised the strength of their role in building relationship-centred care with patients over an extended period of time. They valued this aspect of their role and would welcome opportunities to develop this to benefit patients.

This paper demonstrates an appetite for more advanced education among practice nurses, a leadership role by the CCGs in working across the whole system to address the education needs of practice nurses, and a willingness on the part of National Health Service education commissioners to commission education which meets the education needs of the practice nurse workforce. Evidence is still required, however, to inform the scope of the practice nurse role within an integrated system of care and to identify the impact of practice nursing on improving health outcomes and care of local populations.

To evaluate the impact and acceptability of offering one-to-one lifestyle interventions delivered by lay health trainers in the primary care setting.

Chronic conditions represent major causes of ill-health, avoidable disability, pain and anxiety, and tend to be more prevalent in less affluent groups. This is due, in part, to the link between unhealthy lifestyles and lower socio-economic status, although factors such as poverty, worklessness and social exclusion play a larger role. Lay health trainers were introduced in England with the aim of providing personalised lifestyle advice, support and access to services for people living in disadvantaged areas. There is a body of literature on the effectiveness of lay or community health workers in the management of chronic conditions. However, little is known about their potential to promote lifestyle changes in newly diagnosed patients. An innovative health trainer service was piloted in the primary care setting, to work with people diagnosed with a chronic condition or identified as potentially benefitting from one-to-one support.

A mixed method study design was utilised. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with practice staff (n=11) and patients (n=15) from one primary care practice in North East England, United Kingdom. Discussions were audio-recorded and analysed using a thematic content approach. Routinely collected pre-/post-intervention data (n=246 patients at baseline; sample sizes varied at end line) were analysed and appropriate descriptive and summary statistics produced.

The discussions highlighted a high level of satisfaction with the health trainer model in terms of supporting positive lifestyle changes. Locating the intervention within the practice removed access barriers, particularly for those with long-term conditions. Anecdotal evidence of health improvement was supported by the quantitative analyses, which revealed statistically significant improvements in body mass index, blood pressure, dietary habits, exercise levels, alcohol intake, self-rated health and self-efficacy amongst those who completed the intervention.

We aimed to evaluate a pilot service to facilitate discharge of patients with stable long-term mental health needs from secondary to primary care.

Patients with stable long-term mental health conditions are often not discharged from secondary mental health services when no longer needed due to insufficient systems and processes to enable safe, effective, recovery-focussed treatment and support. The Primary Care Mental Health Specialist (PCMHS) Service was developed to address this gap; new PCMHS posts were introduced to act as a conduit for patients being discharged from secondary care and a single point of referral back into secondary care, should it be required. The two-year pilot, across six Clinical Commissioning Groups in South East England, began in March 2013.

Interviews were conducted with all PCMHS employed in the pilot service (n=13) and a sample of service users (n=12). The views of professionals working alongside the service, including GPs, Psychiatrists and Mental Health Nurses, were captured using a brief online questionnaire (n=50). Time and Activity Recording Sheets were used to capture data required for economic analysis.

Our findings indicate that the service is working well from the perspective of patients; staff employed within the service and professionals working alongside the service. Patients described the service as a ‘safety net’ they could fall back on in case of difficulties, whereas staff used the analogy of a ‘bridge’ to describe the way the service improved communication and collaboration between the various professionals and organisations involved in the patient’s care. Improvements in well-being were seen to result from increased support for those transitioning from secondary to primary care, a more pro-active approach to relapse prevention and increased engagement in daily activities. Each PCMHS covered 36 patients in a one-month period, with a unit cost of £73.01 per patient.

To determine the effectiveness of primary care chaplaincy (PCC) when used as the sole intervention, with outcomes being compared directly with those of antidepressants. This was to be carried out in a homogenous study population reflective of certain demographics in the United Kingdom.

Increasing numbers of patients are living with long-term conditions and ‘modern maladies’ and are experiencing loss of well-being and depression. There is an increasing move to utilise non-pharmacological interventions such as ‘talking therapies’ within this context. Chaplaincy is one such ‘talking therapy’ but within primary care its evidence base is sparse with only one quantitative study to date. There is therefore a need to evaluate PCC excluding those co-prescribed antidepressants, as this is not evidenced in the literature as yet. PCC also needs to be directly compared with the use of antidepressants to justify its use as a valid alternative treatment for loss of well-being and depression.

This was a retrospective observational study based on routinely collected data. There were 107 patients in the PCC group and 106 in the antidepressant group. Socio-demographic data were collected. Their pre- and post-intervention (either chaplaincy or antidepressant) well-being was assessed, by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) which is a validated Likert scale.

The majority of both groups were female with both groups showing marked ethnic homogeneity. PCC was associated with a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in well-being at a mean follow-up of 80 days. This treatment effect was maintained after those co-prescribed antidepressants were removed. PCC was associated with an improvement in well-being similar to that of antidepressants with no significant difference between the two groups.

