Dataset Information

Do changing medical admissions practices in the UK impact on who is admitted? An interrupted time series analysis.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Medical admissions must balance two potentially competing missions: to select those who will be successful medical students and clinicians and to increase the diversity of the medical school population and workforce. Many countries address this dilemma by reducing the heavy reliance on prior educational attainment, complementing this with other selection tools. However, evidence to what extent this shift in practice has actually widened access is conflicting. AIM:To examine if changes in medical school selection processes significantly impact on the composition of the student population. DESIGN AND SETTING:Observational study of medical students from 18 UK 5-year medical programmes who took the UK Clinical Aptitude Test from 2007 to 2014; detailed analysis on four schools. PRIMARY OUTCOME:Proportion of admissions to medical school for four target groups (lower socioeconomic classes, non-selective schooling, non-white and male). DATA ANALYSIS:Interrupted time-series framework with segmented regression was used to identify the impact of changes in selection practices in relation to invitation to interview to medical school. Four case study medical schools were used looking at admissions within for the four target groups. RESULTS:There were no obvious changes in the overall proportion of admissions from each target group over the 8-year period, averaging at 3.3% lower socioeconomic group, 51.5% non-selective school, 30.5% non-white and 43.8% male. Each case study school changed their selection practice in decision making for invite to interview during 2007-2014. Yet, this within-school variation made little difference locally, and changes in admission practices did not lead to any discernible change in the demography of those accepted into medical school. CONCLUSION:Although our case schools changed their selection procedures, these changes did not lead to any observable differences in their student populations. Increasing the diversity of medical students, and hence the medical profession, may require different, perhaps more radical, approaches to selection.

SUBMITTER: Fielding S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6194474 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do changing medical admissions practices in the UK impact on who is admitted? An interrupted time series analysis.

Fielding Shona S Tiffin Paul Alexander PA Greatrix Rachel R Lee Amanda J AJ Patterson Fiona F Nicholson Sandra S Cleland Jennifer J

BMJ open 20181008 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Medical admissions must balance two potentially competing missions: to select those who will be successful medical students and clinicians and to increase the diversity of the medical school population and workforce. Many countries address this dilemma by reducing the heavy reliance on prior educational attainment, complementing this with other selection tools. However, evidence to what extent this shift in practice has actually widened access is conflicting.<h4>Aim</h4>To e ...[more]

