European Journal of General Practice最新文献

Background: Persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) are complex conditions requiring collaboration between healthcare professionals. This is especially true at the interface between primary and secondary care interface. The current fragmentation of care is a major barrier to this, leading to poor experiences and outcomes and high costs for healthcare and society.

Objectives: The aim is to identify barriers and possible solutions for collaboration between primary and secondary care in patients with PSS/FD.

Methods: In two sessions, using the nominal group technique, a mix of primary and secondary care professionals identified barriers and possible solutions to collaboration between primary and secondary care in PSS/FD care. Barriers to collaboration were identified during session one, with potential solutions identified during session two in response to the top eight barriers. Each session ended with a voting round ranking the barriers and solutions.

Results: A total of 102 healthcare professionals participated in two sessions. In the first session, 55 participants provided a list of 22 barriers, while in the second session, 47 participants provided 18 possible solutions. The top barriers related to shared language and protocols, referral quality, expectations and responsibilities between healthcare professionals and patients, and time pressure. The top solutions identified related to general practitioners using electronic consultations with specialists and shared terminology with patients.

Conclusion: The identified barriers and possible solutions for collaboration between primary and secondary care need attention when considering collaboration in PSS/FD care and related settings, both in new and ongoing collaborations.

Background: Patients provide a unique, irreplaceable, and essential perspective in evaluating patient safety. The suite of Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) tools are a notable exception to the scarcity of patient-reported patient safety measures. Full evaluation of their performance has only been attempted for the English version, thereby limiting its international applicability.

Objectives: To assess the psychometric performance of the Spanish and Catalan versions of the PREOS-PC-Compact.

Methods: Cross-sectional validation study. We used Classical Test Theory methods to examine scale score distribution, internal consistency, and construct validity; and Item Response Theory (IRT) methods to further explore construct validity.

Results: 3287 patients completed the Spanish version, and 1007 the Catalan version. Similar results were obtained for both versions. Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported a single construct for each scale. The correlations between PREOS-PC-Compact scales and known group analysis suggested adequate construct validity (inconclusive for known groups at the provider level). All four multi-item scales demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability (α > 0.7), which was only confirmed for test-retest reliability for 'Practice activation.' A sample between 60-90 patients per practice was estimated sufficient to produce scores with reliability > 0.7 for all scales except for harm scales. IRT models showed disordered thresholds for 'Practice activation' and 'Harm burden' but showed excellent fit after reducing the response categories.

Conclusion: The Spanish and Catalan versions of the PREOS-PC-Compact are broadly valid and reliable tools to measure patient safety in Spanish primary care centres; confirmation of lower-than-expected test-rest reliability merits further examination .

Background: Transgender and nonbinary (TNB) people face barriers to primary care, which remains the main entry point for accessing gender-affirming healthcare in the UK.

Objectives: This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence regarding TNB people's experiences of primary care to inform improvements in service and patient outcomes.

Methods: This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. A systematic literature search was conducted across articles from 2005 to April 2023 across Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and PsychInfo using established keywords relating to gender identity, primary care and experiences. Qualitative data were thematically analysed and quantitative data were compiled using a descriptive narrative.

Results: Following eligibility criteria, 16 articles were included in this review. This review identified both facilitators and limitations and barriers experienced by TNB people related to primary care provider knowledge; the patient-provider relationship, and healthcare settings. Quantitative findings reported up to 54.4% of participants were uncomfortable discussing TNB issues with their physician. Overall findings suggest TNB people face discrimination on a systemic level utilising primary care services, though positive healthcare encounters at a local level were reported. Participants expressed a desire for primary care-led gender-affirming healthcare services, with involvement from local TNB communities.

Conclusion: This review demonstrates TNB people's mixed experiences of primary care alongside their recommendations for service improvement. This is the first systematically reviewed evidence on the topic, emphasising the need for clinicians and policymakers to centre the voices of the TNB community in service design and improvement.

Background: Since 2012, Cancer Patient Pathways for Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer (NSSC-CPP) have been implemented in Scandinavia and UK.

Objectives: This study aimed to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred from 1 January to 30 June 2020 to the NSSC-CPP in the Diagnostic Centre in Farsø (DC-F), Denmark.

Methods: During the study period, we prospectively recorded information on the diagnostic flow, including: pathway trajectory, symptoms and findings leading to referral, diagnostic procedures and diagnoses at the end of DC Farsø work-up and within 6-months for all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø using electronic patient files and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR).

