• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

MUS, PPS services and IAPT integration into NHS primary care - what's happening across the UK?

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
http://committee.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=5275

Agenda item
Access to services for people with ME (Myalgic Encephalopathy/Encephalomyelitis)
Report of the Head of Democratic Services

Minutes:

The Chair introduced a report of the Head of Democratic Services on the services provided for and issues faced by people with Myalgic Encephalopathy (ME) and related diagnoses, to determine whether further scrutiny is required. The issue had been brought to the Panel’s attention by members of the public, and public concerns had been expressed about gaps in and consistency of service provision.

The Panel received a presentation by Russell Pitchford, Commissioning Manager – Community Services and Integration at NHS Nottingham City Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), who highlighted the following points:

(a) ME and related conditions, including Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), Post-Viral Fatigue Syndrome (PVFS) and Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome (CFIDS) were prevalent in 0.2 to 0.4% of the population. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence classifies ME/CFS into 3 categories: mild, moderate and severe, but definitive figures for each category are not known;

(b) It is acknowledged that there is a considerable variation in current practice by service providers;

(c) Diagnosis is by exclusion of other possible diagnoses, with symptoms persisting for 4 months in adults and 3 months in children and young people, and may present with other conditions, making diagnosis complex;

(d) It is acknowledged that the conditions have a significant impact on patients and families;

(e) There is a dedicated Nottinghamshire Adult CFS/ME Clinic based at the City Hospital, providing services to those with mild to moderate diagnoses. The programme offered seeks to sustain and/or extend the person’s physical, emotional and cognitive capacity, to manage the physical and emotional impact of their symptoms and to provide cognitive behaviour therapy and/or graded exercise therapy;

(f) The nearest facility for treating severe ME is in Leeds, but there are no current patients from Nottingham referred to the facility;

(g) Services should be needs-based and delivered under local integrated services, with support from specialist services;

(h) The CCG has identified training and education and continuity of care and access to services as the key development areas going forward. The CCG will look to offer education and awareness raising among non-specialists on the symptoms, diagnosis and management of the ME, will look to make local clinicians aware of the specialist services available, and seek to ensure that specialist services consider providing education and awareness training to non-health professionals;

(i) The CCG will also establish agreed pathways to ensure timely diagnosis, consider local referral protocols so people are treated in the right setting, include guidance in protocols so that care is consistent across services.

The Chair then invited Jenny Billings of the ME Self Help Nottingham Group (MESH) to address the Panel, who made a number of points, summarised below:

(j) sufferers of ME/CSF in Nottingham City have experienced delays in diagnosis, have been misdiagnosed and have not been taken seriously by GPs when presenting with ME/CSF symptoms. Sufferers of Fibromyalgia have had similar experiences;

(k) there is a need for a training refresh for GPs in Nottingham to address attitudes to ME/CSF, and to ensure consistency of diagnosis and treatment. In particular, there has been inconsistency in carrying out blood tests and in referring patients to specialists to rule out other illnesses at an early stage;

(l) it is regrettable that Nottingham City CCG did not circulate to GPs for information a report produced by Carruthers and Van de Sande on ME/CSF, as it purportedly failed to meet NICE Guidelines. This was at odds with NHS Services elsewhere in England, which have based information given to patients on this report;

(m) it is unacceptable that the nearest service for those with severe ME/CSF is in Leeds, while patients with moderate ME/CSF find it difficult to access the service at the City Hospital because of its remote location;

(n) MESH Nottingham has experienced poor levels of communication and consultation with Nottingham City CCG, particularly about progression and outcomes of a personalised health budget pilot, and proposed service provision for those with severe ME/CSF. Better working relations between MESH Nottingham and Nottingham City CCG are needed to achieve better outcomes for Nottingham citizens;

(o) It is unacceptable to have local diagnosis figures based on national percentages rather than on local NHS medical records, and this is down to a failure to diagnose and refer appropriately;

(p) There is a sense that there has been little positive action to improve the situation for patients ‘on the ground’. Without the CCG being held to account through a timetable for action this situation is likely to continue, and MESH Nottingham wanted the Panel’s help in continuing to monitor the service provided to ME/CSF sufferers in Nottingham;

(q) A service user endorsed Ms Billings’ comments about diagnosis difficulties, and advised that a majority of survivors of child sexual exploitation suffered from CFS;

(r) In response to points (j) to (p) above, Mr Pitchford advised that patient feedback for the ME/CSF clinic for mild to moderate sufferers was very positive. He acknowledged that there were gaps in provision for those with severe ME/CSF, but that commissioning a service was difficult given low numbers, and options for a joint Nottingham/Derby service were being explored.

Dr Manik Arora of Nottingham City CCG provided a GP/clinician perspective, making the following points:

(s) GPs need to diagnose by exclusion and, while frustrating for both patients and clinicians, taking time to eliminate non-ME/CSF conditions such as anaemia and Multiple Sclerosis is vital if very serious alternative conditions are to be identified and treated. An added complication was that diagnosing other conditions did not mean that ME/CSF was not also present;

(t) Clinicians are happy to take on board learning but are also frustrated by the conflicting guidance, advice and evidence available;

(u) Accurately recording numbers is challenging and this makes the task of commissioning a service very difficult. Addressing the lack of information through the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) would be helpful;

(v) Fragmented commissioning is an issue, but can only be improved through all stakeholders working together non-confrontationally. Ultimately, clinicians want to address patient needs.

Ruth Rigby, Managing Director, Healthwatch Nottingham, appealed to all stakeholders, but especially to patients groups, to share information with Healthwatch. This will build an evidence base to help inform the JSNA and commissioning decisions going forward. As an independent body, Healthwatch Nottingham is in a position to help facilitate information-sharing among stakeholders.


RESOLVED to note the presentations and very valuable, open discussion and to endorse Healthwatch Nottingham’s offer to facilitate information gathering and exchange.