PMID: 30297349

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUncontrolled infection and lockdown measures introduced in response have resulted in an unprecedented challenge for health systems internationally. Whether such unprecedented impact was due to lockdown itself and recedes when such measures are lifted is unclear. We assessed the short- and medium-term impacts of the first lockdown measures on hospital care for tracer non-COVID-19 conditions in England, Scotland and Wales across diseases, sexes, and socioeconomic and ethnic groups.MethodsWe used OpenSAFELY (for England), EAVEII (Scotland), and SAIL Databank (Wales) to extract weekly hospital admission rates for cancer, cardiovascular and respiratory conditions (excluding COVID-19) from the pre-pandemic period until 25/10/2020 and conducted a controlled interrupted time series analysis. We undertook stratified analyses and assessed admission rates over seven months during which lockdown restrictions were gradually lifted.FindingsOur combined dataset included 32 million people who contributed over 74 million person-years. Admission rates for all three conditions fell by 34.2% (Confidence Interval (CI): -43.0, -25.3) in England, 20.9% (CI: -27.8, -14.1) in Scotland, and 24.7% (CI: -36.7, -12.7) in Wales, with falls across every stratum considered. In all three nations, cancer-related admissions fell the most while respiratory-related admissions fell the least (e.g., rates fell by 40.5% (CI: -47.4, -33.6), 21.9% (CI: -35.4, -8.4), and 19.0% (CI: -30.6, -7.4) in England for cancer, cardiovascular-related, and respiratory-related admissions respectively). Unscheduled admissions rates fell more in the most than the least deprived quintile across all three nations. Some ethnic minority groups experienced greater falls in admissions (e.g., in England, unscheduled admissions fell by 9.5% (CI: -20.2, 1.2) for Whites, but 44.3% (CI: -71.0, -17.6), 34.6% (CI: -63.8, -5.3), and 25.6% (CI: -45.0, -6.3) for Mixed, Other and Black ethnic groups respectively). Despite easing of restrictions, the overall admission rates remained lower in England, Scotland, and Wales by 20.8%, 21.6%, and 22.0%, respectively when compared to the same period (August-September) during the pre-pandemic years. This corresponds to a reduction of 26.2, 23.8 and 30.2 admissions per 100,000 people in England, Scotland, and Wales respectively.InterpretationHospital care for non-COVID diseases fell substantially across England, Scotland, and Wales during the first lockdown, with reductions persisting for at least six months. The most deprived and minority ethnic groups were impacted more severely.FundingThis work was funded by the Medical Research Council as part of the Lifelong Health and Wellbeing study as part of National Core Studies (MC_PC_20030). SVK acknowledges funding from the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2), and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. BG has received research funding from the NHS National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Asthma UK, the British Lung Foundation, and the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing strand of the National Core Studies programme.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To identify whether the abolition of prescription fees in Scotland resulted in: (1) Increase in the number (cost to NHS) of medicines prescribed for which there had been a fee (inhaled corticosteroids). (2) Reduction in hospital admissions for conditions related to those medications for which there had been a fee (asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD))-when both are compared with prescribed medicines and admissions for a condition (diabetes mellitus) for which prescriptions were historically free. DESIGN:Natural experimental retrospective general practice level interrupted time series (ITS) analysis using administrative data. SETTING:General practices, Scotland, UK. PARTICIPANTS:732 (73.6%) general practices across Scotland with valid dispensed medicines and hospital admissions data during the study period (July 2005-December 2013). INTERVENTION:Reduction in fees per dispensed item from April 2008 leading to the abolition of the fee in April 2011, resulting in universal free prescriptions. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES:Hospital admissions recorded in the Scottish Morbidity Record - 01 Inpatient (SMR01) and dispensed medicines recorded in the Prescribing Information System (PIS). RESULTS:The ITS analysis identified marked step reductions in adult (19-59 years) admissions related to asthma or COPD (the intervention group), compared with older or young people with the same conditions or adults with diabetes mellitus (the counterfactual groups). The prescription findings were less coherent and subsequent sensitivity analyses found that both the admissions and prescriptions data were highly variable above the annual or seasonal level, limiting the ability to interpret the findings of the ITS analysis. CONCLUSIONS:This study did not find sufficient evidence that universal free prescriptions was a demonstrably effective or ineffective policy, in terms of reducing hospital admissions or reducing socioeconomic inequality in hospital admissions, in the context of a universal, publicly administered medical care system, the National Health Service of Scotland.

Project description:The first case of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in March 2020 in Kenya resulting in the implementation of public health measures (PHM) to prevent large-scale epidemics. We aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 confinement measures on access to inpatient services using data from 204 Kenyan hospitals. Data on monthly admissions and deliveries from the District Health Information Software version 2 (DHIS 2) were extracted for the period January 2018 to March 2021 stratified by hospital ownership (public or private) and adjusting for missing data using multiple imputation (MI). We used the COVID-19 event as a natural experiment to examine the impact of COVID-19 and associated PHM on use of health services by hospital ownership. We estimated the impact of COVID-19 using two approaches; Statistical process control (SPC) charts to visualize and detect changes and Interrupted time series (ITS) analysis using negative-binomial segmented regression models to quantify the changes after March 2020. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to test robustness of estimates using Generalised Estimating Equations (GEE) and impact of national health workers strike on observed trends. SPC charts showed reductions in most inpatient services starting April 2020. ITS modelling showed significant drops in April 2020 in monthly volumes of live-births (11%), over-fives admissions for medical (29%) and surgical care (25%) with the greatest declines in the under-five's admissions (59%) in public hospitals. Similar declines were apparent in private hospitals. Health worker strikes had a significant impact on post-COVID-19 trends for total deliveries, live-births and caesarean section rate in private hospitals. COVID-19 has disrupted utilization of inpatient services in Kenyan hospitals. This might have increased avoidable morbidity and mortality due to non-COVID-19-related illnesses. The declines have been sustained. Recent data suggests a reversal in trends with services appearing to be going back to pre- COVID levels.