To examine assumptions about public–private partnership (PPP) activities and their role in improving public procurement of primary healthcare surgeries.

PPPs were developed to improve the quality of care and patient satisfaction. However, evidence of their effectiveness in delivering health benefits is limited.

A qualitative study design was employed. A total of 25 interviews with public sector staff (n=23) and private sector managers (n=2) were conducted to understand their interpretations of assumptions in the activities of private investors and service contractors participating in Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) partnerships. Realist evaluation principles were applied in the data analysis to interpret the findings.

Six thematic areas of assumed health benefits were identified: (i) quality improvement; (ii) improved risk management; (iii) reduced procurement costs; (iv) increased efficiency; (v) community involvement; and (vi) sustainable investment. Primary Care Trusts that chose to procure their surgeries through LIFT were expected to support its implementation by providing an environment conducive for the private participants to achieve these benefits. Private participant activities were found to be based on a range of explicit and tacit assumptions perceived helpful in achieving government objectives for LIFT.

The success of PPPs depended upon private participants’ (i) capacity to assess how PPP assumptions added value to their activities, (ii) effectiveness in interpreting assumptions in their expected activities, and (iii) preparedness to align their business principles to government objectives for PPPs. They risked missing some of the expected benefits because of some factors constraining realization of the assumptions. The ways in which private participants preferred to carry out their activities also influenced the extent to which expected benefits were achieved. Giving more discretion to public than private participants over critical decisions may help in ensuring that assumptions in PPP activities result in outcomes that match the anticipated health benefits.

This study was to perform unit cost analysis of managing common illnesses comparing between a primary care unit (PCU) and a community pharmacy.

PCU is a key point of access for primary care in Thailand. Although a community pharmacy is an ideal setting, it has not been successfully incorporated in Thailand's health service. Common illnesses are encountered everyday by community pharmacists, an appropriate compensation for this service has not been established.

A primary care service of one educational institution was a study site. Eight common illnesses were emphasised. Patient visits were observed, prospectively at community pharmacy and retrospectively at PCU, during August to October 2013. Labour and material costs related to management of common illnesses were recorded. Total cost divided by total patient visits determined the unit cost. For the community pharmacy, patients were followed up after 3–14 days of visit to evaluate the effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying direct medical cost at ±10–30%.

At the community pharmacy, community pharmacists performed multiple tasks including interviewing and assessing patients, choosing an appropriate treatment and dispensing. Of 9141 visits, 775 (8.5%) with common illnesses were included. Upper respiratory disorder was found the highest 41.9% (325/755). Unit cost of treatment ranged from 54.16 baht (£1.18) for pain to 82.71 baht (£1.80) for skin disorder. Two-thirds of pharmacy visits (77.9%, 539/692) reported complete recovery. Managing common illnesses at the PCU was performed by nurse assistants, nurses, doctors and pharmacists. Of 6701 patient visits to the PCU, 1545 (23.1%) visits were at least one of the eight illnesses. Upper respiratory disorder was the majority, 53.0% (771/1454). Unit cost of treatment ranged from 85.39 baht (£1.86) for eye/ear to 245.93 baht (£5.36) for sexual health. Managing common illness at a community pharmacy shows satisfactory effectiveness with lower unit cost.

To investigate general practitioners’ (GPs’) desire and perceived added value of point-of-care (POC) troponin, its effect on referral decisions, and test requirements.

Excluding acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in primary care remains a diagnostic challenges for GPs. Consequently, referral rates of chest pain patients are high, while the incidence of a cardiovascular problem is only 8–15%. Previous studies have shown that GPs are interested in a POC troponin test. This test could enhance rapid exclusion of ACS, thereby preventing unnecessary patient distress, without compromising safety and while reducing costs. However, using this test is not recommended in current guidelines due to uncertainty in the test’s potential added value, and the lower sensitivity early after symptom onset as compared with troponin tests in a regular laboratory.

An online survey containing 34 questions was distributed among 837 Dutch GPs in June 2015.

A total of 126 GPs (15.1%) completed at least 75% of the questions. 67.1% of GPs believe that POC troponin tests have moderate to very high added value. Although the availability of a POC test is expected to increase the frequency at which troponin tests are used, it likely decreases (immediate) referral rates. Of the responding GPs, 78.3% only accept 10 min as the maximum test duration, 78.1% think reimbursement of the POC device is required for implementation, and 68.9% consider it necessary that it can be performed with a finger prick blood sample. In conclusion, according to GPs, the POC troponin test can be of added value to exclude ACS early on. Actual test implementation will depend on test characteristics, including test duration, type of blood sample required, and reimbursement of the analyzer.