IntroductionNon-medical prescribing has the potential to deliver innovative healthcare within limited finances. However, uptake has been slow, and a proportion of non-medical prescribers do not use the qualification. This systematic review aimed to describe the facilitators and barriers to non-medical prescribing in the United Kingdom.MethodsThe systematic review and thematic analysis included qualitative and mixed methods papers reporting facilitators and barriers to independent non-medical prescribing in the United Kingdom. The following databases were searched to identify relevant papers: AMED, ASSIA, BNI, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, Open Grey, Open access theses and dissertations, and Web of Science. Papers published between 2006 and March 2017 were included. Studies were quality assessed using a validated tool (QATSDD), then underwent thematic analysis. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015019786).ResultsOf 3991 potentially relevant identified studies, 42 were eligible for inclusion. The studies were generally of moderate quality (83%), and most (71%) were published 2007–2012. The nursing profession dominated the studies (30/42). Thematic analysis identified three overarching themes: non-medical prescriber, human factors, and organisational aspects. Each theme consisted of several sub-themes; the four most highly mentioned were ‘medical professionals’, ‘area of competence’, ‘impact on time’ and ‘service’. Sub-themes were frequently interdependent on each other, having the potential to act as a barrier or facilitator depending on circumstances.DiscussionAddressing the identified themes and subthemes enables strategies to be developed to support and optimise non-medical prescribing. Further research is required to identify if similar themes are encountered by other non-medical prescribing groups than nurses and pharmacists.

PROSPERO CRD42015017212. [Noblet T, Marriott J, Graham-Clarke E, Rushton A (2017) Barriers to and facilitators of independent non-medical prescribing in clinical practice: a mixed-methods systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy 63: 221-234].

Introduction Non-medical prescribing was introduced into the United Kingdom (UK) to improve patient care, through extending healthcare professionals’ roles. More recent government health service policy focuses on the increased demand and the need for efficiency. This systematic policy review aimed to describe any changes in government policy position and the role that non-medical prescribing plays in healthcare provision. Method The systematic policy review included policy and consultation documents that describe independent non-medical prescribing. A pre-defined protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015019786). Professional body websites, other relevant websites and the following databases were searched to identify relevant documents: HMIC, Lexis Nexis, UK Government Web Archive, UKOP, UK Parliamentary Papers and Web of Science. Documents published between 2006 and February 2018 were included. Results and discussion Following exclusions, 45 documents were selected for review; 23 relating to policy or strategy and 22 to consultations. Of the former, 13/23 were published 2006–2010 and the remainder since 2013. Two main themes were identified: chronological aspects and healthcare provision. In the former, a publication gap for policy documents resulted from a change in government and associated major healthcare service reorganisation. In the later, the role of non-medical prescribing was found to have evolved to support efficient service delivery, and cost reduction. For many professions, prescribing appears embedded into practice; however, the pharmacy profession continues to produce policy documents, suggesting that prescribing is not yet perceived as normal practice. Conclusion Prescribing appears to be more easily adopted into practice where it can form part of the overall care of the patient. Where new roles are required to be established, then prescribing takes longer to be universally adopted. While this review concerns policy and practice in the UK, the aspect of role adoption has wider potential implications.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of non-medical prescribing (NMP).DesignSystematic review. Two reviewers independently completed searches, eligibility assessment and assessment of risk of bias.Data sourcesPre-defined search terms/combinations were utilised to search electronic databases. In addition, hand searches of reference lists, key journals and grey literature were employed alongside consultation with authors/experts.Eligibility criteria for included studiesRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical or cost-effectiveness of NMP. Measurements reported on one or more outcome(s) of: pain, function, disability, health, social impact, patient-safety, costs-analysis, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), patient satisfaction, clinician perception of clinical and functional outcomes.ResultsThree RCTs from two countries were included (n = 932 participants) across primary and tertiary care settings. One RCT was assessed as low risk of bias, one as high risk of bias and one as unclear risk of bias. All RCTs evaluated clinical effectiveness with one also evaluating cost-effectiveness. Clinical effectiveness was evaluated using a range of safety and patient-reported outcome measures. Participants demonstrated significant improvement in outcomes when receiving NMP compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in all RCTs. An associated cost analysis showed NMP to be more expensive than TAU (regression coefficient p = 0.0000), however experimental groups generated increased QALYs compared to TAU.ConclusionLimited evidence with overall unclear risk of bias exists evaluating clinical and cost-effectiveness of NMP across all professions and clinical settings. GRADE assessment revealed moderate quality evidence. Evidence suggests that NMP is safe and can provide beneficial clinical outcomes. Benefits to the health economy remain unclear, with the cost-effectiveness of NMP assessed by a single pilot RCT of low risk of bias. Adequately powered low risk of bias RCTs evaluating clinical and cost effectiveness are required to evaluate NMP across clinical specialities, professions and settings.RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42015017212).

