Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine最新文献

Family medicine physicians often see headache as the chief complaint when meeting patients within their practice. The goal is to try different treatment modalities without having to send the patient to a specialist. Headaches affect different individuals during their lifetime. Before any treatment begins, it is best that one rules out possible causes of the headache, for example, drug interactions or structural cerebrum conditions. Nonpharmacological treatment is recommended first before attempting a stepwise approach to cost-effective pharmacological treatment options. Pharmacological treatment options should include preventive and on-demand options. A family physician has all the resources to assist patients with different types of headaches.

Purpose: Providing medication abortion in the primary care setting is a promising way to increase access to abortion, a threatened service in many States. This study aimed to characterize primary care clinicians' interest in prescribing medication abortion, what barriers they face in adding this service, and what support they need.

Methods: Data were collected from 162 practicing primary care clinicians in Minnesota using an online survey with closed- and open-ended response options. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, group comparison analyses, and content analysis for the open-ended questions.

Results: Participants represented a diverse range of ages, years in practice, credentials, genders, and urban/rural practice settings, and held mixed knowledge and attitudes around medication abortion. All demographic groups surveyed expressed interest in prescribing medication abortion, with the strongest interest represented among younger respondents, women, and those practicing in urban settings. Clinicians who provide prenatal care or who already work with these medications in other contexts were more likely to want to add medication abortion to their practices. The most common barrier to providing medication abortion was a lack of knowledge about organizational policies and about the medications themselves. To empower clinicians to provide medication abortion, respondents voiced needing their health systems to build clear processes and wanting supportive networks of other clinicians for collaboration.

Conclusions: Given the interest of primary care clinicians in providing medication abortion, health systems have a valuable opportunity to increase access.

Introduction: High-quality primary care can reduce avoidable emergency department visits and emergency hospitalizations. The availability of electronic medical record (EMR) data and capacities for data storage and processing have created opportunities for predictive analytics. This systematic review examines studies which predict emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and mortality using EMR data from primary care.

Methods: Six databases (Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, EBM Reviews (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), Scopus, CINAHL) were searched to identify primary peer-reviewed studies in English from inception to February 5, 2020. The search was initially conducted on January 18, 2019, and updated on February 5, 2020.

Results: A total of 9456 citations were double-reviewed, and 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. The predictive ability measured by C-statistics (ROC) of the best performing models from each study ranged from 0.57 to 0.95. Less than half of the included studies used artificial intelligence methods and only 7 (23%) were externally validated. Age, medical diagnoses, sex, medication use, and prior health service use were the most common predictor variables. Few studies discussed or examined the clinical utility of models.

Conclusions: This review helps address critical gaps in the literature regarding the potential of primary care EMR data. Despite further work required to address bias and improve the quality and reporting of prediction models, the use of primary care EMR data for predictive analytics holds promise.

Two decades into the era of Electronic Health Records (EHRs), the promise of streamlining clinical care, reducing burden, and improving patient outcomes has yet to be realized. A cross-sectional family physician census conducted by the American Board of Family Medicine in 2022 and 2023 included self-reported physician EHR satisfaction. Of the nearly 10,000 responding family physicians, only one-in-four (26.2%) report being very satisfied and one-in-three (33.8%) were not satisfied. These low levels of satisfaction point to the need for greater transparency in the marketplace and pressure to increase user-centric EHR design.

We propose a paper that provides education on commonly used long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) to improve primary care based mental health interventions in patients with severe mental illnesses (SMIs) such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorders. With the expanding interface of primary care and psychiatry across all healthcare settings, it has become increasingly important for primary care clinicians to have a broader understanding of common psychiatric treatments, including LAIs. Long-acting injectable antipsychotics have been shown to be helpful in significantly improving treatment adherence, preventing disease progression, improving treatment response, decreasing readmission rates, and reducing social impairment. We discuss evidence-based indications and guidelines for use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics. We provide an overview of the treatment of SMI with LAIs, mainly focusing on the most commonly used long-acting injectable antipsychotics, advantages and disadvantages of each, along with outlining important clinical pearls for ease of practical application. Equipped with increased familiarity and understanding of these essential therapies, primary care clinicians can better facilitate early engagement with psychiatric care, promote more widespread use, and thus significantly improve the wellbeing and quality of life of patients with severe mental illness.

