UNASSIGNED: Over the past decade, neurosurgical interventions have experienced changes in operative frequency and postoperative length of stay (LOS), with the recent COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacting these metrics. Evaluating these trends in a tertiary National Health Service center provides insights into the impact of surgical practices and health policy on LOS and is essential for optimizing healthcare management decisions.
UNASSIGNED: This was a single tertiary center retrospective case series analysis of neurosurgical procedures from 2012 to 2022. Factors including procedure type, admission urgency, and LOS were extracted from a prospectively maintained database. Six subspecialties were analyzed: Spine, Neuro-oncology, Skull base (SB), Functional, Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and Peripheral nerve (PN). Mann-Kendall temporal trend test and exploratory data analysis were performed.
UNASSIGNED: 19,237 elective and day case operations were analyzed. Of the 6 sub-specialties, spine, neuro-oncology, SB, and CSF procedures all showed a significant trend toward decreasing frequency. A shift toward day case over elective procedures was evident, especially in spine (P < 0.001), SB (tau = 0.733, P = 0.0042), functional (tau = 0.156, P = 0.0016), and PN surgeries (P < 0.005). Over the last decade, decreasing LOS was observed for neuro-oncology (tau = -0.648, P = 0.0077), SB (tau = -0.382, P = 0.012), and functional operations, a trend which remained consistent during the COVID-19 pandemic (P = 0.01). Spine remained constant across the decade while PN demonstrated a trend toward increasing LOS.
UNASSIGNED: Most subspecialties demonstrate a decreasing LOS coupled with a shift toward day case procedures, potentially attributable to improvements in surgical techniques, less invasive approaches, and increased pressure on beds. Setting up extra dedicated day case theaters could help deal with the backlog of procedures, particularly with regard to the impact of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Missed appointments within the National Health Service (NHS) are a drain on resources, associated with not only considerable time and cost implications, but also sub-optimal health outcomes. This literature review aims to explore non-attendance within the NHS in relation to causes, impacts and possible mitigation of negative effects of missed appointments.
METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus and PubMed were searched with a date range of 2016-2021. Databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles published in English addressing non-attendance of adults within the NHS. Studies were excluded if they were theoretical papers, dissertations or research concerning patients aged under 18. A total of 21 articles met the inclusion criteria and were selected for analysis.
RESULTS: The results indicate a significant association of non-attendance and poor health outcomes. Patients from a lower socioeconomic status, adults aged over 85 and those with multiple co-morbidities are more likely to miss appointments. The most commonly reported patient-centred reasons for failing to attend were forgetfulness, transportation difficulties, and family commitments. Practice-specific reasons were cited as inefficiencies of the appointment booking system, failure of traditional reminders and inconvenient timings. Interventions included text reminder services, the inclusion of costs within reminders and enhanced patient involvement with the booking process.
CONCLUSIONS: Non-attendance is complex, and to secure maximum attendance, targeted interventions are required by healthcare facilities to ensure patient needs are met. The adaption of scheduling systems and healthcare services can assist in reducing DNA rates.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing body of research into both Artificial intelligence and mental health inpatient flow issues, few studies adequately combine the two. This review summarises findings in the fields of AI in psychiatry and patient flow from the past 5 years, finds links and identifies gaps for future research.
METHODS: The OVID database was used to access Embase and Medline. Top journals such as JAMA, Nature and The Lancet were screened for other relevant studies. Selection bias was limited by strict inclusion and exclusion criteria.
METHODS: 3,675 papers were identified in March 2020, of which a limited number focused on AI for mental health unit patient flow. After initial screening, 323 were selected and 83 were subsequently analysed. The literature review revealed a wide range of applications with three main themes: diagnosis (33%), prognosis (39%) and treatment (28%). The main themes that emerged from AI in patient flow studies were: readmissions (41%), resource allocation (44%) and limitations (91%). The review extrapolates those solutions and suggests how they could potentially improve patient flow on mental health units, along with challenges and limitations they could face.
CONCLUSIONS: Research widely addresses potential uses of AI in mental health, with some focused on its applicability in psychiatric inpatients units, however research rarely discusses improvements in patient flow. Studies investigated various uses of AI to improve patient flow across specialities. This review highlights a gap in research and the unique research opportunity it presents.

Patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) are available from some National Health Service Trusts in the UK to support patients following their discharge from hospital. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the available evidence regarding the characteristics of enquirers and enquiries to PMHS, in order to develop recommendations for service improvement.
Searches were conducted using Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and Web of Science, on 4 June 2019. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, and grey literature was searched. Studies were included if they reported any characteristics of enquirers who use PMHS, and/or enquiries received. Study quality was assessed using the Axis tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted, and where appropriate, weighted means (WMs) were calculated. Where possible, outcomes were compared with Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data for England, to establish whether the profile of helpline users may differ to that of hospital patients.
Nineteen studies were included (~4362 enquiries). Risk of bias from assessed studies was 71%. Enquirers were predominantly female (WM=53%; HES mean=57%), elderly (WM=69 years; HES mean=53 years) and enquired regarding themselves (WM=72%). Out of inpatient and outpatient enquirers, 50% were inpatients and 50% were outpatients (WM). Six of 15 studies reported adverse effects as the main enquiry reason. Two of four studies reported antimicrobial drugs as the main enquiry drug class. From two studies, the main clinical origin of enquiries were general surgery and cardiology. Across six studies, 27% (WM) of enquiries concerned medicines-related errors.
Our findings show that PMHS are often used by elderly patients, which is important since this group may be particularly vulnerable to experiencing medicines-related issues following hospital discharge. Over a quarter of enquiries to PMHS may concern medicines-related errors, suggesting that addressing such errors is an important function of this service. However, our study findings may be limited by a high risk of bias within included studies. Further research could provide a more detailed profile of helpline users (eg, ethnicity, average number of medicines consumed), and we encourage helpline providers to use their enquiry data to conduct local projects to improve hospital services (eg, reducing errors).
CRD42018116276.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is two-fold. First, it attempts to identify the barriers and enablers of implementing clinical commissioning policy. Second, it synthesises how these barriers and enablers affect the success of National Health Service (NHS) efforts to reduce health inequalities in the UK.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. We searched large biomedical bibliographic databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Allied & Complementary Medicine, DH-DATA, Global Health and CINAHL for primary studies, conducted in the UK, that assessed the factors - barriers and enablers related to health inequalities, published from 2010 onwards and in English, and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We used Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal and Mixed Methods Appraisal tools to assess the methodological qualities, and synthesised by performing thematic analysis. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and extracted data.
RESULTS: We included six primary studies (including a total of 1155 participants) in the final review. The studies reported two broad categories, under four separate themes: (1) the agenda of health inequalities has not been given priority; (2) there was very little evidence for reducing health inequalities through the clinical commissioning (CC) process; (3) CC was positively associated with the restructuring of NHS; and (4) CC brings better collaboration and engagement, which led to some improvements in health services access, utilisation and delivery at the local level.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides useful factors - barriers and enablers - to implement and deliver clinical commissioning policy in improving health and well-being. These factors could be assessed in future to develop objective measures and interventions to establish the link between commissioning and health inequalities.

OBJECTIVE: To review literature on nurses\' and health care workers\' experiences of caring for people with dementia on orthopaedic wards.
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a condition that affects a large number of the older population worldwide. It is estimated that there are 47·5 million people worldwide living with dementia with 4·6 million new cases being diagnosed annually. This number is said to increase to 75·6 million by 2030 and triple by 2050. It is also acknowledged that older people are at a greater risk of falls that are a devastating problem causing a tremendous amount of morbidity, mortality and use of health care services (Rubestein, Age and Ageing, 35, 2006, 37). Falls usually result from identified risk factors such as weakness, unsteady gait, confusion and certain medication. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a large population of older people suffering from dementia may be admitted to orthopaedic wards with various injuries. Nurse and support health workers may experience a range of difficulties when caring for this population of patients.
METHODS: A systematic review.
METHODS: An extensive literature search using; CINAHL, MEDLINE, Academic Search Complete, National Health Service Evidence, websites like Department of Health, Dementia and Alzheimer\'s Society.
RESULTS: The search generated several articles on dementia in general, however, only 14 articles dealing with care of these people in an acute hospital setting were found. No studies dealing with the care of people with dementia on orthopaedic wards were found; therefore, this review has taken a generalist nature and applies the findings to orthopaedic wards. The main themes identified from the review were: challenging behaviour and unsuitable care environment; lack of education on dementia; strain from nursing patients with dementia; and ethical dilemmas arising from care of people with dementia.
CONCLUSIONS: It would be an over-simplification to say that the care of people with dementia on medical wards is the same as the care of trauma patients with dementia. Therefore, there is a need for a study to explore nurses\' and health care worker\'s experiences of caring for trauma patients with dementia on orthopaedic wards.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study could provide guidance on the effective care of people with dementia on orthopaedic wards.

OBJECTIVE: Most Italian children are cared for by a family paediatrician until they are 14 years old, and their duties include prescribing drugs recommended by specialists so that they are free. This study aimed to draw up a list of the drugs most commonly prescribed by family paediatricians.
METHODS: We surveyed 64 experienced family paediatricians to find out what drugs they prescribed over an 8-week period, including those recommended by a specialist, using cartons of drugs as the unit of measurement. A list of commonly prescribed drugs was then drawn up.
RESULTS: A total of 381 active substances were prescribed. The most commonly prescribed drugs were amoxicillin (25.8% of the cartons), amoxicillin clavulanate (9.2%) and cetirizine (9.0%). The most commonly prescribed drug classes were antibiotics (43.8%), anti-asthmatics (12.9%) and antihistamines (11.8%). A list of 38 commonly prescribed drugs belonging to 16 therapeutic subgroups and covering 83.1% of cartons was identified. Of these, 33 were prescribed by 50% or more of the paediatricians and five were mainly prescribed following the recommendation of a specialist.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review of the prescribing habits of family paediatricians showed that 38 commonly prescribed drugs were sufficient to treat most common diseases in children under 15 years of age.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。