Skip to main content

Does higher quality primary health care reduce stroke admissions?


Hospital admission rates for stroke are strongly associated with population factors. The supply and quality of primary care services may also affect admission rates, but there is little previous research on this association. In a paper published recently in the British Journal of General Practice, Michael Soljak and colleagues from the Department of Primary Care & Public Health at Imperial College London investigated whether the hospital admission rate for stroke is reduced by effective primary and secondary prevention in primary care.

This was a national cross-sectional study in an English population (52 763 586 patients registered with 7969 general practices in 152 primary care trusts). They found that mean annual stroke admission rates per 100 000 population varied from zero to 476.5 at practice level. In a practice-level multivariable Poisson regression, observed stroke prevalence, deprivation, and smoking prevalence were all risk factors for hospital admission. Protective healthcare factors included the percentage of stroke or transient ischaemic attack patients whose last measured total cholesterol was ≤5 mmol/l, and ability to book an appointment with a GP.

They concluded that the associations of stroke admission rates with deprivation and smoking highlight the need for effective smoking-cessation services. Patient experience of access to primary care may also be clinically important. In countries with well-developed primary healthcare systems, the potential to reduce hospital admissions by further improving the clinical quality of primary healthcare may be limited unless more rigorous quality improvement measures than those currently being used are implemented.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...

Talking to Patients About Weight-Loss Drugs

The use of weight-loss drugs such as GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g., semaglutide, tirzepatide) has increased rapidly in recent years. These drugs can help some people achieve significant weight reduction, but they are not suitable for everyone and require careful counselling before starting treatment. By discussing benefits, risks, practicalities, and  uncertainties, clinicians can help patients make informed, realistic decisions about their treatment. Key points to discuss with patients 1. Indications and eligibility These drugs are usually licensed for adults with a specific BMI. They should be used alongside lifestyle interventions such as dietary change, increased physical activity, and behaviour modification. 2. Potential side effects – some can be serious Common adverse effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and abdominal discomfort. Less common but more serious risks include gallstones, pancreatitis and visual problems. Patients should know what to watch for a...

Abolishing NHS England will make only modest savings

Abolishing NHS England and reducing Integrated Care Board (ICB) staffing by 50% may appear substantial, but the projected savings - around £500 million annually if fully achieved - would represent only a modest increase (approximately 0.25%) in annual NHS funding in England, given the NHS England budget is approaching £200 billion per year. Evidence from past NHS reforms (like the 2012 Health and Social Care Act) shows mixed results; some efficiency gains but often offset by new layers of complexity elsewhere in NHS structures. Without parallel initiatives to streamline administrative processes, improve efficiency, and enhance clinical productivity, such structural changes to NHS England and ICBs alone will not significantly improve frontline clinical care or health outcomes. Administrative costs, while important to minimise, make up a relatively small proportion of the overall NHS budget. Genuine productivity gains will therefore require systematic reforms aimed at reducing unnecessar...