Carissa Bonner, James E Sharman, Shannon McKinn, Samuel Cornell, Mark R Nelson, Jenny Doust, Niamh Chapman
{"title":"General practitioner support needs to implement cardiovascular disease risk assessment and management guidelines: Qualitative interviews.","authors":"Carissa Bonner, James E Sharman, Shannon McKinn, Samuel Cornell, Mark R Nelson, Jenny Doust, Niamh Chapman","doi":"10.31128/AJGP-06-23-6871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Previous research identified numerous barriers to general practitioner (GP) use of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk guidelines, and it is unclear whether these issues have been resolved. This study explored recent GP experiences.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Interviews with 18 GPs in an Australian state with relatively few COVID-19 cases in 2021 were transcribed and coded using a framework analysis approach, with data mapped to five previously identified CVD risk assessment strategies: absolute risk focused, absolute risk adjusted, clinical judgement, passive disregard and active disregard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPs used various CVD risk calculators to inform clinical decision making, but there were concerns about accuracy, the role of extra risk factors and less 'personalised' assessment. GPs addressed these concerns by requesting additional tests, subjectively adjusting the CVD risk assessment to account for extra risk factors and focusing on individual risk factors.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Many barriers to CVD risk assessment guidelines remain. GP support is needed to implement revised guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":54241,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of General Practice","volume":"53 9","pages":"675-681"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31128/AJGP-06-23-6871","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Previous research identified numerous barriers to general practitioner (GP) use of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk guidelines, and it is unclear whether these issues have been resolved. This study explored recent GP experiences.
Method: Interviews with 18 GPs in an Australian state with relatively few COVID-19 cases in 2021 were transcribed and coded using a framework analysis approach, with data mapped to five previously identified CVD risk assessment strategies: absolute risk focused, absolute risk adjusted, clinical judgement, passive disregard and active disregard.
Results: GPs used various CVD risk calculators to inform clinical decision making, but there were concerns about accuracy, the role of extra risk factors and less 'personalised' assessment. GPs addressed these concerns by requesting additional tests, subjectively adjusting the CVD risk assessment to account for extra risk factors and focusing on individual risk factors.
Discussion: Many barriers to CVD risk assessment guidelines remain. GP support is needed to implement revised guidelines.
期刊介绍：
The Australian Journal of General Practice (AJGP) aims to provide relevant, evidence-based, clearly articulated information to Australian general practitioners (GPs) to assist them in providing the highest quality patient care, applicable to the varied geographic and social contexts in which GPs work and to all GP roles as clinician, researcher, educator, practice team member and opinion leader. All articles are subject to peer review before they are accepted for publication.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
