Biomedical subjects

Ann Raven

Publications and source records attributed to Ann Raven.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Pharmacogenetics and uncertainty: implications for policy makers.

Uncertainty for policy makers is not new but the pressure to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty is perhaps greater than ever. The arrival of new scientific developments such as pharmacogenetics offers potentially great benefits (as well as significant risks). They have passionate supporters as well as doubters. The evidence is often extensive but unclear and policy makers may find themselves under pressure to make decisions before they feel that the evidence is compelling. The UK is particularly well placed to play a leading role in the development of pharmacogenetics and is equally well placed to derive the benefits to both health and wealth that could flow from this. However, the uncertainties threaten to overwhelm the capacity of policy makers to act effectively. The uncertainties are both about the context within which the science and delivery of pharmacogenetics is being developed and about the interests that could be served. This paper maps these uncertainties and concludes with some suggestions, drawing on deliberative democracy and futures thinking, as to how policy makers might manage the tensions and dilemmas they face by moving from an unstable, emergent policy arena to a more stable one.

Administrative Personnel↗

PubMed2005

Do Personal Medical Services contracts improve quality of care? A multi-method evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the new contractual arrangements of first-wave Personal Medical Services (PMS) practices in England improved their quality of care, compared with changes in care provided in a control sample of General Medical Services (GMS) practices. METHODS: Controlled 'before' (at or near 1 April 1998) and 'after' (at or near 31 March 2001) quantitative observational study in a sample of 23 PMS and 23 GMS practices. Quantitative data focused on access, chronic disease management, mental health care, primary care of older people, costs and patient evaluation using the General Practice Assessment Survey. Case studies were also undertaken in all PMS pilots, involving interviews with general practitioners, nurses, practice managers and Health Authority and Primary Care Group/Trust managers, documentation review, and analysis of site-specific data. RESULTS: There were improvements in quality of care in PMS sites in all areas of care evaluated, but improvements in care over and above those found in GMS sites (the 'PMS effect') were only statistically significant for angina care (P = 0.05) and elderly care (P = 0.04). Teamwork, shared culture, clear objectives and leadership were important catalysts for quality improvement in PMS sites. Improvements in PMS practices came at additional financial cost. There were concurrent improvements in GMS practices. No PMS site succeeded in meeting its aims without successfully introducing effective leadership and management, and changing relationships within the practice (e.g. equalising power between nurses and doctors). CONCLUSIONS: Small but steady improvements were observed in English primary care. PMS contracts facilitated quality improvements in specific areas over and above these broad improvements (the 'PMS effect') during the study period. New contractual arrangements for health care can be used to improve quality of care. However, the mechanisms that resulted in quality gains, while facilitated by the new contractual arrangements, were not specific or unique to the PMS experiment. Factors such as effective management, clear objectives and flexible professional relationships within practices are likely to be important in determining whether new contractual arrangements result in improved outcomes. The context within which care and services are provided is as important for quality innovations as specific contractual arrangements.

Chronic Disease↗

PubMed2005

Pharmacogenetics: policy needs for personal prescribing.

Pharmacogenetics involves genetic testing of individual patients to guide drug treatment. Proponents argue that pharmacogenetics will achieve major gains in drug safety and efficacy, and revolutionise marketing. Pharmacogenetics also raises several policy concerns, including the need for sound information for clinical decision-making on drug-genetic test combinations. Currently, the pharmacogenetics science base and the rate of emergence of clinical applications are uncertain. Most commentary on pharmacogenetics focuses on new compounds, yet older drugs cause most adverse events. Test regulation in the USA appears fundamentally different from Europe, where evidence of safety or efficacy may not be required. Genetics research is needed as part of post-marketing surveillance systems. In routine clinical practice, computer-based health records with relevant decision support systems will also be needed. Without health policy action, pharmacogenetics could produce a new generation of poorly evaluated tests and drugs, with medicine becoming significantly less evidence-based, leading to rising costs, patient hazard and exclusions of drug-related 'genetic minorities' from evaluated treatments.

Drug Approval↗

PubMed2003

Is the quality of care in general medical practice improving? Results of a longitudinal observational study.

BACKGROUND: The demand for increased accountability within health care has led to a myriad of government initiatives in the United Kingdom, with the aim of improving care, setting minimum standards, and addressing poor performance. AIM: To assess the quality of care in English general practice in the year 2001 compared with 1998, in terms of access, interpersonal care, and clinical care (chronic disease management, elderly care, and mental health care). DESIGN OF STUDY: Observational study in a purposive sample of general practices in England. SETTING: Twenty-three general practices in England--eight in North Thames, seven in the North West, and eight in the South West. RESULTS: Outcome measures were: quality of chronic disease management (angina, adult asthma and type 2 diabetes from practice questionnaires and medical record review), elderly care and mental health care (from practice questionnaires), access to care, continuity of care and interpersonal care (from practice and patient questionnaires) and costs (mean change in practice budget between 1998 and 2001). There were significant improvements in quality of care in terms of organisational access to services (P = 0.016), practice organisation of chronic disease management (P = 0.039), and the quality of angina care (P = 0.003). There were no significant changes in quality scores for mental health care, elderly care, access and interpersonal care. The mean practice budget rose by 3.4% between 1998 and 2001 (adjusted for inflation). CONCLUSION: These findings provide evidence of improvements in some aspects of the quality of care, achieved at modest cost. This was achieved during a time when the National Health Service was undergoing a series of reforms. However, primary care in England is characterised by variation in care, with significant improvements still possible.

Adult↗