Project description:IntroductionIn March 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued opioid prescribing guidelines for chronic noncancer pain. In response, in April 2016, the North Carolina Medical Board launched the Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative, an investigative program intended to limit the overprescribing of opioids. This study focuses on the association of the Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative with immediate and sustained changes in opioid prescribing among all patients who received opioid and opioid discontinuation and tapering among patients who received high-dose (>90 milligrams of morphine equivalents), long-term (>90 days) opioid therapy.MethodsControlled and single interrupted time series analysis of opioid prescribing outcomes before and after the implementation of Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative was conducted using deidentified data from the North Carolina Controlled Substances Reporting System from January 2010 through March 2017. Analysis was conducted in 2019-2020.ResultsIn an average study month, 513,717 patients, including patients who received 47,842 high-dose, long-term opioid therapy, received 660,912 opioid prescriptions at 1.3 prescriptions per patient. There was a 0.52% absolute decline (95% CI= -0.87, -0.19) in patients receiving opioid prescriptions in the month after Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative implementation. Abrupt discontinuation, rapid tapering, and gradual tapering of opioids among patients who received high-dose, long-term opioid therapy increased by 1% (95% CI= -0.22, 2.23), 2.2% (95% CI=0.91, 3.47), and 1.3% (95% CI=0.96, 1.57), respectively, in the month after Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative implementation.ConclusionsAlthough Safe Opioid Prescribing Initiative implementation was associated with an immediate decline in overall opioid prescribing, it was also associated with an unintended immediate increase in discontinuations and rapid tapering among patients who received high-dose, long-term opioid therapy. Better policy communication and prescriber education regarding opioid tapering best practices may help mitigate unintended consequences of statewide policies.

Project description:ObjectivesFollowing the outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and the subsequent global spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), health systems and the populations who use them have faced unprecedented challenges. We aimed to measure the impact of COVID-19 on the uptake of hospital-based care at a national level.DesignThe study period (weeks ending 5 January to 28 June 2020) encompassed the pandemic announcement by the World Health Organization and the initiation of the UK lockdown. We undertook an interrupted time-series analysis to evaluate the impact of these events on hospital services at a national level and across demographics, clinical specialties and National Health Service Health Boards.SettingScotland, UK.ParticipantsPatients receiving hospital care from National Health Service Scotland.Main outcome measuresAccident and emergency (A&E) attendances, and emergency and planned hospital admissions measured using the relative change of weekly counts in 2020 to the averaged counts for equivalent weeks in 2018 and 2019.ResultsBefore the pandemic announcement, the uptake of hospital care was largely consistent with historical levels. This was followed by sharp drops in all outcomes until UK lockdown, where activity began to steadily increase. This time-period saw an average reduction of -40.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -47.7 to -33.7) in A&E attendances, -25.8% (95% CI: -31.1 to -20.4) in emergency hospital admissions and -60.9% (95% CI: -66.1 to -55.7) in planned hospital admissions, in comparison to the 2018-2019 averages. All subgroup trends were broadly consistent within outcomes, but with notable variations across age groups, specialties and geography.ConclusionsCOVID-19 has had a profoundly disruptive impact on hospital-based care across National Health Service Scotland. This has likely led to an adverse effect on non-COVID-19-related illnesses, increasing the possibility of potentially avoidable morbidity and mortality. Further research is required to elucidate these impacts.