Background: Low back-related leg pain (LBLP) is a challenge for healthcare providers to manage. Neuropathic pain (NP) is highly prevalent in presentations of LBLP and an accurate diagnosis of NP in LBLP is essential to ensure appropriate intervention. In the absence of a gold standard, the objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of patient history, clinical examination and screening tool data for identifying NP in LBLP. Methods: This systematic review is reported in line with PRISMA and followed a pre-defined and published protocol. CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, AMED, Pedro and PubMed databases, key journals and the grey literature were searched from inception to 31 July 2019. Eligible studies included any study design reporting primary diagnostic data on the diagnostic utility of patient history, clinical examination or screening tool data to identify NP in LBLP, in an adult population. Two independent reviewers searched information sources, assessed risk of bias (QUADAS-2) and used GRADE to assess overall quality of evidence. Results: From 762 studies, 11 studies were included. Nine studies out of the 11 were at risk of bias. Moderate level evidence supports a cluster of eight signs (age, duration of disease, paroxysmal pain, pain worse in leg than back, typical dermatomal distribution, worse on coughing/sneezing/straining, finger to floor distance and paresis) for diagnosing lumbosacral nerve root compression, demonstrating moderate/high sensitivity (72%) and specificity (80%) values. Moderate level evidence supports the use of the StEP tool for diagnosing lumbar radicular pain, demonstrating high sensitivity (92%) and specificity (97%) values.

Objectives: Clinical guidelines recommend that health care providers assist children to understand their experience of persistent pain, with pain science education a key component of clinical management in pediatric pain clinics. Currently, no tool exists to assess a child’s concept of pain. The aim of this study was to develop such a tool and to evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods: After a rigorous process to generate items, assess content validity, evaluate readability and understandability, and pretest items, a cohort of 124 children (aged 8 to 12 y) independently completed the measure on 2 occasions, along with additional measures of pain, function, and pain-related distress. Results: The resulting unidimensional 14-item Concept of Pain Inventory (COPI) had acceptable internal consistency (α= 0.78) and moderate test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (3,1) = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68). Higher COPI scores reflect greater alignment with contemporary pain science. COPI scores were inversely correlated with pain intensity and functional disability, but unrelated to pain catastrophizing and pain-related fear. At 1 to 2 months’ follow-up, baseline COPI scores were inversely correlated with clinical variables of functional disability and pain intensity. Discussion: These results support the COPI as a brief, psychometrically sound tool to assess a child’s concept of pain. Clinically, this tool may facilitate individualized pain science education to target identified conceptual “gaps” or misconceptions and to evaluate the effectiveness of pain science education in children. Further research examining its efficacy and impact is warranted.

