PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Chris Salisbury

Publications and source records attributed to Chris Salisbury.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Vulvovaginal-swab or first-catch urine specimen to detect Chlamydia trachomatis in women in a community setting?

Screening for chlamydia in women is widely recommended. We evaluated the performance of two nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis in self-collected vulvovaginal-swab and first-catch urine specimens from women in a community setting and a strategy for optimizing the sensitivity of an amplified enzyme immunoassay on vulvovaginal-swab specimens. We tested 2,745 paired vulvovaginal-swab and urine specimens by PCR (Roche Cobas) or strand displacement amplification (SDA; Becton Dickinson). There were 146 women infected with chlamydia. The assays detected 97.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.1 to 99.2%) of infected patients with vulvovaginal-swab specimens and 91.8% (86.1 to 95.7%) with urine specimens. We tested 2,749 vulvovaginal-swab specimens with both a nucleic acid amplification test and a polymer conjugate-enhanced enzyme immunoassay with negative-gray-zone testing. The relative sensitivities obtained after retesting specimens in the negative gray zone were 74.3% (95% CI, 62.8 to 83.8%) with PCR and 58.3% (95% CI, 46.1 to 69.8%) with SDA. In community settings, both vulvovaginal-swab and first-catch urine specimens from women are suitable substrates for nucleic acid amplification tests, but enzyme immunoassays, even after negative-gray-zone testing, should not be used in screening programs.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

'Two sides of the coin'--the value of personal continuity to GPs: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Continuity is thought to be important to GPs but the values behind this are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To explore the values that doctors working in general practice attach to continuity of patient care and to outline how these values are applied in practice. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interview with 24 GPs in England. Participants were purposefully sampled according to personal and practice characteristics. Analysis was thematic, drawing on the constant comparative method. RESULTS: The majority of doctors valued doctor-patient, or personal, continuity in their everyday work. It was most valued in patients with serious, complex or psychological problems. GPs believed that through their personal knowledge of the patient and the doctor-patient relationship, personal continuity enabled them to provide higher quality care. However, the benefits of personal continuity were balanced against problems, and GPs identified personal, professional and external constraints that limited its provision. GPs seemed to have resolved the tension between the benefits, limits and constraints they described by accepting an increased reliance on continuity being provided within teams. CONCLUSION: Personal continuity may offer important benefits to doctors and patients, but we do not know how unique its values are. In particular, it is not clear whether the same benefits can be achieved within teams, the level at which continuity is increasingly being provided. The relative advantages and limits of the different means of delivering continuity need to be better understood, before further policy changes that affect personal continuity are introduced.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