Results: Of the 314 referrals to DC Farsø, 227 had diagnostic work-up in DC Farsø, the remaining were redirected to other CPPs (n = 11), outpatient clinics (n = 45) or redirected to general practice (n = 25). Of total referrals, 25 (8%) received a malignant diagnosis, 20 (6%) a non-malignant but clinically relevant diagnosis with initiation of treatment, 16 (5%) a non-malignant diagnosis but no treatment needed and in 253 (81%) referrals no severe new condition was diagnosed. Two (1%) additional malignancies were diagnosed within a 6-month follow-up period.

Conclusion: By tracking all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø, including those redirected, this is the first study to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred to a diagnostic centre in Denmark. This knowledge is important for further organisation and planning of the NSSC-CPP.

Background: Sarcoidosis is a chronic multisystem inflammatory disease of unknown aetiology, characterised by noncaseating granulomas and a variable clinical presentation. Despite its global distribution, sarcoidosis is relatively rare, with the highest prevalence in northern Europe. This poses challenges for primary care physicians due to its broad spectrum of symptoms, from organ-specific manifestations to general complaints like fatigue and concentration difficulties.

Objectives: This article aims to provide primary care physicians with practical tools for the early recognition and management of sarcoidosis, emphasising their role in monitoring disease progression and providing supportive care.

Methods: Key strategies for diagnosis and management are reviewed, focusing on holistic patient care addressing both somatic and psychosocial aspects of the disease.

Results: Early recognition, careful monitoring of disease progression, and individualised treatment plans are crucial. Pharmacotherapy is not always required and should be carefully balanced. The role of supportive, patient-centered counseling is illustrated with two cases.

Conclusion: Primary care physicians play a critical role in managing sarcoidosis, particularly in early recognition and monitoring. Given the absence of standardised treatment protocols, a flexible, holistic approach that includes psychosocial support is essential. This article provides a practical framework for general practitioners to address the challenges of sarcoidosis management and improve patient outcomes.

Background: Anecdotal reports suggest that missed diagnosis in general practice during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to a drop in life-threatening events (LTEs) detected in hospitals.

Objectives: To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the accuracy of urgency allocation by telephone triage of patients with shortness of breath and/or chest discomfort in out-of-hours primary care (OHS-PC). Accuracy is defined as the correct allocation of high urgency to patients with LTEs and low urgency to those without.

Methods: Retrospective observational study with data from callers contacting OHS-PC for shortness of breath and/or chest discomfort, between 1 March and 1 June 2019 (pre-pandemic) and 1 March to 1 June 2020 (first wave COVID-19 pandemic). Sensitivity and specificity of telephone urgency allocation were compared during both periods with LTEs, including acute coronary syndrome, and pulmonary embolism, as the reference.

Results: 3,064 adults (1,840 COVID-19 pandemic and 1,224 pre-pandemic, p < 0.001) were included in the study. The sensitivity of urgency allocation was similar during and before the COVID-19 pandemic (0.68, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.75 vs. 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75, p = 0.944). Specificity was slightly higher during the COVID-19 pandemic (0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.55 vs. 0.45, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.48, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Despite a surge in calls from adults with shortness of breath and/or chest discomfort during the COVID-19 pandemic, the accuracy of telephone triage for LTEs in OHS-PC remained similar to the pre-pandemic era. Improvement of telephone triage seems necessary in both periods.

Background: Implementing asthma guideline recommendations is challenging and there is variation between countries, and different healthcare professionals (HCPs). The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) has introduced the Asthma Right Care (ARC) programme implemented in 24 low, middle, and high countries, including Greece. It offers a promising approach drawn from social movements for health to improve asthma care by engaging HCPs in implementing guideline-based asthma care.

Objectives: To explore HCPs' perspectives on current provision of asthma care and their willingness to improve implementation of recommended guidelines using ARC programme tools in Greece.

Methods: A mixed methods study conducted from September 2020 to April 2021. A convenience sample of 30 pharmacists, and 10 General Practitioners (GPs), responded to a questionnaire investigating perceptions, and attitudes, towards implementation of asthma guidelines. Then, a qualitative survey followed with semi-structured interviews to evaluate the feedback obtained from HCPs to assess the content, and applicability of the ARC tools. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: A range of practical challenges in implementing guideline-recommended interventions, improving asthma control and management were described by all HCPs, including lack of time and education, high workload, patients' perceptions, and poor communication contributing to poor management and inadequate follow-up of people with asthma. However, most HCPs were willing to use ARC interventions to improve guideline implementation.

