You know how sometimes someone comes up with a deceptively simple idea and everyone thinks – why has no one done that before? Well, I feel the Patient Safety Guide is one of those ideas. You can download it from a website and print it out, or access it via a mobile app for iOs or Android. It’s designed to help patients and carers prepare for appointments with medical professionals like GPs, nurses and pharmacists.
I think it’s probably quite common for many of us that when you sit down to talk to a medical professional, your mind can go blank. I suddenly forget everything I wanted to discuss. I did get into a habit of making notes beforehand, but sometimes I wasn’t sure what questions I should be asking. I didn’t know where to start. The Patient Safety Guide helps patients and carers to plan what they’re going to ask before an appointment. There are suggested questions and ideas that you might want to consider. There’s space to write down any concerns, as well as what you want to talk about and what you want to get out of the consultation. I feel the guide helps to make the most of an appointment.
Also, as soon the appointment ends, it’s so easy to forget everything you’ve been told. That’s why I find it so valuable that there’s space in the guide to make a note of what was said as well as any tests that have been ordered and when the results may be due.
It’s also a good way of sharing information with others who look after your health. This is invaluable if you have a carer or multiple carers. So, for example, if you have a carer who goes with you to an appointment, they can make a note of what is said, diagnosed and prescribed. These notes are then in one place and can be shared with other carers without having to keep repeating the information.
There’s also space to make a note of all medications and their doses so that you don’t have to remember all the medications you take whenever someone asks.
It’s been developed so that we, the patients, feel more in control of our contact with doctors, nurses and pharmacists (primary care practitioners). Hopefully this will also help to make the relationship more equal.
As another patient put it: “It’s just common sense really”. Get prepared for your appointment so you don’t waste time. Have a record of what happens, tests and medicines all in one place. In other words, no more scrabbling around for all this information every time it’s needed!
A first-of-its-kind free guide that helps patients and carers to take greater control of their healthcare and improve their safety has been launched today, 7 March 2023.
The Patient Safety Guide has been co-developed by patients, carers, GPs and pharmacists with researchers from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (GM PSTRC). The centre is a partnership between The University of Manchester and Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust.
The guide helps patients and their carers decide on the most appropriate way to access healthcare (for example, whether they should visit a pharmacist, book a GP appointment, or visit A&E). It also provides guidance on how to plan for interactions with healthcare staff. There’s suggested questions to ask, and space to make notes both before and after an appointment. Information around any tests that may be recommended can be logged in the guide and it can be used as a place to list all the medications a person is taking.
The guide is available to download from a dedicated website and via an app for iOS and Android phones. It includes specific advice for people with hearing loss and there is a version for people who have vision impairment.
Dr Rebecca Morris, lead for the Patient Safety Guide, said: “Involving patients in their safety is a central recommendation of NHS England’s National Patient Safety strategy and our team were looking at ways of doing this when we started work on our patient safety guide. We wanted to create something that gives patients the ability to understand and support their care while giving them confidence to ask the questions that are important to them.
“We believe our guide addresses some of the most common challenges faced by patients and carers while having the potential to narrow the gap in health inequalities. For example, we’re aware that some patients may take a number of different medications and are under the care of several different doctors. The guide helps the patient and their carer, if they have one, to keep track of all of this. Also, in situations where two family members may be caring for an older relative and are both taking them to different appointments, the guide is an easy way of sharing important information accurately. Alternatively, for someone who may struggle with verbal communication, they can use the guide as a way of helping their communication with healthcare staff. We hope that our guide can be adopted and used widely to help improve patient safety.”
The guide underwent two phases of testing. The first started before the pandemic and the second during it, when appointments were both in-person and virtual. This process involved eight GP practices across the North West of England. One of the GPs involved in the study, said: “I think the patient safety guide is a great idea. It seems doctors and patients sometimes talk at cross-purposes but can’t work out what the confusion is. I think the guide will help patients in a way that could improve their understanding of the system and doctors’ thinking. It could help empower patients.”
Kay Gallacher, a public contributor who was involved in developing and designing the guide, said: “For me, the NHS can seem like a complex system with its own language. I feel the guide can give patients and carers the tools they need to navigate it. The guide helps to ensure everyone can get the most out of an appointment with healthcare staff. I’ve found it particularly useful being able to use the guide to remind me what a doctor may have said at a previous appointment.