'Taking off the suit': engaging the community in primary health care decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the process of public involvement in planning primary health care. BACKGROUND: Recent policy in the UK promotes public involvement in planning health but there have been difficulties in engaging communities in the process. Surveys of health service organizations have found that there has been a failure to adapt to new approaches. It has become important to understand why this has occurred if policy initiatives to encourage involvement are to succeed. DESIGN: Qualitative study. Data collected through individual interviews and focus groups. SETTING: Two new primary healthcare developments in deprived areas in Bristol and Weston-Super-Mare. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six professionals and 23 local residents in Bristol; six professionals and three local residents in Weston-Super-Mare. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: process, partnership and power. The main findings were that exceptional people with a shared commitment to public involvement were necessary to motivate others and develop partnerships. Local people were drawn into the process and with increased confidence became powerful advocates for their community. Creative and varied methods to involve the public were important in achieving balance between professionals and lay people. However, conflicts over practical decisions arose from a lack of clarity over who had power to influence decisions. CONCLUSION: Most of the participants were enthusiastic about their experience of public involvement in planning primary health care. Features crucial to sustainable involvement included a commitment from leaders within statutory agencies, support over a long period to build the confidence of local people, willingness to use informal approaches that are in tune with local culture, and a recognition of the concerns of both service users and providers.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Opportunistic and systematic screening for chlamydia: a study of consultations by young adults in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydia infection is being introduced in England, but evidence for the effectiveness of this approach is lacking. There are insufficient data about young peoples' use of primary care services to determine the potential coverage of opportunistic screening in comparison with a systematic population-based approach. AIM: To estimate use of primary care services by young men and women; to compare potential coverage of opportunistic chlamydia screening with a systematic postal approach. DESIGN OF STUDY: Population based cross-sectional study. SETTING: Twenty-seven general practices around Bristol and Birmingham. METHOD: A random sample of patients aged 16-24 years were posted a chlamydia screening pack. We collected details of face-to-face consultations from general practice records. Survival and person-time methods were used to estimate the cumulative probability of attending general practice in 1 year and the coverage achieved by opportunistic and systematic postal chlamydia screening. RESULTS: Of 12 973 eligible patients, an estimated 60.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 58.3 to 62.5%) of men and 75.3% (73.7 to 76.9%) of women aged 16-24 years attended their practice at least once in a 1-year period. During this period, an estimated 21.3% of patients would not attend their general practice but would be reached by postal screening, 9.2% would not receive a postal invitation but would attend their practice, and 11.8% would be missed by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunistic and population-based approaches to chlamydia screening would both fail to contact a substantial minority of the target group, if used alone. A pragmatic approach combining both strategies might achieve higher coverage.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Comparing the cost of nurse practitioners and GPs in primary care: modelling economic data from randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The role of nurse practitioners in primary care has recently expanded. While there are some outcome data available for different types of consultations, little is known about the relative cost. AIM: To compare the cost of primary care provided by nurse practitioners with that of salaried GPs. DESIGN OF STUDY: Synthesis, modelling, and analysis of published data from the perspective of general practices and the NHS. DATA SOURCES: Two published randomised controlled trials. METHOD: A dataset of resource use for a simulated group of patients in a typical consultation was modelled. Current unit costs were used to obtain a consensus mean cost per consultation. RESULTS: Mean cost of a nurse practitioner consultation was estimated at 9.46 UK pounds (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.16 to 9.75 pounds) and for a GP was 9.30 UK pounds (95% CI = 9.04 to 9.56 pounds) according to salary and overheads, that is, from the perspective of general practices. From the NHS perspective, which included training costs, the estimated mean costs were 30.35 UK pounds (95% CI = 27.10 to 33.59 pounds) and 28.14 UK pounds (95% CI = 25.43 to 30.84 pounds) respectively. Sensitivity analysis suggested that the time spent by GPs contributing to nurse practitioners' consultations (including return visits) was an important factor in increasing costs associated with nurse practitioners. CONCLUSION: Employing a nurse practitioner in primary care is likely to cost much the same as employing a salaried GP according to currently available data. There is considerable variability of qualifications and experience of nurse practitioners, which suggests that skill-mix decisions should depend on the full range of roles and responsibilities rather than cost.

Family Practice↗
PubMed2006

Implementation of Advanced Access in general practice: postal survey of practices.

