Patient and voluntary organisation support for implementing NICE guidance

2018 ◽  
pp. 57-64
Author(s):  
Peter Littlejohns
Keyword(s):  
Voluntary Organisation ◽  
Nice Guidance

Gestational diabetes mellitus: are mothers being followed-up? A retrospective study

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp18X697469
Author(s):  
Rebecca Ward ◽  
Fahmy W Hanna ◽  
Ann Shelley-Hitchen ◽  
Ellen Hodgson ◽  
Adrian Heald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Post Partum ◽  
Tolerance Test ◽  
Oral Glucose ◽  
Tertiary Referral Centre ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
History Of

BackgroundWomen with gestational diabetes (GDM) have an elevated risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2DM). NICE Guidance recommends women who develop GDM are screened 6 weeks post-partum and annually thereafter.AimTo evaluate conformity to guidance of screening in women with GDM by 6-week post-partum fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and annual FPG and determine time between delivery and development of T2DM.MethodRecords at a tertiary referral centre were used to identify women (n = 54) diagnosed with GDM by antenatal oral glucose tolerance test between July 1999 and January 2007. Data from laboratory records were used to collect investigations of glycaemic status during the follow-up period (median follow-up 12.4 years, range 9.5–17.1 years).ResultsOf 252 women, 102 (40.2%) did not have a FPG at 6 weeks (+/−2 weeks). Of these, median time to first test was 1.2 years (range 0.04–10.8 years), with only 43.1% followed-up within 1 year. In those who had a 6-week FPG, 17 (11.3%) women had no further tests. A total of 84 (33% of those with gestational diabetes in the index pregnancy) women were diagnosed with T2DM; median time from delivery to diagnosis was 5.2 years (range 0.35–15.95). We found the only significant factor for a follow-up test at 1-year post-partum was the use of insulin.ConclusionOur data suggest an alternative approach is needed for monitoring women with a history of GDM. This needs to be appropriate for a generally healthy group in which traditional screening mechanisms may not be adequate or sufficient.

scholarly journals P092 NICE biologics pathways for inflammatory arthritis exhibit regional variability due to modification by CCG’s: results from a national survey of pathways in England

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jatin Mistry ◽  
Diane Hill ◽  
Ailsa Bosworth ◽  
Arvind Kaul
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
National Study ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Limited Sample ◽  
Regional Variability ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
Information Requests ◽  
Individual Funding

Abstract Background/Aims  NICE publishes guidance underpinned by act of Parliament and legally enforceable, on the use of biological therapies in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) which should allow harmonisation of access independent of region. However, sufficient guidance is not provided on the use of sequential biologics nor is a numerical cap placed on the number of biologics a patient can attempt if they have had an inadequate response. We have previously reported that in a limited sample, Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) interpret NICE guidance variably and restrict access to NICE approved treatments depending on geography, the so-called “postcode lottery”. We determined the variability of biologics pathways in all CCG’s in England to examine whether a potentially unfair postcode lottery exists for sequential biologics use. Methods  All 135 England CCGs covering over 55 million people, were sent Freedom of Information requests, for their biologic pathways for RA, PsA and AS. Where CCGs did not have this information, the relevant acute trusts were contacted, with responses recorded under that CCG. For every CCG the local biologics pathways were examined for detail on the number and type of biologics commissioned before an Individual Funding Request was needed. “No Cap” was recorded if CCG’s responded with no restriction on the number of biologics. Results  Responses were obtained from 124/135 CCG’s for RA, 122/135 for PsA and AS, all covering an estimated population in excess of 45 million people. For RA, 55% CCG’s had no cap on the number of commissioned RA biologics. 45% had a variable cap from 3 to 6 commissioned biologics. For PsA, the figures were 54% with no cap and 46% with variable capping between 2-5 biologics allowed, for AS the figures were 51% and 49% respectively. In total this represented 41 different local pathways for RA, 29 different pathways for PsA and in AS where fewer biologics choices exist, 25 different pathways depending on CCG and location. Conclusion  There is wide regional variation in the interpretation of NICE guidance by CCG’s resulting in many different local pathways depending on geography. Approximately 50% of pathways restricted biologics prescribing by mandating the type and sequence of biologics used, potentially compromising patient care and delaying treatment by requiring an IFR for a NICE approved biologic. Moreover, pathways varied as to which biologics could be used at any point of management by region as well. As exemplars of good practice, approximately 50% of CCG’s had no cap, allowing clinical freedom to prescribe the most appropriate biologic. The results of this national study demonstrate the variability of biologics pathways in many areas of England ensuring a postcode lottery still exists in many regions. Disclosure  J. Mistry: None. D. Hill: None. A. Bosworth: None. A. Kaul: None.