“Also, I do find my mind can go blank the moment I start to talk to a doctor, so being able to plan ahead and make a note of all the questions I want to ask helps me to make the most of the appointment. I can note down the answers and this makes it easier when trying to recall what the doctor said. I believe the guide is something that can make a big difference across health and social care and I’m looking forward to more people hearing about it so they can start using it and benefitting from it.”
The guide is now available for anyone to access via the app and online, and researchers are encouraging organisations interested in rolling it out to get in touch: Dr Rebecca Morris.
Doctors across hospitals and general practice who are experiencing burnout are twice as likely to be involved in a patient safety incident and three times as likely to leave their job, according to a new research paper that included 239,246 doctors from across America, Europe and the UK.
The paper’s authors believe its findings highlight the importance of investing time and effort into strategies to ease burnout across all areas of medicine, particularly in emergency medicine, to ensure doctors can deliver safe and effective treatment.
Burnout is a reaction to prolonged or chronic work-related stress and involves exhaustion, feelings of not being able to do the job, and cynicism. It is becoming more common among doctors, and this is the largest review to critically assess published studies on the effects of the quality of care given to patients and the engagement of doctors with their career.
Dr Alexander Hodkinson, NIHR Senior Fellow at the Centre for Primary Care, and lead for this research at the GM PSTRC, said: “We understand that doctors are under a number of pressures and with burnout taking the form of an epidemic, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s important to understand its impact on the quality of care doctors give. The fact that both general practitioners and hospital doctors with burnout are twice as likely to be involved in a patient safety incident and are three times as likely to leave their job is significant. Therefore, for organisations such as the NHS, addressing burnout needs to be a priority.
“Also, understanding how burnout affects a doctor’s engagement with their career is valuable. If doctors aren’t engaged, they’re more likely to leave the profession, leading to an increase in staff turnover which can negatively impact patients and healthcare organisations.”
The research involved analysing 170 papers and revealed that doctors experiencing burnout are up to four times more likely to be dissatisfied with their job and more than three times as likely to regret their career choice. In addition, they are twice as likely to receive low satisfaction ratings from patients.
Aneez Esmail, Professor of General Practice at The University of Manchester who was involved in this study, said: “The pressures that many clinicians face in the NHS is impacting on their ability to deliver safe and effective care. In relation to general practice, the impact of this stress is causing doctors to experience burnout so they become despondent and think about leaving the profession (either by retiring early or leaving the NHS). This also impacts on how they deliver care to patients, with doctors who experience burnout more likely to make errors that result in patient harm. By addressing burnout, this research helps to show that care could be safer.”
Tackling health inequalities is a key priority for Greater Manchester (GM) and recent experiences during COVID-19 have further highlighted this need. In spring 2022, two research centres funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) held a workshop to explore health inequalities across Greater Manchester and to set out priorities for working in partnership to make a difference.
The event brought together researchers from the University of Manchester working for the Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester (ARC-GM) and the Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (GM PSTRC). Public contributors and people working in the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector also joined discussions.
Professor Dame Nicky Cullum from ARC-GM highlighted how Gorton Monastery was a fitting location for the event. She explained how Gorton is one of the most deprived areas in GM with poorer health and lower life expectancy compared to the rest of the country. Yet, the restoration of the magnificent monastery building was only possible because of the collective action of local communities working together. This event was similarly focused on the value of working together with local communities to create positive action, and to tackle health inequalities and inequalities in patient safety through our research.
Dr Luke Munford presented ‘A Year of COVID-19 in the North’ and highlighted the bleak picture around widening inequalities in the north of England during the pandemic in terms of life expectancy, the impact of COVID-19, and experiences of many long-term health problems.
Professor Roger Webb (pictured second from left below) talked about inequalities in mental health during the pandemic, exploring the impact on how frequently people presented to healthcare services following self-harm.