Background Physiotherapy can improve functional ability, prevent falls and reduce pain for older adults in nursing homes. However, there are no legislations or guidelines that specify the parameters of physiotherapy required in nursing homes. With the increasing healthcare demands of ageing populations worldwide, it is important to understand the current use of physiotherapy services to ensure they are both evidence-based and promote equity. Objectives (1) When and how are physiotherapy services used by older adults living in nursing homes? (2) What are the factors associated with use of physiotherapy services in nursing homes? (3) How are physiotherapy services in nursing homes documented and monitored? Methods Several databases and grey literature (including MEDLINE, PubMed, Pedro and EMBASE) were searched following PRISMA guidelines in March 2018. Searches were limited to English language publications from 1997. Assessment for inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment were completed by two investigators independently using standardised forms. Studies were included if they considered any type of physiotherapy service that involved a qualified physiotherapist (such as exercise, massage and staff education) with older adults (aged 60 years and older) that were primarily permanent residents of a nursing home. Data extracted included proportion of clients that used physiotherapy services, type, frequency and duration of physiotherapy services, and factors associated with physiotherapy service use. Results Eleven studies were included. Between 10% and 67% of nursing home clients used physiotherapy services. Factors associated with greater use of physiotherapy services included larger size facilities, and if clients had a physical impairment and mild or no cognitive impairment. Types of physiotherapy services reported were pain management and pressure ulcer management. Conclusions Physiotherapy service use in nursing homes varied widely. The development of physiotherapy benchmarks and quality standards are needed to support older adults in nursing homes. PROSPERO registration number : CRD42018082460.

. J.B. is employed by Bayer Corporation and M.L., N.C.B., T.C.N., and J.O.J. were clinical investigators for the present study.Abbreviations: PCOT, point-of-care testing. A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances. Multicenter Evaluation of the Glucometer Elite XL Meter, an Instrument Specifically Designed for Use With Neonates O R I G I N A L A R T I C L EOBJECTIVE -To evaluate the clinical performance of the Glucometer Elite XL Diabetes Care System in neonatal settings using a multicenter study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -A total of 388 blood specimens from 333neonates were included in the study. A capillary or arterial sample was analyzed for determination of glucose with the Glucometer Elite XL system by an attending trained nurse. Through the same sampling site, a specimen was collected and sent to the laboratory for measurement of plasma glucose, bilirubin, and hematocrit.RESULTS -The regression analysis between the results of the Glucometer Elite XL system and comparative methods resulted in the following: Glucometer Elite XL meter = 1.01 ϫ laboratory method ϩ 0.02 mmol/l (n = 388). For the 1.1-4.0 mmol/l plasma glucose range, the regression was Glucometer Elite XL meter = 1.07 ϫ laboratory method ϩ 0.12 mmol/l (n = 150). A difference plot indicated a mean bias of 0.04 mmol/l (95% CI Ϫ0.01 to 0.10). No relationship was found between meter glucose biases and hematocrit levels (r = 0.10, P = 0.14). Although a statistically significant correlation existed between bilirubin levels and the glucose meter biases (r = 0.14, P = 0.005), the predicted mean biases were of little clinical significance.CONCLUSIONS -The Glucometer Elite XL system showed a good performance when used in neonatal settings. E m e r g i n g T r e a t m e n t s a n d T e c h n o l o g i e s Diabetes 1150DIABETES CARE, VOLUME 23, NUMBER 8, AUGUST 2000Blood glucose meter for neonates ethics committee at each site approved the study. Collaborators assigned to the project (mostly nurses and laboratory technologists) were trained before the beginning of the study. They were taught to use the Glucometer Elite XL system, and each of them performed triplicate assays of the glucose control solutions (low, normal, and high) to familiarize themselves with the meter, reagents, and proper testing technique. Meter operators performed glucose measurements using control solutions (in duplicate) each day that they performed a plasma glucose measurement on a neonate. Also, electronic components of the meter were tested each day using the Check Strip (Bayer). One lot of test strips was used for the entire study.The laboratory comparative methods were assessed for precision and accuracy. Six levels of serum glucose control samples with glucose concentrations determined using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institute for Standards and Technology hexokinase reference method for glucose (9) were analyzed (in duplicate) before the study and once each we...