Azeem Majeed

Imperial College London, Londinium, England, United Kingdom

Are you Azeem Majeed?

Claim your profile

Publications (348)2287.35 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and objective: Demand for unplanned hospital services is rising, and children are frequent users, especially where access to primary care is poor. In England, universal health care coverage entitles parents to see a general practitioner (GP) for first-contact care. However, access to GP appointments is variable, and few patients can see their own regular GP out of hours (OOH). The goal of this study explored the association between access to GPs , emergency department (ED) visits and short hospitalizations (<2 days) in children in England. Methods: ED visit and short hospitalization rates were investigated in 9.5 million children aged <15 years registered with English family practices between April 2011 and March 2012 by using administrative hospital data. Six access categories ranked all practices according to patients' reported ability to schedule GP appointments; from national GP Patient Survey data. GP consulting hours were 8:00 am to 6:30 pm on weekdays. Results: There were 3 074 616 ED visits (56% OOH) and 470 752 short hospitalizations over the 12 months studied. Children registered with practices in the highest access group compared with the lowest were 9% less likely to visit an ED (adjusted rate ratio: 0.91 [95% confidence interval: 0.89-93]), particularly OOH compared with consulting hours (10% vs 7%). Children in the highest access groups were equally likely to be admitted for a short stay. Conclusions: Increasing GP accessibility might alleviate the burden of ED visits from children, particularly during peak times OOH. Short hospitalizations may be more sensitive to other aspects of health systems.
    No preview · Article · Feb 2016 · Pediatrics
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives General practitioner (GP)-led urgent care centres were established to meet the growing demand for urgent care. Staff members working in such centres are central in influencing patients’ choices about which services they use, but little is known about staff perceptions of patients’ motives for attending urgent care. We hence aimed to explore their perceptions of patients’ motives for attending such centres. Design A phenomenological, qualitative study, including semistructured interviews. The interviews were analysed using thematic content analysis. Setting 2 GP-led urgent care centres in 2 academic hospitals in London. Participants 15 staff members working at the centres including 8 GPs, 5 emergency nurse practitioners and 2 receptionists. Results We identified 4 main themes: ‘Confusion about choices’, ‘As if increase of appetite had grown; By what it fed on’, ‘Overt reasons, covert motives’ and ‘A question of legitimacy’. The participants thought that the centres introduce convenient and fast access for patients. So convenient, that an increasing number of patients use them as a regular alternative to their community GP. The participants perceived that patients attend the centres because they are anxious about their symptoms and view them as serious, cannot get an appointment with their GP quickly and conveniently, are dissatisfied with the GP, or lack self-care skills. Staff members perceived some motives as legitimate (an acute health need and difficulties in getting an appointment), and others as less legitimate (convenience, minor illness, and seeking quicker access to hospital facilities). Conclusions The participants perceived that patients attend urgent care centres because of the convenience of access relative to primary care, as well as sense of acuity and anxiety, lack self-care skills and other reasons. They perceived some motives as more legitimate than others. Attention to unmet needs in primary care can help in promoting balanced access to urgent care.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · BMJ Open
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Identification of primary care factors associated with hospital admissions for adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Design and setting Cross-sectional analysis of 2010–2012 data from all National Health Service hospitals and 7664 of 8358 general practices in England. Method We identified all hospital episodes with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10 code indicative of an ADR, in the 2010–2012 English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) admissions database. These episodes were linked to contemporary data describing the associated general practice, including general practitioner (GP) and patient demographics, an estimate of overall patient population morbidity, measures of primary care supply, and Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) quality scores. Poisson regression models were used to examine associations between primary care factors and ADR-related episode rates. Results 212 813 ADR-related HES episodes were identified. Rates of episodes were relatively high among the very young, older and female subgroups. In fully adjusted models, the following primary care factors were associated with increased likelihood of episode: higher deprivation scores (population attributable fraction (PAF)=0.084, 95% CI 0.067 to 0.100) and relatively poor glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control among patients with diabetes (PAF=0.372; 0.218 to 0.496). The following were associated with reduced episode likelihood: lower GP supply (PAF=−0.016; −0.026 to −0.005), a lower proportion of GPs with UK qualifications (PAF=−0.035; −0.058 to −0.012), lower total QOF achievement rates (PAF=−0.021; −0.042 to 0.000) and relatively poor blood pressure control among patients with diabetes (PAF=−0.144; −0.280 to −0.022). Conclusions Various aspects of primary care are associated with ADR-related hospital episodes, including achievement of particular QOF indicators. Further investigation with individual level data would help develop understanding of the associations identified. Interventions in primary care could help reduce the ADR burden. ADRs are candidates for primary care sensitive conditions.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2015 · BMJ Open
  • Azeem Majeed · Mariam Molokhia