Conclusion: HCPs in Greece encounter challenges in implementing asthma guidelines; however, they can overcome these challenges by using ARC interventions and engagement tools to address barriers and implement efficient asthma management strategies.

Background: National Action Plans (NAPs) aim to address antimicrobial resistance (AMR) understanding and awareness but struggle to translate targets into clinically relevant guidance for general practice.

Objective: To identify and map antibiotic use targets in European general practice and explore if and how these targets are linked to NAPs.

Methods: A systematic search was carried out in MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE and SCOPUS, with additional manual searches. The research questions were: What are existing targets for antibiotic use in general practice in the 31 European countries? and How are these targets linked to the NAPs on AMR?. The results are presented narratively.

Results: 77 reports were included, of which 33 focused on national targets and general practice or linking national and local targets. Reports describe local strategies to achieve targets, such as prescriber feedback, benchmarking systems and financial incentives. However, these reports provide aggregated targets for general practice, such as a percentage reduction of antibiotics prescribed. These targets are set in general, for a specific type of antibiotic, for an amount per number of patients, in defined daily doses or items. None of the reports translate national targets into clinically relevant or practical targets for general practitioners.

Conclusion: Most European countries have an NAP with established targets, but the type and implementation of these targets vary between nations. Translating national targets into daily clinical practice is challenging and often lacks the involvement of prescribers. Aligning national and local targets would enhance coherence and more effectively contribute to improvements in antibiotic use.

Background: COVID-19 may initially manifest as flu-like symptoms. As such, general practitioners (GPs) will likely to play an important role in monitoring the pandemic through syndromic surveillance.

Objectives: To present a COVID-19 syndromic surveillance tool in Belgian general practices.

Methods: We performed a nationwide observational prospective study in Belgian general practices. The surveillance tool extracted the daily entries of diagnostic codes for COVID-19 and associated conditions (suspected or confirmed COVID-19, acute respiratory infection and influenza-like illness) from electronic medical records. We calculated the 7-day rolling average for these diagnoses and compared them with data from two other Belgian population-based sources (laboratory-confirmed new COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions for COVID-19), using time series analysis. We also collected data from users and stakeholders about the syndromic surveillance tool and performed a thematic analysis.

Results: 4773 out of 11,935 practising GPs in Belgium participated in the study. The curve of contacts for suspected COVID-19 followed a similar trend compared with the curves of the official data sources: laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions but with a 10-day delay for the latter. Data were quickly available and useful for decision making, but some technical and methodological components can be improved, such as a greater standardisation between EMR software developers.

Conclusion: The syndromic surveillance tool for COVID-19 in primary care provides rapidly available data useful in all phases of the COVID-19 pandemic to support data-driven decision-making. Potential enhancements were identified for a prospective surveillance tool.

Background: Primary Health Care (PHC) was the cornerstone of the pandemic response.

Objectives: We aimed to explore the positive and negative impact of the pandemic, during its final wave, through 'PHC providers' eyes', as well as their recommendations towards restructuring and enhancing PHC services.

Methods: A two-phase qualitative study was conducted, pursuing data triangulation from Focus Groups (FGs) and individual, semi-structured interviews for the purposes of data completeness and confirmation (summer 2022 and spring 2023, respectively). A purposive sample of settings was employed, including in total five PHC units according to location with different population distribution; one in Athens (FGs) and four in Northern Greece (interviews). Inductive content analysis was used.

Results: In total, 24 PHC professionals participated in FGs, whereas 17 were individually interviewed. Our findings reflect a general understanding of the pandemic's positive imprint, namely acceleration of digitalisation, establishment of health protection measures, recognition of PHC's role, raise in public awareness of primary prevention, team-cooperation, increase in providers' self-efficacy, appointment of health professionals and re-organisation of accessibility. The negative impact is summarised in fatigue/burnout in PHC providers, patient safety concerns and changes in patients' behaviour. To increase resilience, participants suggest restructuring PHC, recruiting PHC personnel and enhancing digital infrastructure, maintenance of sanitary protection measures, investment in quality, and empowering patients through health literacy.

Conclusion: Based on the lessons learnt, building further on the pandemic-accelerated digitalisation, emphasising on quality improvement and patient safety, ensuring providers' well-being, and empowering citizens through health literacy could be key in promoting PHC resilience.