From the GM PSTRC (l-r):
Research Leads Prof Caroline Sanders & Prof Roger Webb
Director Prof Darren Ashcroft
Centre Manager Karen Considine
Dr Kelly Howells and Matt Amp (a researcher from the homelessness charity Groundswell) presented their work exploring healthcare access for people experiencing homelessness. They highlighted the benefits of working in partnership to ensure those with lived experiences of homelessness drive the whole research pathway from the earliest ideas to the final writing and dissemination.
Stephanie Gillibrand finished the session discussing partnerships to ensure community voices were at the centre of research on inequalities during COVID-19 and the vaccination programme. Participants praised the participatory approach and co-production evident, sharing ideas on how we can ensure more projects adopt this way of working.
Neil Walbran from Healthwatch Manchester talked about their work to ensure equalities legislation is put into practice. Paul Hine presented some work by Made By Mortals, a creative performance organisation. They use creative methods and podcasts to bring experiences to life, especially to those most affected by inequalities.
Charles Kwaku-Odoi from the Caribbean and African Health Network (CAHN) discussed examples of CAHN’s work at the forefront of tackling ethnic health inequalities. We reflected back to a previous event they led two years earlier (also at Gorton Monastery), in partnership with GM PSTRC and others, to highlight the major inequalities in outcomes and experiences for Black and Asian women using maternity services. We did not know then, that the following month would bring a total lock down and change the lives and health of so many people.
Community members and organisations presenting and participating at the event reflected many experiences of worsening health, hardship and social exclusion. Yet, much of the discussion also reflected passion, resilience and commitment that is inspirational in demonstrating what can be achieved in working together.
Nasrine Akhtar, who leads a voluntary organisation called Awakening Minds and working with local communities in Oldham, aptly summed up how she views this work, saying “It’s not hard work, it’s heart work!” This sentiment was widely appreciated by others, representing the underlying values needed to drive future partnership working to address health inequalities.
Further information and some of the presentations are available on this website and a report will be published soon.
Research Fellow, Dr Lisa Riste, attended the ‘Addressing health inequalities and local needs through research about health and social care’ event and was inspired to write this poem giving her impression of what was discussed.
Research has revealed that older people living in care homes who are allocated to interventions that support the move between a care home and a hospital or emergency department are almost two times less likely to be readmitted.
The transition between hospital and care home is a challenging time for many older people and previous research has shown that patient safety issues are more common at points of transition.
Therefore, we identified the need to carry out research to improve patient safety in this area. Our study involved a systematic review which gathered together data reported in previous research. We then used a type of analysis known as meta-analysis to understand the association between interventions that support transitions between care settings, and various outcomes for care home residents and care home staff. Some examples of these interventions include post-discharge support and outreach services.
Transitional care interventions associated with improved outcomes
We discovered that for care home residents who were allocated to a transitional care intervention, there were fewer readmissions and their length of stay in the emergency department was shorter.
However, we discovered that the content of these interventions varied. The studies didn’t always measure the same outcomes, making it difficult to directly compare the results across studies. Therefore, a standardised set of outcomes that are agreed by patients, staff and health and care systems would strengthen future research.
We also found that the quality of communication and referral processes between care providers, as well as engagement with primary care is likely to influence the effect of transitional care interventions.
Input from people with lived experience
The study was supported by three public contributors with experience of caring for family members, preparing for a move to or already living in care homes. The public contributors provided feedback on the design of the research and on the studies that were included in the review. They agreed with our finding that more clarity is needed regarding staff roles, training and ability, in order to support transitions to and from different care settings.
Public contributor Mr Manoj Mistry said: ”We were involved from the beginning of the study, we questioned everything that was presented to us by the researchers on the basis of our ‘lived experience’ of having family members in care homes etc, which then led to refinements, further discussions and consensus. This study has been a good example of genuine collaboration and co-production between an established team of researchers and public contributors, adding more validity to the findings”.
Implications of the research
Dr Maria Panagioti, lead of the GM PSTRC’s Safer Care Systems and Transitions theme and an author of this study, said: “As this is the first review of transitional interventions in care homes, we believe our findings have the potential to improve patient safety in this area, especially since the emergence of COVID-19.”
The research identified 15 studies of transitional care interventions, 10 of which were set in Australia, but none had been carried out in the UK.
Dr Panagioti continued: “There is a striking lack of investment in transitional care interventions across most countries, and the high human and financial costs mean such investment is urgently needed.”