    No preview · Article · Nov 2015 · BMJ (online)
  • Azeem Majeed

    No preview · Article · Nov 2015 · BMJ (online)
  • John Tayu Lee · Nicole Huang · Azeem Majeed

    No preview · Article · Nov 2015 · BMJ (online)
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent health-care reforms in England have opened up the provision of general practice to new models of care, and primary care can now be provided under various contractual mechanisms. Previous research has highlighted population-level variation in quality indicators across practices under different contract types. We present differences in patient-reported experience of general practice services across three contract types in England.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2015 · The Lancet
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Some patients attend emergency departments more frequently than others and account for a disproportionate number of attendances. However, little is known about repeat attenders at National Health Service urgent care centres. We aimed to describe the volume and characteristics of repeat attenders at such centres.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2015 · The Lancet
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although policy discourses frame integrated Electronic Health Records (EHRs) as essential for contemporary healthcare systems, increased information sharing often raises concerns among patients and the public. This paper examines patient and public views about the security and privacy of EHRs used for health provision, research and policy in the UK. Sequential mixed methods study with a cross-sectional survey (in 2011) followed by focus group discussions (in 2012-2013). Survey participants (N = 5331) were recruited from primary and secondary care settings in West London (UK). Complete data for 2761 (51.8 %) participants were included in the final analysis for this paper. The survey results were discussed in 13 focus groups with people living with a range of different health conditions, and in 4 mixed focus groups with patients, health professionals and researchers (total N = 120). Qualitative data were analysed thematically. In the survey, 79 % of participants reported that they would worry about the security of their record if this was part of a national EHR system and 71 % thought the National Health Service (NHS) was unable to guarantee EHR safety at the time this work was carried out. Almost half (47 %) responded that EHRs would be less secure compared with the way their health record was held at the time of the survey. Of those who reported being worried about EHR security, many would nevertheless support their development (55 %), while 12 % would not support national EHRs and a sizeable proportion (33 %) were undecided. There were also variations by age, ethnicity and education. In focus group discussions participants weighed up perceived benefits against potential security and privacy threats from wider sharing of information, as well as discussing other perceived risks: commercial exploitation, lack of accountability, data inaccuracies, prejudice and inequalities in health provision. Patient and public worries about the security risks associated with integrated EHRs highlight the need for intensive public awareness and engagement initiatives, together with the establishment of trustworthy security and privacy mechanisms for health information sharing.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2015 · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To identify patient and attendance characteristics that are associated with onwards referral to co-located emergency departments (EDs) or other hospital specialty departments from general practitioner (GP) led urgent care centres (UCCs) in northwest London, England. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of administrative data recorded in the UCCs at Charing Cross and Hammersmith Hospitals, in northwest London, from October 2009 to December 2012. Attendances made by adults resident in England were included. Logistic regression was used to model the associations between the explanatory variables-age; sex; ethnicity; socioeconomic status; area of residence; distance to UCC; GP registration; time, day, quarter, year; and UCC of attendance-and the outcome of onwards referral to the co-located EDs or other hospital specialty departments. Results: Of 243 042 included attendances, 74.1% were managed solely within the UCCs without same day referral to the EDs (16.8%) or other hospital specialty departments (5.7%), or deferred referral to a fracture, hand management or soft tissue injury management clinic (3.3%). The adjusted odds of onwards referral was estimated to increase by 19% (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.19) for a 10 year increase in a patient's age. Men, patients registered with a GP and residents of less socioeconomically deprived areas were also more likely to be referred onwards from the UCCs. Conclusions: The majority of patients, across each category of all explanatory variables, were managed solely within the UCCs, although a large absolute number of patients were referred onwards each year. Several characteristics of patients and their attendances were associated with the outcome variable.
    No preview · Article · Sep 2015 · Emergency Medicine Journal
  • Source

    Full-text · Article · Sep 2015 · Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online)
  • Azeem Majeed