Project description:BackgroundThe unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused millions of infections worldwide and represents a significant challenge facing modern health care systems. This study was conducted to investigate the impact of lockdown measures in a tertiary Children's Hospital in southwest China, which might be used to predict long-term effects related to health-seeking behavior of parents/caregivers.MethodsThis study included newborns enrolled over a span of 86 weeks between January 4, 2019, and August 27, 2020. We designated two time periods for analysis purposes: a stable pre-COVID period(55 weeks between January 4, 2019, and January 23, 2020) and a COVID-impacted period (31 weeks between January 24, 2020, and August 27, 2020). An interrupted time-series analysis was employed to compare changes and trends in hospital admissions and disease spectra before and after the period of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Furthermore, this study was conducted to evaluate whether the health-seeking behavior of parents/caregivers was influenced by pandemic factors.ResultsOverall, 16,640 infants were admitted to the neonatology department during the pre-COVID period (n = 12,082) and the COVID-impacted period (n = 4,558). The per week neonatal admissions consistently decreased following the first days of NPIs (January 24, 2020). The average weekly admission rates of 220/week pre-COVID period and 147/week COVID-impacted period. There was an evident decrease in the volume of admissions for all disease spectra after the intervention, whereas the decrease of patients complaining about pathological jaundice-related conditions was statistically significant (p<0.05). In the COVID-impacted period, the percentage of patients who suffered from respiratory system diseases, neonatal encephalopathy, and infectious diseases decreased, while the percentage of pathological jaundice-related conditions and gastrointestinal system diseases increased. The neonatal mortality rates (NMRs) increased by 8.7% during the COVID-impacted period compared with the pre-COVID period.ConclusionsIn summary, there was a significant decline in neonatal admissions in a tertiary care hospital during the COVID-19 Pandemic and the associated NPIs. Additionally, this situation had a remarkable impact on disease spectra and health-seeking behavior of parents/caregivers. We, therefore, advise continuing follow-ups and monitoring the main health indicators in vulnerable populations affected by this Pandemic over time.

Project description:BackgroundThe high costs of innovative anticancer drugs hinder a number of cancer patients' access to these drugs in China. To address this problem, in 2018, the medical insurance access negotiation (MIAN) policy was implemented, when the prices of 17 innovative anticancer drugs were successfully negotiated and they were therefore included in the reimbursement list. This study aimed to explore the impact of the MIAN policy on the utilization of innovative anticancer drugs.MethodsWith monthly data on drug expenditures and defined daily doses (DDDs) of each innovative anticancer drug from January 2017 to December 2019, interrupted time series analysis was employed to estimate both the instant (change in the level of outcome) and long-term (change in trends of outcomes) impacts of the MIAN policy on drug utilization in terms of drug expenditures and DDDs. Our sample consists of 12 innovative anticancer drugs.ResultsFrom January 2017 to December 2019, the monthly drug expenditures and DDDs of 12 innovative anticancer drugs increased by about 573% (from US$8,931,809.30 to US$51,138,331.09) and 1400% (from 47,785 to 668,754), respectively. Overall, the implementation of the MIAN policy led to instant substantial increases of US$8,734,414 in drug expenditures and 158,192.5 in DDDs. Moreover, a sharper upward trend over time was reported, with increases of US$2,889,078 and 38,715.3 in the monthly growth rates of drug expenditures and DDDs, respectively. Regarding individual innovative anticancer drugs, the most prominent instant change and trend change in drug utilization were found for osimertinib, crizotinib, and ibrutinib. In contrast, the utilization of pegaspargase was barely affected by the MIAN policy.ConclusionsThe MIAN policy has effectively promoted the utilization of innovative anticancer drugs. To ensure the continuity of the effects and eliminate differentiation, supplementary measures should be carried out, such as careful selection of drugs for medical insurance negotiations, a health technology assessment system and a multichannel financing mechanism.

Dataset Information

Do changing medical admissions practices in the UK impact on who is admitted? An interrupted time series analysis.

Publications

Do changing medical admissions practices in the UK impact on who is admitted? An interrupted time series analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets