Background

ObjectivesTo determine whether local trainer-led TARGET antibiotic interactive workshops improve antibiotic dispensing in general practice.MethodsUsing a McNulty–Zelen-design randomized controlled trial within three regions of England, 152 general practices were stratified by clinical commissioning group, antibiotic dispensing rate and practice patient list size, then randomly allocated to intervention (offered TARGET workshop that incorporated a presentation, reflection on antibiotic data, promotion of patient and general practice (GP) staff resources, clinical scenarios and action planning, 73 practices) or control (usual practice, 79 practices). The primary outcome measure was total oral antibiotic items dispensed/1000 patients for the year after the workshop (or pseudo-workshop date for controls), adjusted for the previous year’s dispensing.ResultsThirty-six (51%) intervention practices (166 GPs, 51 nurses and 101 other staff) accepted a TARGET workshop invitation. In the ITT analysis total antibiotic dispensing was 2.7% lower in intervention practices (95% CI −5.5% to 1%, P = 0.06) compared with controls. Dispensing in intervention practices was 4.4% lower for amoxicillin/ampicillin (95% CI 0.6%–8%, P = 0.02); 5.6% lower for trimethoprim (95% CI 0.7%–10.2%, P = 0.03); and a non-significant 7.1% higher for nitrofurantoin (95% CI −0.03 to 15%, P = 0.06). The Complier Average Causal Effect (CACE) analysis, which estimates impact in those that comply with assigned intervention, indicated 6.1% (95% CI 0.2%–11.7%, P = 0.04) lower total antibiotic dispensing in intervention practices and 11% (95% CI 1.6%–19.5%, P = 0.02) lower trimethoprim dispensing.ConclusionsThis study within usual service provision found that TARGET antibiotic workshops can help improve antibiotic use, and therefore should be considered as part of any national antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. Additional local facilitation will be needed to encourage all general practices to participate.

BackgroundStool specimen collection is challenging and informal feedback has indicated that participants find the process difficult. Increasing stool specimen returns would improve the investigation of outbreaks of diarrhoeal and food-borne disease.AimTo explore the barriers to stool sample collection and specimen return to ascertain which factors may help to improve the process.Design and settingQualitative patient interview study in Gloucester, UK.MethodA two-stage purposive sampling process was used to identify patients who had either previous experience or no experience of collecting a stool sample. The interview schedule, based on the theory of planned behaviour, was used to facilitate interviews with 26 patients. Interview transcripts were analysed using a modified framework analysis.ResultsBarriers to collection included embarrassment, fear of results, concerns around hygiene and contamination, discretion and privacy, and lack of information. Personal gain was identified as the main incentive to collecting and returning a stool sample. The need for an information leaflet on stool collection was emphasised by most patients.ConclusionsGPs could make a number of small changes that could make a big difference for patients and potentially increase stool sample return. If they, rather than receptionists, distributed collection kits it may be easier for patients to ask any questions they had regarding collection. In addition, the provision of a stool-collection information leaflet could increase patients’ confidence regarding collecting the sample, and providing drop-off boxes for specimens could help prevent patients’ embarrassment regarding handing their stool over to a receptionist.

BackgroundThe role of the school nurse is complex with many possible elements identified by previous research. The aim of this study is to understand perceptions of the role of the school nurse in order to support school nurses in the delivery of health education.MethodsThe study used an inductive, qualitative research design involving semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Participants were recruited from four NHS trusts across England and final sample size was thirty one school nurses. Three focus groups and two interviews took place in person, and three interviews were over the phone. Data was thematically analysed.ResultsSchool nurses described six main themes. Four themes directly related to the school nurse role: the main roles of a school nurse, school nurses' role in health education, prioritisation of workload and activities, and community work. A further two other themes related to the delivery of health education: the school nursing system and educational resources.ConclusionsThe role of the school nurse in England is very diverse and the school nurse role in health education is primarily to advise and support schools, rather than to directly deliver education. The study identified that tailored public health educational resources are needed to support school nurses.