Back

Recording of Pharmacy First consultations in general practice records in England: an observational study of the service's first year using OpenSAFELY

Kingsley, V. J.; Wiedemann, M.; Wood, C.; Green, A.; Curtis, H. J.; Fisher, L.; Andrews, C. D.; Taylor, A. C.; Ashiru-Oredope, D.; Sonnex, K.; Allen, T.; Higgins, H.; Thornley, T.; Mays, N.; Glover, R. E.; Elliott, R. A.; Avery, A. J.; MacKenna, B.

2025-10-02 primary care research
10.1101/2025.09.30.25336964 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPharmacy First, a national community pharmacy service, launched in January 2024 to improve access to primary care for patients with minor conditions facing backlogs caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Pharmacies are required to share details about their consultations with general practices. We aimed to describe how and what clinical activity was recorded in general practice during the first year of the service. MethodsWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP including Pharmacy First consultations between 31 January 2024 and 30 January 2025. We described patient demographics, consultation trends, and the clinical conditions and medications coded with Pharmacy First consultations. ResultsA total of 402,165 Pharmacy First consultations were recorded for 340,710 patients from a general population of 26,142,380 registered patients in OpenSAFELY-TPP. Acute pharyngitis (28.9%) and uncomplicated urinary tract infection (28%) were the most frequently recorded conditions. By January 2025, 36.3% of recorded Pharmacy First consultations had a clinical condition, medication, or both. Females, younger adults and those living in more deprived areas were observed more often in Pharmacy First records compared to the general population. ConclusionIncreasing recording of the Pharmacy First community pharmacy service was observed in general practice records during its first year, particularly among younger and more deprived populations. However, variation in structured recording of consultation details may limit evaluation.

Published in British Journal of General Practice (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.