The research “Transitional Care Interventions for Older Residents of Long-term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis” was published in the journal JAMA Network Open and was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research School for Primary Care Research (NIHR SPCR), with support from staff within the National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GM PSTRC).
To ensure people experiencing homelessness can access the healthcare they need in the community, GP services should not be remote by default, finds Manchester based researchers and a homelessness charity, in a new study published today in The British Journal of General Practice. Instead, there should be a flexible approach that takes into consideration both the clinical and social factors that underpin health, advises the research team.
The study, Remote primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic for people experiencing homelessness: a qualitative study, was carried out by researchers along with homelessness charity, Groundswell and inclusion healthcare providers across within Greater Manchester. It was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GM PSTRC). The Centre is a partnership between The University of Manchester and Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust.
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, in many cases it’s only been possible to access a GP remotely. As people experiencing homelessness are more likely to have more than one medical condition, and, on average, a far shorter life expectancy than the general public, being able to easily access their GP is particularly important.
People experiencing homelessness and healthcare practitioners were interviewed during the pandemic to understand the impact of remote consultations and to identify changes that could be made to improve access.
Dr Kelly Howells, researcher at the GM PSTRC and lead for this study, said: “Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic GP services have mainly been accessed using some form of technology, a change that happened almost overnight. We’re aware of how challenging the pandemic has been for GPs, balancing the need to keep everyone safe while carrying out as many consultations face to face as possible.
“In fact, this study was prompted by concerns raised by GPs, nurses, homeless service providers and charities about the impact of the necessary changes for people experiencing homelessness, who may not have access to, or feel comfortable discussing their health concerns, over the phone.”
Researchers found that the move to delivering services remotely has meant there was an increased reliance on support workers and clinicians to make a GP appointment happen. The healthcare practitioners interviewed highlighted that this could be problematic for those experiencing homelessness that may not have a support worker or someone else to help them access services. Therefore, researchers concluded that creating a system that’s flexible where access to healthcare isn’t exclusively remote or digital is vital.
Jo Brown, Research Manager at Groundswell, said: “It’s imperative that we listen directly to people experiencing homelessness about their experiences of accessing primary healthcare. During the pandemic, this work has been crucial in developing our understanding of the barriers many people face when trying to access their GP. We know people experiencing homelessness face significant health inequalities and barriers to getting the healthcare they need; these findings indicate steps that should be taken to address such inequalities.”
The number of people seeking help for self-harm in primary care (for example from their GP), dropped sharply during the first UK lockdown in 2020. By May 2021 this deficit had not returned to pre-pandemic levels, according to new research that analysed the electronic health care records in primary care of 2.8 million people across Greater Manchester.
Researchers analysed a new de-identified database that pulls together healthcare information from general practices across Greater Manchester to identify trends around self-harm by sex, age group, ethnicity and deprivation. They found a potentially concerning treatment gap for self-harm among men and people living in the most deprived areas.
Dr Sarah Steeg, Presidential Fellow in mental health epidemiology at The University of Manchester, who worked with researchers from the GM PSTRC on this study, said: “We believe the fact the number of people accessing healthcare for self-harm didn’t return to pre-pandemic levels by May 2021 is unlikely to be because these people aren’t harming themselves. It is more likely to be because people aren’t seeking help or aren’t seeking help in the same way as they did before the pandemic.”
There has been research that’s looked at self-harm during the first wave of the pandemic. However, despite further waves of COVID-19 and ongoing national and regional restrictions that affected Greater Manchester into the autumn/winter of 2020 and the spring of 2021, little was known about how many people were visiting their GP after harming themselves during that time.
Dr Steeg, continued: “The findings of our study are concerning as the deepening health inequalities we observed during the first wave of the pandemic, in 2020, didn’t recover by the spring of 2021. This could reflect a hesitance to seek help from health services in the way people did before the pandemic.”
Researchers believe the potential treatment gap among men is particularly concerning due to the increased risk of suicide for men if they have harmed themselves.
This is the first study to be published that used the Greater Manchester Care Record, which brings together healthcare and social care information. It meant researchers could examine the number of times self-harm was recorded across primary care (for example, general practices) every month until May 2021.