Referral patterns for catheter-directed thrombolysis for iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis

2021 ◽  
pp. 026835552097728
Author(s):  
Kirtan D Patel ◽  
Alison YY Tang ◽  
Ashik DJ Zala ◽  
Rakesh Patel ◽  
Kishan R Parmar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Management Option ◽  
Venous Anatomy ◽  
Nice Guidelines ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Radiology Reports ◽  
Catheter Directed Thrombolysis ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Venous Thromboses

Objectives Post thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is a serious complication of deep venous thromboses (DVTs). PTS occurs more frequently and severely following iliofemoral DVT compared to distal DVTs. Catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) of iliofemoral DVTs may reduce PTS incidence and severity. We aimed to determine the rate of iliofemoral DVT within our institution, their subsequent management, and compliance with NICE guidelines. Methods Retrospective review of all DVTs diagnosed over a 3-year period was conducted. Cases of iliofemoral DVT were identified using ICD-10 codes from patient notes, and radiology reports of Duplex scans. Further details were retrieved, such as patient demographics and referrals to vascular services. NICE guidance was applied to determine if patients would have been suitable for CDT. A survey was sent to clinicians within medicine to identify awareness of CDT and local guidelines for iliofemoral DVT management. Results 225 patients with lower limb DVTs were identified. Of these, 96 were radiographically confirmed as iliofemoral DVTs. The median age was 77. 67.7% of iliofemoral DVTs affected the left leg. Right leg DVTs made up 30.2% and 2.1% were bilateral DVTs. Of the 96 iliofemoral DVTs, 21 were deemed eligible for CDT. Only 3 patients (14.3%) were referred to vascular services, and 3 received thrombolysis. From our survey, 95.5% of respondents suggested anticoagulation alone as management for iliofemoral DVT. Only one respondent recommended referral to vascular services. There was a knowledge deficiency regarding venous anatomy, including superficial versus deep veins. Conclusions CDT and other mechanochemical procedures have been shown to improve outcomes of patients post-iliofemoral DVT, however a lack of awareness regarding CDT as a management option results in under-referral to vascular services. We suggest closer relations between vascular services and their “tributary” DVT clinics, development of guidelines and robust care pathways in the management of iliofemoral DVT.

scholarly journals 828 Is Isolation Before Elective Surgery the Way Forward During The COVID-19 Pandemic?

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S James ◽  
G Lafaurie ◽  
R Hafeez
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
General Surgery ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Patient’S Satisfaction ◽  
Anonymous Questionnaire ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
Mode Of Transport ◽  
Isolation Period ◽  
The Way

Abstract Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic is here to last, and services must adapt to enable elective surgery to continue. Surgery involves high-risk aerosol generating procedures, potentially harmful to staff and patients. The current NICE guidance is for the patient to self-isolate for 72 hours prior to surgery. A question persists: Is 72-hour isolation the way forward in elective general surgery? Method In a DGH centre, using an anonymous questionnaire, we prospectively collected data on isolation for 36 elective general surgery patients during the 72h isolation period. The data was analysed to assess the concordance with isolation as well as patient's satisfaction with the process. Results 75% of patients were concordant with 72 hours of isolation pre-operatively. This was an increase from 35% when compared to patients questioned during the 14 day isolation period. The main factors contributing to isolation breech were visitors to the house and the mode of transport used to attend hospital. Conclusions The protocol is now for a COVID swab 72 hours pre-operatively followed by isolation until the operation. Our results show that still significant breaches in isolation remain and patients welfare is adversely affected during that period. Further research and consideration is needed to optimise the COVID isolation protocol.

scholarly journals 160 The Effect of Frailty and COVID-19 Infection on Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults—A Single Centre Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i12-i42
Author(s):  
O Okuwoga ◽  
S Mufti
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Clinical Frailty Scale ◽  
Health Records ◽  
Frail Patients ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
Data Points ◽  
Continued Use ◽  
Support Decision Making ◽  
Frailty Score

Abstract Introduction It was anticipated that the COVID-19 pandemic would put a strain on our healthcare system, disproportionately affecting older people. NICE guidance recommended using frailty scoring to support decision making around escalation of care. This study aimed to assess frailty, demographics and COVID-19 infection and to investigate how these related to outcomes of patients aged over 65 years admitted to hospital. Methods A single centre retrospective cohort study was carried out by reviewing the electronic health records of all admissions over 65 years. Data points collected included length of stay (LOS), frailty score using the Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and mortality. Patients were stratified into COVID and non-COVID based on health records and into non-frail (CFS 1–4) and frail (CFS 5–9). Results A total of 257 patients admitted between 30th March and 30th April 2020 were included in the study (mean age 79 years, 43% female). 141 (54.9%) of patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection. 120 patients had CFS 1–4 and 136 has CFS 5–9. 1 patient did not have a frailty score due to insufficient information. 68 (26.8%) of all patients died during the admission. The relative risk (RR) of mortality of patients with coronavirus was 6.3 (95% CI 3.1–12.6, p < 0.0001). The RR of mortality for frail patients compared to the non-frail was 2.1 (95% CI 1.3–3.2, p = 0.002). The median LOS for patients with COVID-19 was 5 days, compared to 4 days for patients who did not have coronavirus. Frailty did not predict longer admission, with median LOS of 5 days for both non-frail and frail patients. Conclusion The results demonstrated in this study show that COVID-19 infection and frailty were significantly associated with increased mortality in older patients. This validates the continued use of frailty scoring of older patients on admission to support care planning.

Ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage: diagnosis and initial management: summary of updated NICE guidance

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l6283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Webster ◽  
Hilary Eadon ◽  
Sarah Fishburn ◽  
Geeta Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Ectopic Pregnancy ◽  
Initial Management ◽  
Nice Guidance
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document