    No preview · Article · Sep 2015 · BMJ (online)
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Multidisciplinary group meetings are one of the key drivers of facilitating integrated care. Health care professionals attending such groups have a key role in the success of these discussions and hence, in the forming of multi-professional integrated care. The study aimed to explore the professionals’ experiences and views of participating and implementing the groups in integrated care context. Methods: A qualitative study including 25 semi-structured interviews with professionals participating in the Northwest London Integrated Care Pilot analysed using thematic content analysis. Results: Participants mentioned a number of benefits of participating in the meetings, including shared learning and shared decision-making between different services and specialties. Yet, they perceived barriers that diminish the efficiency of the groups, such as time constraints, group dynamics and technicalities. The participants felt that the quality of discussions and facilitation could be improved, as well as technical arrangements that would make them easier to participate. Most of the participants perceived the groups to be beneficial for providers mostly questioning the benefits for patient care. Conclusion: Findings provide an insight into how health professionals’ views of their participation to the multidisciplinary group meetings can be more effectively translated into more tangible benefits to the patients. To benefit patient care, the multidisciplinary groups need to be more patient-oriented rather than provider-oriented, while overcoming professional boundaries for participating.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2015 · International journal of integrated care
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The UK government is pursuing policies to improve primary care access, as many patients visit accident and emergency (A and E) departments after being unable to get suitable general practice appointments. Direct admission to hospital via a general practitioner (GP) averts A and E use, and may reduce total hospital costs. It could also enhance the continuity of information between GPs and hospital doctors, possibly improving healthcare outcomes. To determine whether primary care access is associated with the route of emergency admission-via a GP versus via an A and E department. Retrospective analysis of national administrative data from English hospitals for 2011-2012. Adults admitted in an emergency (unscheduled) for ≥1 night via a GP or an A and E department formed the study population. The measure of primary care access-the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt-was derived from a large, nationally representative patient survey. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate associations, adjusting for patient and admission characteristics. The analysis included 2 322 112 emergency admissions (81.9% via an A and E department). With a 5 unit increase in the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt, the adjusted odds of GP admission (vs A and E admission) was estimated to increase by 15% (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17). The probability of GP admission if ≥95% of appointment attempts were successful in each general practice was estimated to be 19.6%. This probability reduced to 13.6% when <80% of appointment attempts were successful. This equates to 139 673 fewer GP admissions (456 232 vs 316 559) assuming no change in the total number of admissions. Associations were consistent in direction across geographical regions of England. Among hospital inpatients admitted as an emergency, patients registered to more accessible general practices were more likely to have been admitted via a GP (vs an A and E department). This furthers evidence suggesting that access to general practice is related to use of emergency hospital services in England. The relative merits of the two admission routes remain unclear. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2015 · BMJ quality & safety
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine coverage of NHS Health Check, a national cardiovascular risk assessment programme in England, in the first four years after implementation, and to examine prevalence of high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and uptake of statins in high risk patients. Study sample was 95,571 patients in England aged 40-74 years continuously registered with 509 practices in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between April 2009 and March 2013. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to assess predictors of Health Check attendance; elevated CVD risk factors and statin prescribing among attendees. Programme coverage was 21.4% over four years, with large variations between practices (0%-72.7%) and regions (9.4%-30.7%). Coverage was higher in older patients (adjusted odds ratio 2.88, 95% confidence interval 2.49-3.31 for patients 70-74 years) and in patients with a family history of premature coronary heart disease (2.37, 2.22-2.53), but lower in Black Africans (0.75, 0.61-0.92) and Chinese (0.68, 0.47-0.96) compared with White British. Coverage was similar in patients living in deprived and affluent areas. Prevalence of high CVD risk (QRISK2≥20%) among attendees was 4.6% One third (33.6%) of attendees at high risk were prescribed a statin after Health Checks. Coverage of the programme and statin prescribing in high risk individuals was low. Coverage was similar in deprived and affluent groups but lower in some ethnic minority groups, possibly widening inequalities. These findings raise a question about whether recommendations by WHO to develop CVD risk assessment programmes internationally will deliver anticipated health benefits. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2015 · Preventive Medicine
  • Source