Supporting documents:


PDFs above are:

Report, item 53 HEALTH SCRUTINY PANEL 25 MARCH 2015, ACCESS TO SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WITH ME (MYALGIC ENCEPHALOPATHY/ ENCEPHALOMYELITIS), REPORT OF HEAD OF DEMOCRATIC SERVICES
ME Appendix 1 Health and Scrutiny Committee 25th March 2015
ME Appendix 2 Contribution of Sarah Found on behalf of the M.E Self Help (MESH) Nottingham Group to be submitted to the Nottingham City Health Scrutiny Panel for consideration at the meeting on 25th March 2015
ME Appendix 3 The Rough Guide to ME/CFS
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2009/01January/Pages/ChildhoodtraumaandME.aspx
https://www.cdc.gov/cfs/news/features/childhood_adversity.html
https://www.cdc.gov/cfs/news/features/childhood_adversity.html

https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/fi...ents_ClinPsyReview_uncorrected_manuscript.pdf

Citation for published version (APA):
Lievesley, K., Rimes, K., & Chalder, T. (2014). A review of the predisposing, precipitating and perpetuating factors in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in children and adolescents. Clinical Psychology Review, 34(3), 233-248. 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.02.002


https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-researchdiv/1C9F1D8C8AA524036564986EF8E9298F
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/200/2/164.2

Correspondence
Childhood sexual abuse and chronic fatigue syndrome
Filip Van Den Eede, Tess Haccuria, Maud De Venter, Greta Moorkens
The British Journal of Psychiatry Feb 2012, 200 (2) 164-165; DOI: 10.1192/bjp.200.2.164a

"Recently, our research group examined the impact of childhood trauma in a well-described tertiary sample of patients with CFS. In accordance with the previously mentioned population-based studies, childhood sexual harassment was the best predictor of psychological symptoms in CFS (unpublished data). Taken together, these data emphasise the importance of childhood sexual abuse as a premorbid risk marker for CFS."

-------------------------


Be aware that the threshold for exposure to childhood sexual abuse is set very low in some studies.

I recall one UK study from some years ago, based on telephone interviews. I had a copy of the questionnaire used and had posted it on another forum, at the time. I don't have this material on this laptop so I can't pull up the exact wording.

In the questionnaire, the participants were asked something like, "Thinking about your body...did anything happen to you or was said to you that made you feel uncomfortable..." (in a sexual context) and this was presumably recorded as exposure to "sexual abuse". I don't recall participants being asked to describe the nature or frequency of the incidents; nor rate the degree of perceived emotional or psychological distress, trauma or physical abuse that had occurred or had made them feel "uncomfortable"; nor for how long the "uncomfortable" stuff had persisted.

I should think there is hardly an adult who cannot recall, as a child or young teenager, the occasional incident of opportunist attention from an adult who couldn't keep his hands to himself; or the guy in the grubby mac who moved seats in order to sit right next to you in the cinema or who touched you up in a queue. The swimming instructor who stared down the front of your swimming costume etc.

It was pretty much par for the course in the 60s. Not pleasant and yes, it made you feel "uncomfortable", but for myself, (I am not an ME, CFS patient), I would not describe incidents like these as significant evidence of exposure in childhood to "sexual exploitation", "sexual abuse" or trauma.

 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-medical-expert-group/about/membership

What we do
The Independent Medical Expert Group advises the Minister for Defence Personnel and Veterans on medical and scientific aspects of Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and related matters.

IMEG is an advisory non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Ministry of Defence.



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...MEG_Register_of_Members_Interests_-_FINAL.pdf

Independent Medical Expert Group

Transparency data

Register of Members Interests (for Chair and Members)


1. Professor Sir Anthony Newman Taylor
2. Professor Linda Luxon
3. Professor James Ryan
4. Professor David Snashall
5. Professor Peter White
6. Doctor John Scadding

Members of the Independent Medical Expert Group (IMEG) are required to declare any personal, political or business interests that could (or could be seen to) influence their judgement.

(...)


5. Professor Peter White (Medical member)

Other public appointments held at present:

Professor of Psychological Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London.
European Association for Psychosomatic Medicine (Advisory Board member).

Personal and business interests:
Consultancy to Swiss Re re-insurance company.
Director, Added Value Advisory Services Ltd.

Previous public appointments held within the last 5 years:
Member London Region NIHR Research for Benefit research panel.
Member of Department of Health’s advisory group to expand IAPT programme to include medically unexplained symptoms and long term health conditions.
Honorary consultant liaison psychiatrist to the East London Foundation NHS trust and Barts Health NHS trust.
Member MRC CFS/ME expert working group to encourage biomedical research.

Political activity: None.

(...)


Updated 11 January 2017
 

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
INVITATION TO TENDER FOR THE PROVISION OF: IMPROVING ACCESS to PYSCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES (IAPT) LONG TERM CONDITIONS AND MEDICALLY UNEXPLAINED

SYMPTOMS PROJECT PHASE 1 COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK; SCOPING EXERCISE
Deadline: 14.00, Thursday 31 January 2013
ITT Reference: ITT 58786
PART B – Tender Schedules
(To be returned by Tenderers)

https://data.gov.uk/data/contracts-...d/877115/a5b48158-eb12-408f-8c7d-a03023eadb53
 

Attachments

  • Tender Response 58786-1.pdf
    106.4 KB · Views: 6

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
http://committee.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=185&MId=5714&Ver=4

Meeting Wednesday, 28 September 2016

http://committee.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/documents/g5714/Public reports pack 28th-Sep-2016 14.00 Health and Wellbeing Board.pdf?T=10

NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL
HEALTH AND WELLBEING BOARD

Date: Wednesday, 28 September 2016

Public Document Pack



Among the various documents circulated within this 28 September 2016 pack was a consultation document for books on prescription:

(starts on Page 137 of the Nottingham City Council pack, but is also available as a standalone document here:
http://www.bsrm.org.uk/downloads/rwbopforltcconsultationpaperaug16.pdf )


Note: Active links are provided for all the referenced documents but please refer to the PDF for the links.
I have highlighted in red some of the CFS, ME related text.

Reading Well Books on Prescription for long-term conditions: consultation paper August 2016

1. Introduction

As part of its successful Reading Well Books on Prescription (RWBOP) programme, The Reading Agency and the Society of Chief Librarians are planning to develop a new scheme for public libraries focusing on the needs of people with long-term conditions (LTCs). This work will be developed and delivered with relevant health agencies and organisations. It supports the Society of Chief Librarians’ Public Library Health Offer, a national strategy that articulates the role that libraries can play in promoting the health and wellbeing of local communities.

(...)