BACKGROUND: Advanced Access has been strongly promoted as a means of improving access to general practice. Key principles include measuring demand, matching capacity to demand, managing demand in different ways and having contingency plans. Although not advocated by Advanced Access, some practices have also restricted availability of pre-booked appointments. AIM: This study compares the strategies used to improve access by practices which do or do not operate Advanced Access. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal survey of practices. SETTING: Three hundred and ninety-one practices in 12 primary care trusts. METHOD: Questionnaires were posted to practice managers to collect data on practice characteristics, supply and demand of appointments, strategies employed to manage demand, and use of Advanced Access. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-five from 391 (63%) practices returned a questionnaire and 162/241(67%) claimed to be using Advanced Access. There were few differences between characteristics of practices operating Advanced Access or not. Both types of practice had introduced a wide range of measures to improve access. The proportion of doctors' appointments only available for booking on the same day was higher in Advanced Access practices (40 versus 16%, difference = 24%, 95% CI = 16% to 32%). Less than half the practices claiming to operate Advanced Access ((63/140; 45%) used all four of this model's key principles. CONCLUSION: The majority of practices in this sample claim to have introduced Advanced Access, but the degree of implementation is very variable. Advanced Access practices use more initiatives to measure and improve access than non-Advanced Access practices.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Partner notification of chlamydia infection in primary care: randomised controlled trial and analysis of resource use.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a practice nurse led strategy to improve the notification and treatment of partners of people with chlamydia infection. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 27 general practices in the Bristol and Birmingham areas. PARTICIPANTS: 140 men and women with chlamydia (index cases) diagnosed by screening of a home collected urine sample or vulval swab specimen. INTERVENTIONS: Partner notification at the general practice immediately after diagnosis by trained practice nurses, with telephone follow up by a health adviser; or referral to a specialist health adviser at a genitourinary medicine clinic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the proportion of index cases with at least one treated sexual partner. Specified secondary outcomes included the number of sexual contacts elicited during a sexual history, positive test result for chlamydia six weeks after treatment, and the cost of each strategy in 2003 sterling prices. RESULTS: 65.3% (47/72) of participants receiving practice nurse led partner notification had at least one partner treated compared with 52.9% (39/68) of those referred to a genitourinary medicine clinic (risk difference 12.4%, 95% confidence interval -1.8% to 26.5%). Of 68 participants referred to the clinic, 21 (31%) did not attend. The costs per index case were 32.55 pounds sterling for the practice nurse led strategy and 32.62 pounds sterling for the specialist referral strategy. CONCLUSION: Practice based partner notification by trained nurses with telephone follow up by health advisers is at least as effective as referral to a specialist health adviser at a genitourinary medicine clinic, and costs the same. Trial registration Clinical trials: NCT00112255.

Chlamydia Infections↗
PubMed2005

Economic evaluation of a general practitioner with special interests led dermatology service in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out an economic evaluation of a general practitioner with special interest service for non-urgent skin problems compared with hospital outpatient care. DESIGN: Cost effectiveness analysis and cost consequences analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practitioner with special interest dermatology service covering 29 general practices in Bristol. PARTICIPANTS: Adults referred to a hospital dermatology clinic who were potentially suitable for management by a general practitioner with special interest. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised 2:1 to receive either care by general practitioner with special interest service or usual hospital outpatient care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs to NHS, patients, and companions, and costs of lost production. Cost effectiveness, using the two primary outcomes of dermatology life quality index scores and improved patient perceived access, was assessed by incremental cost effectiveness ratios and cost effectiveness acceptability curves. Cost consequences are presented in relation to all costs and both primary and secondary outcomes from the trial. RESULTS: Costs to the NHS for patients attending the general practitioner with special interest service were 208 pounds sterling (361 dollars; 308 euro) compared with 118 pounds sterling for hospital outpatient care. Based on analysis with imputation of missing data, costs to patients and companions were 48 pounds sterling and 51 pounds sterling, respectively; costs of lost production were 27 pounds sterling and 34 pounds sterling, respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios for general practitioner with special interest care over outpatient care were 540 pounds sterling per one point gain in the dermatology life quality index and 66 pounds sterling per 10 point change in the access scale. CONCLUSIONS: The general practitioner with special interest service for dermatology is more costly than hospital outpatient care, but this additional cost needs to be weighed against improved access and broadly similar health outcomes.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed2005