Professor Niels Peek, lead of the Safety Informatics theme at the GM PSTRC, who was also part of the team that created the Greater Manchester Care Record, said: “This is an important milestone for the Integrated Care System in Greater Manchester. It tells us that we can use data from the Greater Manchester Care Record to accurately assess the impact of the pandemic on the Manchester population.”
Manchester-based researchers estimate that between March and December 2020, 7.4 million fewer NICE recommended health care checks took place in UK general practices in people with type 2 diabetes, when compared to 10-year historical trends.
The research involved analysing the primary care healthcare records of 618,161 people with type 2 diabetes to estimate how many health checks had been missed during the pandemic in 2020 and who had been most affected.
The checks include measuring blood pressure and weight, urine tests for protein and blood tests for cholesterol, kidney function and average sugar level. These processes are essential to minimise the risk of developing long-term complications caused by type 2 diabetes.
The results have shown older people with type 2 diabetes from deprived areas were most likely to miss out on having health checks.
The researchers also estimated that across the UK between March and December 2020, there were ~31,800 fewer people with type 2 diabetes prescribed a new type of diabetes medication and ~14,600 fewer were prescribed a new type of blood pressure lowering medication. This almost certainly means that large numbers of people are being left with poorly controlled diabetes and high blood pressure which increases the risk of developing serious complications such as heart attacks, strokes, kidney failure and amputations.
Dr Matthew Carr from The University of Manchester, and lead for this study at the GM PSTRC, said: “Health checks for people with type 2 diabetes are generally carried out in general practice and as face-to-face appointments aren’t yet back up to pre COVID levels delays are likely to continue. As a result, there’s an urgent need to reduce the harm caused by these changes to the way care has been delivered.
“Although it’s not possible to estimate the number of people who have missed out on a check, we are able to analyse health care records to identify the number of processes that took place. This has allowed us to understand the size of the problem, along with the sectors of the population that have been most affected by looking at how trends varied by age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation.”
The research revealed that, between May and December 2020 the number of health checks did increase, but they remained between 28-47% lower than expected.
Co-author, Professor Martin K Rutter, from The University of Manchester and Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, said: “Health checks for type 2 diabetes are essential in the long-term management of the condition. As we recover from the pandemic, our research will help UK healthcare services focus their efforts on how to provide support for people living with diabetes who have been most affected by changes in the way that care has been provided.”
Nikki Joule, Policy Manager at Diabetes UK, said: “It’s incredibly concerning that both diabetes checks and prescriptions of new medicines for people living with type 2 diabetes were reduced during the pandemic. Blood cholesterol, blood pressure and longer-term blood sugar levels are vital indicators of how type 2 diabetes is being managed, and missing these checks puts people at greater risk of diabetes-related complications such as heart attacks, strokes and kidney failure.
“That older people from deprived backgrounds have been disproportionately affected is yet another stark example of how the pandemic has exacerbated health inequalities. It is vital that this is addressed, and the backlog of care urgently dealt with to avoid people developing life-changing complications of diabetes that may have been preventable.
“While we welcome the recent Government commitment to invest more in the prevention of type 2 diabetes, measures to help people already living with diabetes should be prioritised equally to allow more people the best chance to live well with the condition.”
Visit this webpage to find out your risk of developing type 2 diabetes and steps you can take to reduce it.
A new study investigated measures used to control infection in care homes for older people. It involved analysing data and previous research from 2007 to 2020, before the COVID-19 pandemic, in a bid to understand the reasons how viruses spread and identify how to influence this both now and into the future.
Dr Maria Panagioti, lead of the GM PSTRC’s Safer Care Systems and Transitions Theme and an author of this study, said: “In England, Government policy around the discharge of patients from hospitals into care homes has been used to explain how COVID-19 spreads though care homes.
“However, we believe this is only part of the story as less attention has been given to investigating the role Infection Prevention and Control played. In conducting this research we’ve analysed a large number of studies to identify some of the reasons why Infection Prevention and Control might not always be effective in stopping COVID in its tracks and how this can be improved to make healthcare safer in care homes for older people.”