1 Reading Well Books on Prescription Evaluation Report - BOP consulting (2015)

3. Classification of long-term conditions

Physical illnesses such as asthma or diabetes, which following diagnosis usually continue to present throughout a person’s lifetime, were once referred to as chronic physical diseases or illnesses. Unlike acute physical health problems for which successful medical treatment can often provide a cure and lead to full patient recovery, LTCs are best characterised as those for which a cure leading to full recovery does not exist and medical treatment comprises the management of symptoms for the remainder of the person’s life. As such, LTCs have a lasting and persistent impact on people’s functioning that may affect quality of life, as well as placing great demands on health services through GP consultations, out-patient clinics, hospital admissions and the costs of prescribed medications and interventions.

3.1 Long-term conditions

Although LTCs are wide-ranging, from idiopathic neurological diseases such as multiple sclerosis or Parkinson’s through to cancer, cardiovascular disease and renal failure, and have their own individual pathologies and treatments, they also share common aspects of treatment and management that has led to them being frequently referred to in the last couple of decades as ‘long-term conditions’ by health professionals. Moreover, these illnesses are becoming more prevalent due to the combined effects of an ageing population and the impact of lifestyles and behaviours (for example diet and obesity, smoking, alcohol abuse) on their occurrence. Encouragingly, however, the increase in prevalence of LTCs is also partly due to people with many more conditions that once resulted in considerably reduced life expectancy now living much longer and fuller lives as a result of advances in medical science.

Although health care organisations have devised a variety of definitions for LTCs, they have extensive overlap:
  • The Department of Health: ‘A long term condition is a condition that cannot, at present, be cured but is controlled by medication and/or other treatment/therapies.’2
  • NICE Guidelines (NG22): ‘One that generally lasts a year or longer and impacts on a person’s life… may also be known as a chronic condition.’3
  • The King’s Fund: ‘Long-term conditions or chronic diseases are conditions for which there is currently no cure, and which are managed with drugs and other treatment.’4
  • The Royal College of GPs (RCGP): ‘A long term condition is any medical condition that cannot currently be cured but can be managed with the use of medication and/or other therapies. This is in contrast to acute conditions which typically have a finite duration such as a respiratory infection, an inguinal hernia or a mild episode of depression.’5
2 Long Term Conditions Compendium of Information: Third Edition - Department of Health (2012)
3 Older people with social care needs and multiple long-term conditions [NG22] - NICE (2015)
4 Long Term Conditions & Multi-morbidity - The King's Fund
5 Written Evidence Long Term Conditions - Royal College of GPs (2012)


---------------------------------------

However, the RCGP then goes on to say that the best way to gauge whether a patient has a LTC is on an individual basis with discussion between a patient and their health practitioner. As we will review within Section 4, contemporary approaches to the management of LTCs stress the need to treat the whole patient rather than just the disease, to emphasise the importance of proactive ‘living well and wellbeing’ approaches, as well as medical interventions that can include a consideration of patient goals and the need to individually plan care taking into account multiple co-morbidities and the impact of these conditions on social care needs and support.

Health conditions that are often identified as coming under the LTCs banner include, but are not restricted to: asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic pain, diabetes, irritable bowel syndrome, multiple sclerosis, obesity/weight loss intervention, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, stroke. This is the list used in NHS Scotland’s Matrix Guide6 to delivering psychological therapies for LTCs.

Long-term mental health problems, especially depression but also schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, together with some dementias, are also regarded as LTCs. The RWBOP list for LTCs will not deal specifically with serious mental illnesses such as recurrent depression, psychoses and dementia since some of these conditions have already been referred to within the adult mental health and dementia lists. However, when depression or anxiety are associated with a LTC, their management will be considered. Other persistent conditions such as HIV and AIDS and sickle cell disease are also sometimes included. Indeed, the term LTCs is designed to be inclusive and not strictly defined by a rigid diagnostic scheme.

3.2 Long-term conditions and mental health

LTCs have also been of interest to mental health practitioners since, unsurprisingly, rates of common mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression are frequently elevated within these patient groups.7 The emphasis on more holistic treatment of the individual has meant that it has become more common to offer both physical and psychological treatments to people with LTCs. The overlap between the conditions is illustrated strikingly in Figure 1 below, taken from a King’s Fund report. Providing effective treatment for co-morbid conditions such as depression often results in improved quality of life and more effective physical management of the condition, leading to savings in health care provision. In 2011 the Department of Health’s Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme undertook to establish a series of pathfinder projects to examine the viability of extending IAPT services to encompass LTCs. This was an extension of the most prevalent collaborative care model, as reflected in the recently published NICE guidance on depression and LTCs,8 of building partnerships between specialist mental health services and primary care in tackling LTCs.

6 Matrix Guide to delivery psychological therapies for LTCs - NHS Scotland
7 Long-term conditions positive practice guide - IAPT (2008), Long-term conditions and mental health: the cost of co-morbidities - The King's Fund (2012), Emotional and psychological wellbeing for patients with long-term conditions - NHS confederation (2012)
8 Depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem: recognition and management [CG91] – NICE (2009)

-------------------------------

Fig 1 The overlap between long-term conditions and mental health problems

[Ed: Omitted graphic from these extracts]

3.3 Medically unexplained symptoms or functional symptoms

The distinction, however, between physical and mental health conditions is not straightforward. There are many conditions which impact on patients’ lives, through either loss of function or debilitating pain, for which clinical and diagnostic assessments provide no identifiable physical diagnosis or pathology. These conditions are often referred to as ‘medically unexplained symptoms’ (MUS) but previously have been described as ‘functional or psychosomatic complaints’. It should be noted that this diagnostic term relies not on the positive identification of a disease by the presentation of specific symptoms but the absence of pathology. These terms are often disliked by patients since they imply that their physical symptoms and suffering are ‘all in the mind’ and hence not amenable to medical treatment. The term is also unpopular with many health professionals since it encourages false dualistic thinking that illnesses are either physically or psychologically caused.9 Indeed, Roth and Pilling10 when scoping competences for the IAPT workforce in delivering psychological interventions for people with LTCs and MUS, suggested using the more comprehensive and descriptive term of ‘persistent physical health conditions’ when referring to both LTCs and MUS.

Conditions frequently identified as MUS include fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome. A recent good practice guide published by IAPT11 lists in addition to these three common conditions: temporomandibular joint dysfunction, atypical facial pain, non-cardiac chest pain, hyperventilation, chronic cough, loin pain haematuria syndrome, functional weakness/movement disorders, dissociative (non-epileptic) attacks and chronic pelvic pain/dysmenorrhea.