Evaluation of a general practitioner with special interest service for dermatology: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness, accessibility, and acceptability of a general practitioner with special interest service for skin problems compared with a hospital dermatology clinic. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practitioner with special interest dermatology service and hospital dermatology clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Adults referred to a hospital dermatology clinic and assessed by a consultant or the general practitioner with special interest service,. Suitable patients had non-urgent skin problems and had been identified from the referral letter as suitable for management by a general practitioner with special interest. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised in 2:1 ratio to receive management by a general practitioner with special interest or usual hospital outpatient care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were disease related quality of life (dermatology life quality index) and improvement in patients' perception of access to services, assessed nine months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, preference for site of care, proportion of failed appointments, and waiting times to first appointment. RESULTS: 49% of the participants were judged suitable for care by the general practitioner with special interest service. Of 768 patients eligible, 556 (72.4%) were randomised (354 to general practitioner with special interest, 202 to hospital outpatient care). After nine months, 422 (76%) were followed up. No noticeable differences were found between the groups in clinical outcome (median dermatology life quality index score = 1 both arms, ratio of geometric means 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.15). The general practitioner with special interest service was more accessible (difference between means on access scale 14, 11 to 19) and waited a mean of 40 (35 to 46) days less. Patients expressed slightly greater satisfaction with consultations with a general practitioner with special interest (difference in mean satisfaction score 4, 1 to 7), and at baseline and after nine months 61% said they preferred care at the service. CONCLUSIONS: The general practitioner with special interest service for dermatology was more accessible and preferred by patients than hospital outpatient care, achieving similar clinical outcomes. Trial registration ISRCTN31962758.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Coverage and uptake of systematic postal screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and prevalence of infection in the United Kingdom general population: cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the coverage and uptake of systematic postal screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and the prevalence of infection in the general population in the United Kingdom. To investigate factors associated with these measures. DESIGN: Cross sectional survey of people randomly selected from general practice registers. Invitation to provide a specimen collected at home. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: 19,773 men and women aged 16-39 years invited to participate in screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Coverage and uptake of screening; prevalence of chlamydia. RESULTS: Coverage of chlamydia screening was 73% and was lower in areas with a higher proportion of non-white residents. Uptake in 16-24 year olds was 31.5% and was lower in men, younger adults, and practices in disadvantaged areas. Overall prevalence of chlamydia was 2.8% (95%confidence interval 2.2% to 3.4%) in men and 3.6% (3.1% to 4.9%) in women, but it was higher in people younger than 25 years (men 5.1%; 4.0% to 6.3%; women 6.2%; 5.2% to 7.8%). Prevalence was higher in the subgroup of younger women who were harder to engage in screening. The strongest determinant of chlamydial infection was having one or more new sexual partners in the past year. CONCLUSIONS: Postal chlamydia screening was feasible, but coverage was incomplete and uptake was modest. Lower coverage of postal screening in areas with more non-white residents along with poorer uptake in more deprived areas and among women at higher risk of infection could mean that screening leads to wider inequalities in sexual health.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Enhanced enzyme immunoassay with negative-gray-zone testing compared to a single nucleic Acid amplification technique for community-based chlamydial screening of men.

We evaluated a low-cost diagnostic strategy for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis in a low-prevalence population. We used an amplified enzyme immunoassay (EIA) with a reduced-cutoff "negative gray zone" to identify reactive specimens for confirmation by a nucleic acid amplification test. As part of the Chlamydia Screening Studies project, men provided a first-pass urine specimen, which they returned by post for testing. We tested 1,003 specimens by IDEIA PCE EIA (Dako) and Cobas PCR (Roche). There were 32 (3.2%) true positive specimens according to a combined standard using an algorithm requiring concordant results from at least two independent tests. All of these were positive by Cobas PCR and 24 were confirmed to be positive by PCE EIA, including 2 that gave results in the negative gray zone. There were 971 true negative specimens, 2 of which were positive by Cobas PCR and 19 of which were initially inhibitory for PCR. The relative sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of PCE EIA with PCR confirmation were 75.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56.6 to 88.5%), 100% (95% CI, 99.7 to 100%), 100% (95% CI, 88.3 to 100%), and 99.2% (95% CI, 98.4 to 99.6%), respectively. The corresponding values for Cobas PCR were 100% (95% CI, 89.1 to 100%), 99.8% (95% CI, 99.3 to 100%), 94.1% (95% CI, 76.9 to 98.2%), and 100% (95% CI, 99.6 to 100%), respectively, with 1.9% (19/1003) of the samples being initially indeterminate. When the prevalence of C. trachomatis is low, the use of an amplified EIA on urine specimens, with confirmation of results in the negative gray zone by use of a nucleic acid amplification technique, is not suitable for screening asymptomatic men. In addition, positive nucleic acid amplification test results should be confirmed and an inhibition control should be used.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2004