The research identified that one of the challenges faced by care homes is uncovering how an outbreak begins. Then, once an infection begins to spread, identifying who is responsible for the necessary control measures is not always easy. High staff turnover was also found to be an additional challenge. The need to bring in external health care professionals such as GPs to diagnose or treat an infection effects Infection Prevention and Control (IPC).
Researchers concluded that training staff repeatedly could support them in ensuring IPC is effectively practiced across care homes as this would help to, overcome one of the key reasons why IPC in care homes has not been as effective as it could have been, i.e. high staff turnover. However, the success of this measure depends upon managerial commitment and organisational improvements being made within care homes.
Dr Panagioti, continued: “Our research has identified how important it is to understand the unique challenges care homes face regarding IPC. We believe repetitive staff training in IPC is key in helping to improve safety for care home residents and we look forward to seeing these recommendations being acted upon.”
An experienced public contributor, who is an informal carer, was involved in the research, and said: ‘‘Having previously inspected acute hospital inpatient and mental health inpatient wards for their condition and cleanliness as a Public Member throughout Northwest England, and previously having family members / family friends admitted into care homes, I was genuinely interested in assisting with this much needed research study.
“The findings from this study on effective Infection Prevention and Control in care home settings if adhered to by owners, managers and the staff working within care homes, should make a positive difference to the safety and welfare of care home residents by reducing the risks of any potential infections that may originate and then spread. A particular strength of the study was that the voice of those with lived experience of care homes and their family members/ family carers was both listened to and incorporated into the recommendations.”
Patients experiencing homelessness use hospital services, especially emergency admissions, at much higher rates than housed patients according to new research published this week.
The study’s authors believe the research indicates the need to improve access to primary care, including GPs, along with implementing other interventions for people experiencing homelessness.
The researchers calculated that for patients experiencing homelessness emergency admissions were 2.08 times higher, and annual admissions 1.79 times higher than housed patients.
The team also investigated differences in ambulatory care-sensitive admissions (ACSCs), admissions for certain conditions, such as diabetes, asthma, and pneumonia, that could potentially be avoided with timely and effective primary care.
They found that these admissions were 1.65 times higher in patients experiencing homelessness than housed patients.
Researchers from The University of Melbourne and The University of Southern Denmark were also involved in the work.
Compared to 1,000 housed patients with similar characteristics, they found, 1,000 patients experiencing homeless would collectively have 225 more emergency admissions per year, and 25 more ambulatory care-sensitive emergency admissions per year.
Ambulatory care-sensitive conditions that were more common in patients experiencing homelessness were cellulitis (skin infections), convulsions/epilepsy, and chronic angina.
The study, published in BMJ Open, compared data collected from 16,161 hospital patients registered as having no fixed abode with 74,780 housed patients.
Lead author Charlie Moss from The University of Manchester said: “This study is one of the first to quantify the higher rates at which patients experiencing homelessness use hospital services compared to housed patients in England.
“Our analysis shows that some of the admissions may be potentially preventable with improved access to primary care, though these comprise a small share of the total.
She added: “There is likely to be a complex array of factors which lead to the differences we observe.
“But other research suggests that people experiencing homelessness face barriers to healthcare because services are less accessible to them.
“There is a perception that stigma and discrimination from health professionals may lead to poor or delayed engagement with services.
“People experiencing homelessness often face many complex challenges making it harder for them to use services and for health care professionals to manage conditions that may need multiple appointments.”
Professor Matt Sutton from The University of Manchester said: “Addressing structural factors such as improved access to primary care could potentially reduce some of these admissions.
“However, the fact that only 11% of the additional emergency admissions experienced by the cohort including people experiencing homelessness were ambulatory care-sensitive suggests that other approaches are also needed if the goal is to reduce hospital admissions for people experiencing homelessness.
“Our results may suggest that interventions which strengthen support for people experiencing homelessness when they attend A&E could have the potential to reduce future hospital admissions.”
Dr Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi from the Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, added: “The study shows the need to make sure that we collect data routinely on characteristics that make people more vulnerable to worse health outcomes. In this case, recording people’s housing status is important to understanding the specific health needs for this population.”
The views expressed in these blog posts are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care, The University of Manchester, The University of Nottingham or the Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre.
GM PSTRC 