Furthermore, in as many as 30% of patients referred for diagnostic tests for common complaints such as chest or back pain, no physical pathology or medical diagnosis will be revealed, suggesting that these complaints might be functionally associated with anxiety or depression. It is argued that MUS cost the NHS significant resources in terms of repeated and unrevealing outpatient appointments and diagnostic testing.

9 The cognitive behavioural model of medically unexplained symptoms: A theoretical and empirical review - Deary, Chalder & Sharpe (2007)
10 Psychological Interventions with People and Persistent Physical Health Problems - Kings College London (2011)
11 Medically unexplained symptoms good practice guide - IAPT (2015)


----------------------------------

Recently it has been suggested that services might consider identifying MUS or offering these patients the opportunity for psychological interventions in order to reduce the financial impact of MUS on acute hospital services.

3.4 Summary

Persistent physical health conditions have major impacts on individuals and their families/carers, together with growing demands on both health and social care. Rather than dealing with each chronic physical condition separately, health professionals have striven to adopt a common approach to assessing and managing people with these physical illnesses. As we will see in the next sections, this has emphasised personalised care, which is proactive and planned to encompass all LTCs, and integrates both physical and psychological needs, together with health and social care provision. It is also argued that people with MUS where clinical assessments have failed to identify an underlying pathology or physical diagnosis would also benefit from systems of care developed for people with LTCs, together with interventions targeting positive adaptation and living well, and wellbeing.


Consultation question 2

a. ‘Long-term condition’ is an inclusive term and many conditions can be defined as such. However, we need to produce a booklist of approx. 25–35 titles for this scheme and so will not be able to provide targeted books for all long-term conditions. Taking into account prevalence, need and relevance of book-based information provided by RWBOP please select the 10 LTCs that you believe the RWBOP LTC scheme should target from the list below:

Angina
Arthritis – includes osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis
Asthma
Cancer
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) – includes coronary heart disease, stroke, peripheral arterial disease and aortic disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), or ME
Chronic kidney disease (CKD)
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) – includes chronic bronchitis, emphysema, chronic obstructive airways disease
Chronic pain
Chronic skin conditions – includes eczema and psoriasis
Diabetes
Endometriosis
Epilepsy
Fibromyalgia
High blood pressure, or hypertension
HIV and AIDS
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) – includes Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)
Motor Neuron Disease (MND)
Multiple sclerosis (MS)
Parkinson’s Disease
Sickle cell disease

b. Please indicate any additional LTCs not identified above that you think should be prioritised by the list and tell us why.
c. Is there any terminology relating to long-term conditions that you would advise we avoid using?

Please submit your response at the following link: www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/consultationLTC


4. Policy framework

Delivering health services for people with chronic disease or LTCs has been a major focus for policy makers, health professionals and charities for the last two decades. A summary of international approaches and a strategic framework identifying key policy issues surrounding long-term care was published in 2003 by the World Health Organisation.12 It was becoming clear that the demands on health service provision arising from a growing and ageing population requiring medical and social care for a variety of different LTCs was a major challenge for health care planners and policy makers, not to mention health economists and politicians.

Below we summarise our understanding of the scale of the challenge in meeting the needs of people with LTCs and the associated costs of providing services and impact on health care in general. We also review the most recent UK developments in policy within this area originating from governments, professional bodies, and patient groups and charities. Based on this evidence we argue the case that the current policy framework supports the development by The Reading Agency and Society of Chief Librarians of a Books on Prescription scheme for people with LTCs and their relatives/carers.

4.1 The extent of the problem: statistics and costs

Statistical and economic profiles

Numerous reports detail the prevalence of common LTCs, the changing demographic profile, the impact on the uptake of GP and hospital outpatient and inpatient services, and the overall economic burden of providing care and meeting the needs of these patients. For example, the Department of Health’s own LTC Compendium of Information13 lists the following statistics:
  • Fifteen million people in England have one or more LTCs, and the number of people with multiple conditions (multi-morbidity) is rising
  • Around 70% of the total healthcare spend in England is attributed to caring for people with long-term conditions.
  • People with long-term conditions account for 50% of all GP appointments.
The majority of people aged over 65 have two or more LTCs; the majority of over 75s have three or more; and, overall, the number of people with multiple conditions is rising.

12 International policy issues in long-term conditions - World Health Organisation (2003)
13 Long Term Conditions Compendium of Information: Third Edition - Department of Health (2012)


---------------------------------------------

A more recent set of revised statistics produced by NHS England reports the following:14

About 26 million people in England have at least one LTC.
About 10 million people have two or more LTCs, 1 million with frailty, 0.5 million at end of life.
There’s a three-fold increase in cost of health care for those with frailty.
Some people living in deprived areas will have health problems 10–15 years earlier than people in affluent areas.
15% of young adults aged 11–15 have a LTC.
Only 59% of people living with LTCs are in work, compared with 72% of the general population.

LTCs account for:

50% of all GP appointments
64% of all hospital outpatients appointments
70% of all hospital bed days
70% of health and care spend
33% of GP appointments for patients with multiple LTCs
50% of emergency bed days for over 75s
25% of bed days occupied by someone dying

64% of people living with LTCs at present say they feel supported, so there is room for improvement.

People living with LTCs are being supported to develop their own care plans. However, at present, only 3.2% have written their own plan.

On average people living with LTCs spend just four hours a year with a health professional and 8,756 hours self-managing.

80% of carers report that caring for someone living with a LTC has had a negative impact on their health. In addition, £1 billion in carer’s allowance is unclaimed each year.

Multi-morbidity and mental health problems

A major contributor to the costs of LTCs care is the frequent co-morbidity with mental health problems, particularly depression. A recent King’s Fund report15 indicates that people with a LTC are two to three times more likely to also experience depression. Similarly, around 30% of people with a LTC will experience some form of mental health problem. Furthermore, having depression alongside a LTC can exacerbate the physical condition(s) and raises health care costs by 45% for each person affected. Furthermore, experiencing depression alongside at least one LTC significantly worsens quality of life compared to the experience of the LTC alone16 with the impact of depression becoming greater the more LTCs the patient experiences.