A health needs assessment of street-based prostitutes: cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Research with prostitutes has tended to concentrate on sexual health rather than wider health issues, and has failed to differentiate between street-based prostitutes and off-street workers. Little is known about the general health and background of street-based sex workers, the group likely to have the greatest needs. METHODS: An interview-based survey amongst street-based sex workers in central Bristol was employed. RESULTS: Seventy-one women were interviewed. All reported chronic health problems. Sexually transmitted infections were between nine and 60 times more common than the general population. Many women (44 per cent; n = 31) had experienced sexual abuse and 38 per cent (n = 27) had been in care. Women who had experienced care left school earlier (14.1 versus 15.5 years; p < 0.0001 unpaired t-test) and were less likely to have their own children at home [1/18 (5.5 per cent) versus 8/25 (32 per cent); p = 0.06) The stillbirth rate was 50/1000. Most (97 per cent; n = 69) had been offered more money for unprotected sex. Half (51 per cent; n = 36) had unprotected sex in the last week. All had drug or alcohol dependency problems. In the last week, 22 per cent (n = 9/41) of injecting drug users had shared needles and 59 per cent (n = 24/41) had shared injecting equipment, despite most (96 per cent; n = 39/41) knowing the risks. CONCLUSIONS: The health and social inequalities experienced by this group are much worse than any group highlighted in the 'Tackling Health Inequalities Review 2002' and appear cross generational. In neither that report nor the Sexual Health and HIV Strategy report are sex workers identified as a particularly high priority group. There is the potential for their needs to continue to be unmet.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Self-reported experiences of health services among female street-based prostitutes: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies show that women working in prostitution do not use routine health services appropriately. Little is known about the nature and frequency of service contacts or barriers to access. This information is needed if use of current services by this group is to improve. AIM: To identify barriers reducing access to health services by street prostitutes, and to identify current patterns of use. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Inner-city Bristol. METHOD: Seventy-one female street-based prostitutes were interviewed about their experiences of health services. RESULTS: The women had frequent contacts with healthcare providers. The general practitioner (GP) was the main source of all types of care. Although 83% (59/71) were registered with a GP, 62% (36/59) had not disclosed their work. Only 46% (33/71) had been screened for sexually transmitted infection in the previous year and 24% (17/71) were vaccinated against hepatitis B, a national recommendation for sex workers. Only 38% (25/65) had had cervical smears according to screening guidelines. Opportunistic screening and care was important. While pregnant with their last child, only 30% (14/47) booked in the first trimester and attended all antenatal appointments, with 13% (6/47) receiving no antenatal care until admitted in labour. Appointments, waiting times, and fear of judgement and other patients staring, were considered significant barriers to service use. The model suggested by the women was an integrated service providing basic living needs alongside health care. CONCLUSION: Non-disclosure and poor attendance for follow-up make appropriate care difficult, and may contribute to poor health. Despite frequent service contacts, opportunities for care are being missed.

Attitude to Health↗
PubMed2003

Impact of NHS walk-in centres on the workload of other local healthcare providers: time series analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of NHS walk-in centres on the workload of local accident and emergency departments, general practices, and out of hours services. DESIGN: Time series analysis in walk-in centre sites with no-treatment control series in matched sites. SETTING: Walk-in centres and matched control towns without walk-in centres in England. PARTICIPANTS: 20 accident and emergency departments, 40 general practices, and 14 out of hours services within 3 km of a walk-in centre or the centre of a control town. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean number (accident and emergency departments) or rate (general practices and out of hours services) of consultations per month in the 12 month periods before and after an index date. RESULTS: A reduction in consultations at emergency departments (-175 (95% confidence interval -387 to 36) consultations per department per month) and general practices (-19.8 (-53.3 to 13.8) consultations per 1000 patients per month) close to walk-in centres became apparent, although these reductions were not statistically significant. Walk-in centres did not have any impact on consultations on out of hours services. CONCLUSION: It will be necessary to assess the impact of walk-in centres in a larger number of sites and over a prolonged period, to determine whether they reduce the demand on other local NHS providers.

After-Hours Care↗