Family physicians are fielding questions about cannabis --particularly for the use of cannabis for treatment of pain. Like about every substance ingested to treat medical conditions, cannabis has risks and benefits. But regarding evidence-based practice and practice-based recommendations for patients about cannabis use, the cart is in front of the horse. Cannabis use is still illegal at a federal level and a Schedule 1 drug, but most states have challenged federal law by decriminalizing or legalizing cannabis for a variety of uses. Research is difficult due to this federal status as a Schedule 1 drug since federal funding is not readily available to support research. As a result, physicians have little to no guidance about the clinical usefulness of the product. This article explores what we know and what we are learning about cannabis, and the authors provide clinical guidance for patient care based on this evidence.

Purpose: Sexual misconduct by physicians is a consequential violation of patient trust. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency and patterns of sexual misconduct by physicians certified by the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM).

Methods: We described a cohort of current or formerly ABFM certified physicians ("Diplomates") disciplined for sexual misconduct in 2016 to 2022.

Results: Ninety-four physicians, representing only 0.1% of ABFM Diplomates, were identified as having received disciplinary action(s) for reported sexual misconduct. These constituted 8.9% of the 1122 cases that resulted in a physician losing board certification or eligibility for any cause in 2016 to 2022. Ninety-three of the 94 physicians identified as male, with an average age of 56 (range 22 to 88 years). Eighty-nine percent of victims were female, and 90% were patients of the physician. Unwanted sexual behavior/assault occurred in more than half of the cases, whereas one third described an ongoing sexual relationship between patient and physician. Nearly 1 in 5 cases also included controlled substance prescribing. Seven cases involved minors. Noncontact ("grooming") behaviors were described in 34 cases, 28 of which included subsequent physical sexual behavior. A clinical setting was the site of misconduct in 84% of cases.

Conclusions: Reports of sexual misconduct among board-certified family physicians are infrequent. However, any sexual misconduct by physicians is harmful to patients and the profession. The specialty should work to enhance education and change professional culture to mitigate this important problem.

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes is associated with improved clinical, behavioral, and psychosocial patient health outcomes and is part of the American Diabetes Association's Standards of Medical Care. CGM prescription often takes place in endocrinology practices, yet 50% of adults with type 1 diabetes and 90% of all people with type 2 diabetes receive their diabetes care in primary care settings. This study examined primary care clinicians' perceptions of barriers and resources needed to support CGM use in primary care.

Methods: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with primary care clinicians to understand barriers to CGM and resources needed to prescribe. Participants were recruited through practice-based research networks. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to summarize themes from interview findings.

Results: We conducted interviews with 55 primary care clinicians across 21 states. Participants described CGM benefits for patients with varying levels of diabetes self-management and engagement. Major barriers to prescribing included lack of insurance coverage for CGM costs to patients, and time constraints. Participants identified resources needed to foster CGM prescribing, for example, clinician education, support staff, and EHR compatibility.

Conclusion: Primary care clinicians face several challenges to prescribing CGM, but they are interested in learning more to help them offer it to their patients. This study reinforces the ongoing need for improved clinician education on CGM technology and continued expansion of insurance coverage for people with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Background: Higher trust in healthcare providers has been linked to better health outcomes and satisfaction. Lower trust has been associated with healthcare-based discrimination.

Objective: Examine associations between experiences of healthcare discrimination and patients' and caregivers of pediatric patients' trust in providers, and identify factors associated with high trust, including prior experience of healthcare-based social screening.

Methods: Secondary analysis of cross-sectional study using logistic regression modeling. Sample consisted of adult patients and caregivers of pediatric patients from 11 US primary care/emergency department sites.

Results: Of 1,012 participants, low/medium trust was reported by 26% identifying as non-Hispanic Black, 23% Hispanic, 18% non-Hispanic multiple/other race, and 13% non-Hispanic White (P = .001). Experience of any healthcare-based discrimination was reported by 32% identifying as non-Hispanic Black, 23% Hispanic, 39% non-Hispanic multiple/other race, and 26% non-Hispanic White (P = .012). Participants reporting low/medium trust had a mean discrimination score of 1.65/7 versus 0.57/7 for participants reporting high trust (P < .001). In our adjusted model, higher discrimination scores were associated with lower trust in providers (aOR 0.74, 95%CI = 0.64, 0.85). A significant interaction indicated that prior healthcare-based social screening was associated with reduced impact of discrimination on trust: as discrimination score increased, odds of high trust were greater among participants who had been screened (aOR = 1.28, 95%CI = 1.03, 1.58).

Conclusions: Patients and caregivers reporting more healthcare-based discrimination were less likely to report high provider trust. Interventions to strengthen trust need structural antiracist components. Increased rapport with patients may be a potential by-product of social screening. Further research is needed on screening and trust.