14 Long-term conditions metrics infographic - NHS England (2016)
15 Long-term conditions and the cost of co-morbidity - The Kings Fund (2012)
16 Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health: results from the World Health Surveys - Moussavi et al (2007)


-----------------------------------

Similar conclusions were reached by the British Heart Foundation in their publication Twice as likely: Putting long term conditions and depression on the agenda.17 Indeed, the NHS Confederation also published a report reviewing the impact of LTCs on people’s mental health and wellbeing and recommending how services should respond to this challenge.18

Impact on unemployment, benefits and work

An important area that has received considerable attention is the impact of LTCs on work and employment. A recent report by the Work Foundation has calculated the impact of LTCs on working lives. People with LTCs frequently struggle to maintain employment due to significant disabilities. This impacts on business and employers in terms of skill shortages and unemployment, sickness absence and presentism. They illustrate the scale of the problem by presenting relevant statistics for six common LTCs:19

The average age of retirement for someone with multiple sclerosis is 42 years old
Over 45% of people with asthma report going to work when ill, increasing the risk of prolonged sickness and affecting their ability to perform effectively
Just 8% of people with schizophrenia are in employment, despite evidence that up to 70% of people with severe mental illness express a desire to work
People with heart failure lose an average of 17.2 days of work per year because of absenteeism caused by their condition
Over 52% of people with diabetic macular oedema are of working age
A 10% reduction in sickness absence for people with psoriasis would provide a £50 million boost to the UK
Public Health England and NHS Employers have both published advice to employers about positive approaches to supporting people with LTCs within employment.

Impact of long-term conditions and services on people’s lives

Finally, a recent report published by the Richmond Group of Charities documents the impact of LTCs on people’s lives, together with the quality of services provided to people with LTCs. Some relevant findings are summarised below:20

44% of adult inpatients say they are not sufficiently informed about clinical decisions.
Only 40% of people could understand the stroke information packs given to them.
Only 1.6% of people with diabetes attended structured courses in education that met NICE standards.
More than two thirds of people with neurological conditions report not having been offered a care plan.

We should also stress the burden of care and associated costs of employment and benefit support for the families and carers of people with LTCs. For example, in a recent survey circulated by Carers UK the costs of

17 Twice as likely: putting long-term conditions and depression on the agenda - The British Heart Foundation (2012)
18 Investing in emotional and psychological wellbeing for patients with long-term conditions - NHS confederation (2012)
19 The impact of long-term conditions on the economy - The Work Foundation, The University of Lancaster (2016)
20 Vital Signs report - The Richmond Group of Charities (2015)


---------------------------------------

informal caring are estimated as being equivalent to the NHS budget.21 Previous reports by Carers UK have also emphasised the increase in stress, depression and social isolation felt by carers of people with LTCs. Indeed, a recent King’s Fund report on integration between physical and mental health care emphasises the importance of providing support to carers of people with LTCs.22

Consultation question 3

Are there important socio-economic impacts relating to long-term conditions that we have missed?
Please submit your response at the following link: www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/consultationLTC


4.2 Policy development: reviews and guidance

It is clear that LTCs have had a major impact on the delivery of health care and the costs of NHS provision. It is not surprising, therefore, that LTCs have been the subject of numerous policy reviews and reports coming from both health professionals and the Government. Moreover, in recent years it has been acknowledged that patients with LTCs need to be consulted more extensively and encouraged to actively engage in their treatment. This has come from patients themselves and also the various charities and voluntary organisations representing them.

We will not attempt an exhaustive review of policy development in the last decade or so, but instead will attempt to identify the key issues that have emerged. There are several key reports that mark significant milestones in the development of health care provision for LTCs. Perhaps the publication of the first National Service Framework (NSF) for Long-term Conditions in 2005 is a convenient starting point, which illustrates some of the key policy areas and their development in the coming years. The NSF specifically targeted people with long-term neurological conditions such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, and cerebral palsy in adults. Nevertheless, a key purpose was to describe how health and social services should provide an integrated service to support and rehabilitate people with neurological conditions and other LTCs. It listed a number of quality requirements including:23

A person-centred service
Early recognition, prompt diagnosis and treatment
Emergency and acute management
Early and specialist rehabilitation
Community and vocational services
Providing practical support including equipment and accommodation
Personal care and support
Palliative care
Supporting families and carers

21 State of Caring 2016 - Carers UK (2016)
22 Bringing together physical and mental health: a new frontier for integrated care - The Kings Fund (2016)
23 National Service Framework for Long Term Conditions - Department of Health (2005
)

-----------------------------

Many of the principles identified above have become incorporated into service planning for a whole range of LTCs. Perhaps the most important is the recognition of personalised care and the importance of treating the person/patient and not the condition.24 Other important principles have included encouraging self-management, and the development of the expert patients programme and patient held records. These innovations have arisen particularly for people with diabetes where the focus has been to encourage patients to be actively involved in managing their own condition. Asthma is another area where there has been a focus on self-management and patient recorded outcomes.

These approaches very much rely on the provision of accessible and high quality information.25 Indeed, there have been several recent initiatives to provide greater access to learning about self-care for both patients and professionals through e-learning resources. For many conditions, there has been a shift towards pro-active and innovative programmes aimed at facilitating positive adaptation to living with a LTC, as well as general improvements in healthy lifestyles and wellbeing. Good examples being for people with cardiovascular disease, arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, some types of cancer and HIV. For people with more disabling conditions, or older people with LTCs who may also have mobility or social care needs, the focus has been on integrated care planning involving health and social services assessments, co-ordinated written care plans and individualised budgets and payments.26 More recently, the focus has been on multi-morbidities which are usually the norm within older populations.27

Many of the above initiatives have been combined in a single initiative promoted by the King’s Fund and NHS England, termed the House of Care.28 The ‘House’ is a metaphor, whereby the central aspect of delivering care for LTCs is personalised care planning. However, for this to be effective, patients have to be informed and motivated, and staff committed to partnership working. The foundations for this are responsive commissioning, whereas the entire process requires oversight and appropriate organisational processes.

24 Improving the wellbeing of people with LTCs - Department of Health (2010), Improving health and wellbeing of people with long term conditions in Scotland - NHS Scotland (2009), Our vision for the future: action on long-term conditions - Coalition of collaborative care (2011)
25 Our health, our care, our say: A new direction for community services - Department of Health (2006), Patients in control: why people with long-term conditions must be empowered - Institute for Public Policy Research (2014)
26 Multimorbidity: clinical assessment and guidelines - NICE (2016), Improving the lives of people with long term conditions - Royal College of GPs (2012), Executive summary: Personalised care and support planning handbook The journey to person-centred care - NHS England (2016)
27 Older people with social care needs and multiple long-term conditions [NG22] - NICE (2015)
28 Delivering person centred care in long term conditions - BMJ Eaton Simon, Roberts Sue, Turner Bridget (2015)


-------------------------------------------------------

(...)

