Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this article we explore how people who experienced a stroke, transient ischaemic attack, or heart attack sought health care during the COVID‐19 lockdown periods. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 27 patients admitted to hospital between March 2020 and May 2021, and one carer who was recruited from cardiac and stroke rehabilitation services in two large acute NHS trusts in England. Drawing on concepts of candidacy, illness and moral work, we discuss how people's sense‐making about their symptoms fundamentally shaped both their decisions about seeking help and the impact of COVID‐19 on help seeking. Risk perception and interactional ritual chain theory allow further exploration of constructing symbols of national identity in times of crises, managing risk and levels of acceptable risk and critique of ambiguous national messaging over accessing health‐care services for people with emergency health‐care needs. Our findings have wider implications for supporting access into health care for those with life‐threatening conditions under highly publicised strain on the health system, including winter pressure and staff strikes, as well as policymaking and public messaging.

Background National Health Service emergency departments have been under considerable pressure. Many patients presenting to emergency departments could be managed in primary care, suggesting that aspects of general practice might be associated with unplanned hospital admission. Recently a government scheme introduced the concept of a named GP (general practitioner) responsible for the care of patients aged 75 and older to reduce unplanned hospital admission. We aimed to investigate whether better continuity of care is associated with lower risk of emergency hospital admission.

Background: A strong and self confident primary care workforce can deliver the highest quality care and outcomes equitably and cost effectively. To meet the increasing demands being made of it, primary care needs its own thriving research culture and knowledge base. Methods: Review of recent developments supporting primary care clinical research. Results: Primary care research has benefited from a small group of passionate leaders and significant investment in recent decades in some countries. Emerging from this has been innovation in research design and focus, although less is known of the effect on research output. Conclusion: Primary care research is now well placed to lead a broad re-vitalisation of academic medicine, answering questions of relevance to practitioners, patients, communities and Government. Key areas for future primary care research leaders to focus on include exposing undergraduates early to primary care research, integrating this early exposure with doctoral and postdoctoral research career support, further expanding cross disciplinary approaches, and developing useful measures of output for future primary care research investment.