    Full-text · Article · Jun 2015 · British Journal of General Practice
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder that affects the small joints of the body. It is one of the leading causes of chronic morbidity in high-income countries, but little is known about the burden of this disease in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of RA in six of the World Health Organization's (WHO) regions that harbour LMIC by identifying all relevant studies in those regions. To accomplish this aim various bibliographic databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, LILACS and the Chinese databases CNKI and WanFang. Studies were selected based on pre-defined inclusion criteria, including a definition of RA based on the 1987 revision of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) definition. Meta-estimates of regional RA prevalence rates for countries of low or middle income were 0.40% (95% CI: 0.23-0.57%) for Southeast Asian, 0.37% (95% CI: 0.23-0.51%) for Eastern Mediterranean, 0.62% (95% CI: 0.47-0.77%) for European, 1.25% (95% CI: 0.64-1.86%) for American and 0.42% (95% CI: 0.30-0.53%) for Western Pacific regions. A formal meta-analysis could not be performed for the sub-Saharan African region due to limited data. Male prevalence of RA in LMIC was 0.16% (95% CI: 0.11-0.20%) while the prevalence in women reached 0.75% (95% CI: 0.60-0.90%). This difference between males and females was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). The prevalence of RA did not differ significantly between urban and rural settings (P = 0.353). These prevalence estimates represent 2.60 (95% CI: 1.85-3.34%) million male sufferers and 12.21 (95% CI: 9.78-14.67%) million female sufferers in LMIC in the year 2000, and 3.16 (95% CI: 2.25-4.05%) million affected males and 14.87 (95% CI: 11.91-17.86%) million affected females in LMIC in the year 2010. Given that majority of the world's population resides in LMIC, the number of affected people is substantial, with a projection to increase in the coming years. Therefore, policy makers and health-care providers need to plan to address a significant disease burden both socially and economically.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2015 · Global journal of health science
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Data mining of electronic health records (eHRs) allows us to identify patterns of patient data that characterize diseases and their progress and learn best practices for treatment and diagnosis. Clinical Prediction Rules (CPRs) are a form of clinical evidence that quantifies the contribution of different clinical data to a particular clinical outcome and help clinicians to decide the diagnosis, prognosis or therapeutic conduct for any given patient. The TRANSFoRm diagnostic support system (DSS) is based on the construction of an ontological repository of CPRs for diagnosis prediction in which clinical evidence is expressed using a unified vocabulary. This paper explains the proposed methodology for constructing this CPR repository, addressing algorithms and quality measures for filtering relevant rules. Some preliminary application results are also presented.
    Full-text · Article · May 2015 · Studies in health technology and informatics
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) is a financial incentive scheme that rewards UK general practices for providing evidence-based care, including smoking cessation advice mainly as a secondary prevention intervention. We examined the effects on smoking outcomes and inequalities of a local version of QOF (QOF+), which ran from 2008 to 2011 and extended financial incentives to the provision of cessation advice as a primary prevention intervention. Methods Before-and-after study using data from 28 general practices in Hammersmith & Fulham, London, UK. We used logistic regression to examine changes in smoking outcomes associated with QOF+ within and between socio-demographic groups. Results Recording smoking status increased from 55.5% to 64.2% for men (p<0.001) and from 67.9% to 75.8% for women (p<0.001). All groups benefitted from the increase, but younger patients remained less likely to be asked about smoking than older patients. White patients were less likely to be asked than those from other ethnic groups. Smoking cessation advice increased from 32.7% to 54.0% for men (p<0.001) and from 35.4% to 54.1% for women (p<0.01) and there was little variation between groups for this outcome. Recorded smoking prevalence reduced from 25.0% to 20.8% for men (p<0.001) and from 16.1% to 12.5% for women (p<0.001). White patients and those from more deprived areas remained more likely to be smokers than other groups. Conclusion The introduction of QOF+ was associated with general improvements in recording of smoking outcomes, but inequalities in ascertainment and smoking prevalence with respect to age, ethnicity and deprivation persisted. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Nicotine & Tobacco Research
  • Source
    Michael Soljak · Azeem Majeed

    Full-text · Article · May 2015 · JAMA Internal Medicine

Publication Stats

6k Citations
2,287.35 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 2005-2016
    • Imperial College London
      • • School of Public Health
      • • Department of Primary Care and Public Health
      • • Imperial College Clinical Imaging Facility
      • • Faculty of Medicine
      Londinium, England, United Kingdom
  • 2009-2014
    • Imperial Valley College
      IPL, California, United States
    • The University of Edinburgh
      • Centre for Population Health Sciences
      Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
  • 2011
    • University of Split
      Spalato, Splitsko-Dalmatinska, Croatia
  • 2006
    • Medical University of South Carolina
      • Department of Family Medicine
      Charleston, SC, United States
  • 1998-2005
    • Office for National Statistics
      Londinium, England, United Kingdom
  • 2000-2004
    • University College London
      • School of Public Policy
      Londinium, England, United Kingdom
  • 2003
    • University of Nottingham
      Nottigham, England, United Kingdom
    • University of California, San Francisco
      • Department of Medicine
      San Francisco, California, United States
  • 2002
    • University of Leicester
      • Department of Health Sciences
      Leiscester, England, United Kingdom

We use cookies to give you the best possible experience on ResearchGate. Read our cookies policy to learn more.