The recent emphasis on treating mental health conditions alongside LTCs29 is also consistent with the RWBOP approach and would allow for titles relating to the mental health implications of living with a LTC to be featured on the list, as well as signposting to the existing adult common mental health conditions and dementia lists. The common mental health conditions booklist was shaped by the views of IAPT therapists (both low and high intensity psychological therapists) and we would envisage that this would also be appropriate for a LTCs list.

29 Long-term conditions positive practice guide - IAPT (2008), MUS positive practice guide - IAPT (2014), Long-term conditions and mental health: the cost of co-morbidities - The Kings Fund (2012), Investing in emotional and psychological wellbeing for patients with long-term conditions - NHS confederation (2016), Investing in emotional and psychological wellbeing for patients with long-term conditions - NHS confederation (2016), Bringing together report - The Kings Fund (2016).

-----------------------------------------------

(...)

5. Clinical guidelines, quality standards and the evidence base

5.1 Overview


A major effort was made when establishing the English RWBOP for common mental health conditions scheme to ensure that it was informed by the relevant NICE guidance surrounding particular conditions. There was also a strong focus on corroborating research evidence supporting the use of particular books or manuals. A summary of the evidence base is provided on The Reading Agency website.30 Where there was evidence of ineffective or potentially harmful self-help interventions, these conditions (for example, post-traumatic stress disorder) were not included on the book list.

With the original RWBOP list for common mental health conditions the strategy for gathering evidence to support particular self-help books for conditions where they might be beneficial relied heavily on recommendations about the use of guided CBT self-help books or self-help groups contained within the relevant NICE clinical guidelines. Given that the majority of books offering CBT self-help were for identified conditions where NICE guidance was available, this ensured that an identifiable and transparent evidence base was deployed. Additional guidance was provided by an expert panel of relevant health professionals.

Some books on the list referred to problems where no specific NICE guidance was available (these included anger, relationship problems, self-esteem, sleep, stress and worry). It was, however, acknowledged that there was a need for quality endorsed guidance relating to these everyday problems associated with psychological distress. The books selected were endorsed by professionals and had been subject to evaluation research and scientific scrutiny.
When attempting a similar exercise in scoping the evidence for the RWBOP dementia list, we became aware that the evidence base for individual self-help books was less developed. We therefore adopted a more general approach that critically examined the role of books and psycho-educational materials in enhancing care standards as identified by NICE and key charities in promoting the quality of dementia services. Rather than just focusing on self-help strategies to ameliorate symptoms, titles from the dementia list were about providing information for people worried about symptoms at the time of diagnosis, about how to ‘live well with dementia,’ and providing support for relatives and carers. Several biographical and

30 Evidence base for Reading Well Books on Prescription - The Reading Agency website

--------------------------------------

fictional accounts of dementia were also recommended by both individuals and charities as being extremely useful in helping people to understand the experience and inner worlds of people with dementia. For the young people’s list, we adopted aspects of both approaches identified above. We were also strongly guided by the views of young people themselves since for this particular project we adopted a strong co-production model for consultation and book selection.

The situation regarding LTCs is less than clear. Although many self-help books are available that cover LTCs in general, very few appear to be evidence-based or derived from clinical evaluations or trials. A few titles have been based on educational programmes31 that have tended to be delivered in a group format (see next section). Some are extensions of well researched interventions such as CBT32 or mindfulness33 that have been applied to specific LTCs. However, very few, if any, of these books are specifically recommended in NICE clinical guidelines. This is in contrast to the RWBOP common mental health conditions list, where direct links with NICE could be made.

In order to summarise the potential links between NICE and a list for RWBOP for LTC, we have scanned and summarised the relevant NICE guidance and identified either specific psychological approaches or self-help materials that might form the basis for recommendations for a list. A useful reading list and summary of the LTC literature was published by the King’s Fund34 in 2014. We have also scoped various systematic reviews of LTCs and searched the literature for relevant psychological interventions, self-help strategies and self-management and support programmes. We will also aim to foster an active dialogue with people with LTCs, relatives, carers, professionals and charities concerning additional titles not necessarily associated with NICE guidance that should also be considered. Given the absence of clinical trials or evaluations of specific titles, we believe that professional endorsement, together with the views of people with lived experience of LTCs, will be major components of the book selection process. A library survey of existing titles regarding LTCs and the extent to which they have been borrowed will also inform the later book selection process.

5.2 NICE35 and long-term conditions


There are three sources of NICE guidance that are relevant to the development of the book list. First, there have been several general guidelines about LTCs, together with care planning for older people. There are also condition-specific NICE guidelines (for example, diabetes, epilepsy), which cover the majority of conditions relevant to our list. Finally, there are NICE guidelines for mental health conditions such as depression, which is often seen as a LTC in itself, plus specific NICE guidance for depression experienced by people with LTCs.

General guidance

NICE guidelines (NG22) provide the framework for integrated care planning, self-management and support for carers of older people with multiple LTCs. It stresses the importance of accessible and good quality information at every stage of the development of the patient’s care plan. It also stresses providing relevant information and support to carers. Guidance that is about to published (expected September 2016) on

31 Living a Healthy Life with Chronic Conditions: For Ongoing Physical and Mental Health Conditions - Kate Lorig, Halsted Holman, David Sobel (2013)
32 Overcoming chronic pain - Cole et al (2010)
33 Mindfulness for Health: A practical guide to relieving pain, reducing stress and restoring wellbeing - Burch et al (2013)
34 Library reading list: long-term conditions - The Kings Fund (2014)
35 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE]


--------------------------------------

multi-morbidity in LTCs will also help select those at risk and who would particularly benefit from more intensive and individualised care. Although it is doubtful that older people with multi-morbidity may benefit directly from RWBOP, relevant information from a LTC list, together with the RWBOP for dementia list, might benefit relatives and carers.

Specific NICE guidance

Most individual conditions such as asthma (QS25), arthritis (CG79), diabetes (CG87) and epilepsy (CG137) have individual NICE clinical guidelines about treatment and management. Generally, they all emphasise the importance of providing good quality information to patients and their relatives from the time of diagnosis onwards. Good quality, according to NICE, means individually tailored to the patient’s level of understanding and designed to be accessible. Providing information is said to improve a patient’s understanding of their condition, which can then help motivate them to control their symptoms through self-management. Indeed, it is argued that good information provision leads to an increase in perceived control over the condition (i.e. self-efficacy) and also better understanding (for example, health literacy). The latter is seen as a good predictor for positive outcomes in treatment trials of people with LTCs.36 Individual guidance for asthma and diabetes particularly recommend setting up psycho-educational groups to encourage self-management of the condition. It also suggests that information sessions and support should be offered on an individual basis to both patients and carers.

