The purpose of this evaluation was to obtain views from general practitioners (GPs) who piloted the electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) for suspected lung or colorectal cancer. We wanted to find out whether GPs were able to integrate these tools into their everyday practice. We were also keen to identify facilitators and barriers to their more widespread use.

Cancer remains one of UK’s biggest health problems, in terms of morbidity and mortality. Comparative European data show that five-year survival figures for many cancers are lower in the United Kingdom than in comparable European countries. eRATs are intended to aid recognition of symptoms of lung and colorectal cancers in patients aged 40 years and over.

This was a qualitative study; telephone interviews were conducted with 23 GPs who piloted the eRATs. A systematic qualitative analysis was applied to the data. The normalisation process model was used after data collection. This theory-driven conceptual framework was used to examine the operationalisation of this intervention in Primary Care.

Electronic decision-support tools appear to be useful additions to the resources available to GPs in order to assist them with recognizing potential cancer symptoms. However, the tools need to be refined in order to integrate them into GP practice. The tools raised GPs’ awareness about cancer because of the prompt facility of the software, although this also raised the potential of ‘prompt fatigue’. GPs constantly receive alerts via their clinical system, particularly related to the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The integration of eRATs into routine practice could be engendered by improvement to the training packages that accompany them, and by its delivery via a platform compatible with all GP clinical systems.

To present an overview of effective interventions for quality improvement in primary care at the practice level utilising existing systematic reviews.

Quality improvement in primary care involves a range of approaches from the system-level to patient-level improvement. One key setting in which quality improvement needs to occur is at the level of the basic unit of primary care – the individual general practice. Therefore, there is a need for practitioners to have access to an overview of the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions available in this setting.

Design: A tertiary evidence synthesis was conducted (a review of systematic reviews). A systematic approach was used to identify and summarise published literature relevant to understanding primary-care quality improvement at the practice level. Quality assessment was via the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for systematic reviews, with data extraction identifying evidence of effect for the examined interventions. Scope: Included reviews had to be relevant to quality improvement at the practice level and relevant to the UK primary-care context. Reviews were excluded if describing system-level interventions. Outcome measures: A range of measures across care structure, process and outcomes were defined and interpreted across the quality improvement interventions.

Audit and feedback, computerised advice, point-of-care reminders, practice facilitation, educational outreach and processes for patient review and follow-up all demonstrated evidence of a quality improvement effect. Evidence of an improvement effect was higher where baseline performance was low and was particularly demonstrated across process measures and measures related to prescribing. Evidence was not sufficient to suggest that multifaceted approaches were more effective than single interventions.

Evidence exists for a range of quality improvement interventions at the primary-care practice level. More research is required to determine the use and impact of quality improvement interventions using theoretical frameworks and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Develop and pilot test evidence-based resources for general practice training practices to enhance older patients’ (65+ years) interactions with General Practice Registrars (GPRs).

In Australia, general practice trainees, referred to as GPRs, see fewer older patients and patients with chronic conditions than doctors who have completed their specialist GP training. This reduces learning opportunities for GPRs in the management of these important patient groups. Therefore, developing effective strategies to improve GPR–older patient interaction is critical to primary care training, to meet the current and future needs of an ageing population.

Adopting a social marketing approach, GPR practice resources were developed to address knowledge and attitudinal barriers at the practice and patient level to improve older patient comfort, and willingness to engage, with GPR care. Two focus groups with older patients (n=18) and interviews with staff of training practices (n=12) were utilised to pre-test resources. Amended resources were pilot tested and evaluated in a naturalistic GPR training practice setting using a structured patient questionnaire (n=44).

Pilot evaluation suggests improved comfort and willingness of older patients to interact with GPRs. In all, 54% of survey participants indicated they would be more likely to make an appointment with a Registrar in the future as a result of exposure to the resources. In all, 40% of patients would feel comfortable having a GPR manage a complex or chronic condition, which compares favourably with 28% of similarly aged patients in previous research. The use of tailored, engaging and informative GPR resources for older patients and practice staff may be an important contributor to addressing the growing problem of ensuring GPRs are adequately engaged in treating older patients. The adoption of a social marketing framework was instrumental in enhancing the acceptance and effectiveness of this intervention.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate an educational programme, ‘Diabetes Connect: Connecting Professions’, which was developed to enhance communication across primary care networks, to support best practice in clinical interventions and progress multidisciplinary team work to benefit patients in diabetes care.

A total of 26 workshops were successfully delivered for 309 primary care professionals across the state of Queensland in Australia from November 2011. It consists of two separate, but complementary training elements: a series of online clinical education training modules and state-wide interprofessional learning workshops developed to enhance professional competencies. The evaluation design included completion of online surveys by the participants at two time points: first upon registering for the online modules or workshops; second, one week after attending a workshop. The survey included questions to evaluate the change in role performance measures.

Overall, significant increases in participants’ current knowledge, perceived ability to adopt this knowledge at work and willingness to change professional behaviour in the short term were observed.

The study suggests that for maximum benefit both, workshop and online training, should be combined and made available widely. Future programmes should use a randomised trial design to test the delivery model.

To explore GPs’ experiences of managing recurrent urinary tract infections (RUTIs) and their views on the use of herbal medicines for this condition.

RUTIs are an important problem commonly managed in primary care. Antibiotic prophylaxis is an effective treatment for acute infections but growing microbial resistance, adverse effects, and the lack of sustained long-term benefits mean that novel treatments are required. There are a number of promising reports of herbal medicines being used to treat RUTIs.

A total of 15 GPs (seven female; aged 34–59 years; in practice from 3 to 31 years) were purposively sampled and took part in semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Data collection and analysis proceeded iteratively to allow emerging themes to inform subsequent interviews.

Participants were aware of the disabling effect of RUTIs on women’s lives. GPs experienced significant challenges in their management of RUTIs with decisions about the provision of antibiotics being particularly complex. While some participants were open to the possibility of herbal treatment options they required more research into effectiveness and safety, better regulation of herbal practitioners, and assurance about herbal quality control and potential herb–drug interactions.

This study assesses the feasibility of collecting genetic samples and self-reported outcome measures after cardiovascular risk assessment, and presenting the genetic test results to participants.

Coronary heart disease (CHD) genetic tests are increasingly available through direct-to-consumer marketing, but their potential clinical impact on cardiovascular risk assessment is unclear.

Observational study in 10 British general practices in Central England. A total of 320 individuals, who had completed conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, were offered CHD genetic test, with follow-up outcome questionnaire at eight months for lifestyle change and State-Trait Anxiety.

A total of 119 (37%) participants returned genetic test specimens, with over a third reporting family history of CHD in a specified relative; 79 (66.4%) were categorized above-average risk on conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, 65 of whom (82.3%) were only average risk on genetic assessment. The dietary fat questionnaire was poorly completed while study participation was not associated with increased anxiety (mean increase in anxiety score=2.1; 95% CI −0.1–4.3; P=0.06).

As a feasibility study, over a third of individuals offered genetic testing in primary care, as part of CVD risk assessment, took up the offer. Although intervention did not appear to increase anxiety, this needs further evaluation. To improve generalizability and effect size, future studies should actively engage individuals from wider socio-economic backgrounds who may not have already contemplated lifestyle change. The current research suggests general practitioners will face the clinical challenge of patients presenting with direct-to-consumer genetic results that are inconsistent with conventional cardiovascular risk assessment.