For some LTCs, specific psychological interventions are also mentioned:

For rheumatoid arthritis (CG79), psychological interventions such as stress management and relaxation, together with cognitive coping skills, are recommended.
For asthma (QS25) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CG101), psychological approaches to breathing control are suggested as components of an education programme.
For stroke, the teaching of psychological principles within rehabilitation programmes is stressed.
For epilepsy (CG137), psychological interventions such as CBT, relaxation training and biofeedback are recommended.
NICE guidelines for some specific conditions such as coronary heart disease (CG108), stroke (CG162), multiple sclerosis (CG186) and chronic kidney disease (QS25) all emphasise the importance of detecting depression and making adequate provision for treatment.

We have dealt with some of the most common NICE clinical guidelines referring to LTCs; others also exist (for example, chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic pain and irritable bowel syndrome) but space prevents comprehensive coverage.

etc


The remaining references for this document are:

37 Improving information and understanding - National Voices (2016)
38 A rapid synthesis of the evidence on interventions supporting self-management for people with long-term conditions - National Institute of Health (2014)
39 Good practice guidance on the use of self-help materials within IAPT services - NHS England
40 Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions - Coulter - 2015 - The Cochrane Library - Wiley Online Library
41 A meta-analysis of health status, health behaviours, and healthcare utilization outcomes of the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program - Brady et al (2013)
42 Supporting self-management: helping people manage long-term conditions - The University of York (2015)
43 Self-help interventions for symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological distress in patients with physical illnesses - Matcham et al (2014)
44 Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Self-Help for the Treatment of Depression - Farrand & Woodford (2015)
45 Adapting Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Interventions for Anxiety or Depression to Meet the Needs of People with Long-term Physical Health Conditions - Hadert (2013)



Full consultation document here: http://www.bsrm.org.uk/downloads/rwbopforltcconsultationpaperaug16.pdf
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
I've been asked about the outcome of the 2013 Barnet Pilot:


NHS England: Pilot of Enhanced GP Management of Patients with Medically Unexplained Symptoms


NHS Barnet Clinical Commissioning Group

mus-pilot.png


Open full size flyer here:


https://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordp...lly-unexplained-sympthoms-kingsfund-may12.pdf

---------------------------

I don't have this information yet, but I did come across this reference to the Pilot from an October 2013 meeting Agenda:

http://www.lmc.org.uk/visageimages/files/Barnet/1.10.13 Barnet LMC Agenda Part 1.pdf

BARNET LOCAL MEDICAL COMMITTEE MEETING

Tuesday 1 October 2013

Agenda


(...)

5.4
5.4.1 Primary Care Strategy Implementation:

Medically Unexplained Symptoms (MUS) enhanced service
Dr Benjamin noted that the aim of this enhanced service was to
introduce something into general practice which would lighten the
workload. There was funding for 15 practices which would be
selected on a first come first served basis and data would be
collected to see if it could be rolled out across Barnet. It would
involve practices looking at 10 patients on a retrospective basis
over a year to see how many diagnostics they had.

Dr Benjamin advised that the CCG was experiencing difficulty in
rolling this out as it was not clear what mechanism it could use.
Mrs Betts noted that previously such schemes would have been
called an invest to save scheme and considered that this would
be a mechanism to take this forward. It was agreed that she
would liaise with Dr Benjamin about this outside the meeting to
agree what it should be called and how it could be contracted.

Dr Saldanha considered that this was very much a worthwhile
project and thanked Dr Benjamin for working up a scheme which
would be useful to GPs and would improve the quality of life of
patients and GPs. Dr Saldanha suggested that it might also be
helpful to collate data on patients with no interventions also in
order to compare outcomes. Dr Benjamin noted that this might be
difficult to do as it was not a research project and the techniques
were all evidenced based.

Dr Benjamin hoped that this would be implemented in one month.

-------------

Also a reference here:

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/hot-top...heroes/dr-charlotte-benjamin/20032623.article

"...Dr Benjamin...also initiated a pilot across 15 GP practices in Barnet to give GPs enhanced training for managing patients with medically unexplained symptoms. This has increased the GPs’ confidence in this area, and has even reduced consultations and referrals by a statistically significant amount."

No data yet on outcomes and no confirmation, yet, on forward plans for roll out.
 

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
https://tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/documents/401/board-papers-july-2016.pdf

NHS Tavistock and Portman

Board of Directors Meeting Part One

Agenda and papers of a meeting to be held in public
2.00pm–5.00pm
Tuesday 26th July 2016

(...)

7.2 This successful and highly regarded work applying psychoanalytic
understanding, has a long history of connection with the Tavistock which
has developed into the present consolidated position with a secure
contract. It is closely connected with our concerns about Medically
Unexplained Symptoms, which in spite of considerable efforts has
otherwise not been successful in attracting new funding except in the
Primary Care domain...

...We have tried for some time to develop services around the physical
health boundary, with Medically Unexplained symptoms and Pain
Management, but so far with limited success. It nevertheless remains a
highly desirable project if it can be realised. An Institute of
Psychosomatic Medicine could be a huge achievement.


From the 26 January 2016 NHS Tavistock and Portman Board of Directors Meeting Part One Agenda:


"10. Research
Towards the end of last year we met Professor Allan Abass from Canada who was
giving a scientific meeting presentation on the use of Intensive Short Term Dynamic
Psychotherapy with Medically Unexplained Symptoms. He is a well-known and
experienced clinician / researcher with a library of large scale RCT studies and had
been featured on Canadian TV News as providing a proven, cost saving intervention
to complex needs patients. Prof Abass is keen to develop research partners and
opportunities and we are considering some potential collaboration in 16/17. We have
recently agreed to fund a brief, three day training programme for primary care staff to
learn some of the clinical techniques involved in ISTDP which we will open up to
other applicants within and outside of the Tavistock."
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
Another Rona Moss-Morris (National Clinical Advisor to NHS England on IAPT MUS) presentation here:

https://www.networks.nhs.uk/nhs-net...oning-community/documents/medical-unexplained

MEDICALLY UNEXPLAINED SYMPTOMS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES AS APPLIED TO MEDICINE

RONA MOSS-MORRIS
PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY

IAPT: LTC/MUS
Rona Moss-Morris
National Clinical Advisor
(October 2012-present)
NHS England

-------------------

http://textlab.io/doc/22023055/congress-handbook

Congress Handbook

14TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE

ICBM Melbourne


7 – 10 DECEMBER 2016

Page 12

Keynote Speakers:

Professor Rona Moss-Morris
King’s College London, United Kingdom

Thursday 8 December 2016
10:15am – 11:00am

Medically unexplained syndromes (MUS): Time for name and system change


(I haven't been able to locate a copy of the presentation.)

----------------------

Brief summary here from a 2015 conference keynote presentation from Rona Moss-Morris

http://www.cchsr.iph.cam.ac.uk/2474

Conference report: Society for Academic Primary Care (SAPC) 2015


Rona Moss-Morris gave a keynote about Medically Unexplained Symptoms, perhaps better described as ‘persistent physical symptoms’. Doctors, educators, medical students are all afraid of what they don’t (and probably cannot) know, and so they tend to avoid it, only 6 out of 53 medical schools provide training on MUS. MUS account for 18% of GP workload and most GPs will tell you that an enduring theraputic relationship is vital. Most patients will accept that stress can cause physical symptoms if assured that their symptoms are not imagined. There is evidence that some medical students avoid general practice on the grounds that it is not intellectually challenging enough. Medically unexplained symptoms and the patients who suffer them are as challenging as medicine gets, but it is a human challenge as much as an intellectual one and we might do well to celebrate the human challenges of general practice as one of its greatest attractions.
 

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
[Canada]

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/12/e012379.full

PDF: http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/12/e012379.full.pdf

Neurology
Research

Clinical practitioners’ views on the management of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS): a qualitative study

A Keith W Brownell1, Chloe Atkins2, Andrea Whiteley3, Robert F Woollard4, Jude Kornelsen4

Abstract

Objectives By identifying strategies that practicing physicians use in managing patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS), we present an interim practical management guide (IPMG) that clinical practitioners may find useful in their clinical practices and that may help guide future research.

Design A qualitative research study based on interview data from practicing physicians with experience in dealing with MUPS and known to the physician members of the research team. A parallel exploration of patient experiences was carried out simultaneously and is reported elsewhere.

Setting 2 urban centres in 2 different Canadian provinces in a healthcare system where family physicians provide the majority of primary care and self-referral to specialists rarely occurs.

Participants The physician members of the research team invited practicing family and specialty physicians to participate in the study.

Results We characterise the care of patients with MUPS in terms of a 4-part framework: (1) the challenge of diagnosis; (2) the challenge of management/treatment; (3) the importance of communication and (4) the importance of the therapeutic relationship.

Conclusions On the basis of the details in the different parts of the framework, we propose an IPMG that practitioners may find useful to facilitate the clinical care of patients with MUPS. The guide can be readily implemented into the practice of any physician who cares for patients with MUPS.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012379
 

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
http://docplayer.net/20884558-Impro...ruitment-2016-information-for-applicants.html

UCL

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies,

London Recruitment 2016: Information for Applicants


Post Graduate Certificate in Low Intensity Cognitive Behaviour Interventions
Psychological Wellbeing Practitioners (PWPs)

This is the IAPT Training Information Pack for applicants wishing to apply for Psychological Wellbeing Practitioner (PWP), training places and jobs. PWPs are also known as Low Intensity (LI) workers and/or Step 2 workers. The information accompanies the job description and person specification.


At the end of the document are summaries of London area services that were offering IAPT and trainee posts at the point the document was authored; Barking and Dagenham, and Redbridge provide IAPT for medically unexplained physical symptoms and long term conditions (LTCs).


[IAPT Training Information Pack PDF uploaded below]
 

Attachments

  • Improving Access to Psychological Therapies, London Recruitment 2016_ Information for Applicants.pdf
    1.2 MB · Views: 5
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
By email:

January 25, 2017

To: Dr Vincent Deary
CC: Dr Joanne Smithson


Dear Dr Deary,

I have a query in relation to the presentation:

http://www.nescn.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/20150922-Presentation.pdf

Specifically, the section that begins at Slide #29

Improving Pathways for PPS
Dr Vincent Deary, Joanne Smithson, Dr Michaela Faye. Faculty of Health and Life Sciences


At Slide #31 you have stated:

"...Our work is focusing on three PPS: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and Fibromyalgia.

"These three PPS account for at least 15% of GP consultations and up to 30-50% of referrals to specialists"


Would you be kind enough to provide references for the statements that:

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)
Fibromyalgia

account for

a) at least 15% of GP consultations
b) up to 30-50% of referrals to specialists.

Whilst I have data from a number of papers for prevalence rates across all secondary care specialities which are subsequently recorded as MUS, for example: ABC of Medically Unexplained Symptoms edited by Christopher Burton gives the following:

Prevalence of medically unexplained symptoms in new referrals to different specialities:


Cardiology 53%
Gastroenterology 58%
Gynaecology 66%
Neurology 62%
Respiratory 41%
Rheumatology 45%


and from:

Guidance for health professionals on medically unexplained symptoms (MUS)
(2011). Royal College of General Practitioners and Royal College of Psychiatrists

In secondary care, 50% of outpatients fulfil criteria for MUS with a wide range of disorders

The following shows the % at 12 months


• Gynaecology (66%)
• Neurology (62%)
• Gastroenterology (58%)
• Cardiology (53%)
• Rheumatology (45%)
• General Medicine (40.5%)



I have been unable to locate data on GP referral rates specifically for CFS, IBS and FM as a percentage of referrals to specialists.

Kind regards,
etc


Slide #31 http://www.nescn.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/20150922-Presentation.pdf


deary1.png
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
If those percentages are correct, surely there should be an outcry among GP's demanding better biomedical research for these patients, so they will have real treatments to offer them.

Oh, hang on, I forgot, the GP's 'know' it's all in our heads, so there's no need for biomedical research.


I think what Deary has done, is to take the figure of 30-50% of referrals to outpatients fulfilling criteria for all MUS across all specialities and applied that to CFS, IBS and FM.

I have not had a response from him yet, but I will let you know when I do and I will persist until I do get a response, if not from him, from his superiors.

In the context of referrals across all specialities, the figure he has quoted simply does not hold up.