Pub Date : 2024-04-17DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02283-x
Karin Eli, Jenny Harlock, Caroline J. Huxley, Celia Bernstein, Claire Mann, Rachel Spencer, Frances Griffiths, Anne-Marie Slowther
The Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) was launched in the UK in 2016. ReSPECT is designed to facilitate meaningful discussions between healthcare professionals, patients, and their relatives about preferences for treatment in future emergencies; however, no study has investigated patients’ and relatives’ experiences of ReSPECT in the community. To explore how patients and relatives in community settings experience the ReSPECT process and engage with the completed form. Patients who had a ReSPECT form were identified through general practice surgeries in three areas in England; either patients or their relatives (where patients lacked capacity) were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, focusing on the participants’ understandings and experiences of the ReSPECT process and form. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Thirteen interviews took place (six with patients, four with relatives, three with patient and relative pairs). Four themes were developed: (1) ReSPECT records a patient’s wishes, but is entangled in wider relationships; (2) healthcare professionals’ framings of ReSPECT influence patients’ and relatives’ experiences; (3) patients and relatives perceive ReSPECT as a do-not-resuscitate or end-of-life form; (4) patients’ and relatives’ relationships with the ReSPECT form as a material object vary widely. Patients valued the opportunity to express their wishes and conceptualised ReSPECT as a process of caring for themselves and for their family members’ emotional wellbeing. Participants who described their ReSPECT experiences positively said healthcare professionals clearly explained the ReSPECT process and form, allocated sufficient time for an open discussion of patients’ preferences, and provided empathetic explanations of treatment recommendations. In cases where participants said healthcare professionals did not provide clear explanations or did not engage them in a conversation, experiences ranged from confusion about the form and how it would be used to lingering feelings of worry, upset, or being burdened with responsibility. When ReSPECT conversations involved an open discussion of patients’ preferences, clear information about the ReSPECT process, and empathetic explanations of treatment recommendations, working with a healthcare professional to co-develop a record of treatment preferences and recommendations could be an empowering experience, providing patients and relatives with peace of mind.
{"title":"Patient and relative experiences of the ReSPECT process in the community: an interview-based study","authors":"Karin Eli, Jenny Harlock, Caroline J. Huxley, Celia Bernstein, Claire Mann, Rachel Spencer, Frances Griffiths, Anne-Marie Slowther","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02283-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02283-x","url":null,"abstract":"The Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) was launched in the UK in 2016. ReSPECT is designed to facilitate meaningful discussions between healthcare professionals, patients, and their relatives about preferences for treatment in future emergencies; however, no study has investigated patients’ and relatives’ experiences of ReSPECT in the community. To explore how patients and relatives in community settings experience the ReSPECT process and engage with the completed form. Patients who had a ReSPECT form were identified through general practice surgeries in three areas in England; either patients or their relatives (where patients lacked capacity) were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, focusing on the participants’ understandings and experiences of the ReSPECT process and form. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Thirteen interviews took place (six with patients, four with relatives, three with patient and relative pairs). Four themes were developed: (1) ReSPECT records a patient’s wishes, but is entangled in wider relationships; (2) healthcare professionals’ framings of ReSPECT influence patients’ and relatives’ experiences; (3) patients and relatives perceive ReSPECT as a do-not-resuscitate or end-of-life form; (4) patients’ and relatives’ relationships with the ReSPECT form as a material object vary widely. Patients valued the opportunity to express their wishes and conceptualised ReSPECT as a process of caring for themselves and for their family members’ emotional wellbeing. Participants who described their ReSPECT experiences positively said healthcare professionals clearly explained the ReSPECT process and form, allocated sufficient time for an open discussion of patients’ preferences, and provided empathetic explanations of treatment recommendations. In cases where participants said healthcare professionals did not provide clear explanations or did not engage them in a conversation, experiences ranged from confusion about the form and how it would be used to lingering feelings of worry, upset, or being burdened with responsibility. When ReSPECT conversations involved an open discussion of patients’ preferences, clear information about the ReSPECT process, and empathetic explanations of treatment recommendations, working with a healthcare professional to co-develop a record of treatment preferences and recommendations could be an empowering experience, providing patients and relatives with peace of mind.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140614838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-17DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02371-y
Kylie S Carville, Niamh Meagher, Yara-Natalie Abo, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis, James Fielding, Andrew Steer, Jodie McVernon, David J Price
Reducing antibiotic use in Australia, and the subsequent impact on antimicrobial resistance, requires multiple, sustained approaches with appropriate resources and support. Additional strategies to reduce antibiotic prescribing include effective vaccines, against pathogens such as Streptococcus pyogenes, the most common bacterial cause of sore throat. As part of efforts towards assessing the benefits of introducing new strategies to reduce antimicrobial prescribing, we aimed to determine the burden of antimicrobial prescribing for sore throat in general practice. General practice activity data from 2013 – 2017 derived from the first 8 practices participating in the ‘Primary Care Audit, Teaching and Research Open Network’ (Patron) program were analysed according to reason for visit (upper respiratory tract infection, URTI, or sore throat) and antibiotic prescription. The main outcome measures were percentage of sore throat or URTI presentations with antibiotic prescription by age. A total of 722,339 visits to general practice were made by 65,449 patients; 5.7% of visits were for URTI with 0.8% meeting the more specific criteria for sore throat. 66.1% of sore throat visits and 36.2% of URTI visits resulted in antibiotic prescription. Penicillin, the recommended antibiotic for sore throat when indicated, was the antibiotic of choice in only 52.9% of sore throat cases prescribed antibiotics. Broader spectrum antibiotics were prescribed more frequently in older age groups. Frequency of antibiotic prescribing for sore throat is high and broad, despite Australian Therapeutic guideline recommendations. Multiple, sustained interventions to reduce prescribing, including availability of effective S. pyogenes vaccines that could reduce the incidence of streptococcal pharyngitis, could obviate the need to prescribe antibiotics and support ongoing efforts to promote antimicrobial stewardship.
{"title":"Burden of antimicrobial prescribing in primary care attributable to sore throat: a retrospective cohort study of patient record data","authors":"Kylie S Carville, Niamh Meagher, Yara-Natalie Abo, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis, James Fielding, Andrew Steer, Jodie McVernon, David J Price","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02371-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02371-y","url":null,"abstract":"Reducing antibiotic use in Australia, and the subsequent impact on antimicrobial resistance, requires multiple, sustained approaches with appropriate resources and support. Additional strategies to reduce antibiotic prescribing include effective vaccines, against pathogens such as Streptococcus pyogenes, the most common bacterial cause of sore throat. As part of efforts towards assessing the benefits of introducing new strategies to reduce antimicrobial prescribing, we aimed to determine the burden of antimicrobial prescribing for sore throat in general practice. General practice activity data from 2013 – 2017 derived from the first 8 practices participating in the ‘Primary Care Audit, Teaching and Research Open Network’ (Patron) program were analysed according to reason for visit (upper respiratory tract infection, URTI, or sore throat) and antibiotic prescription. The main outcome measures were percentage of sore throat or URTI presentations with antibiotic prescription by age. A total of 722,339 visits to general practice were made by 65,449 patients; 5.7% of visits were for URTI with 0.8% meeting the more specific criteria for sore throat. 66.1% of sore throat visits and 36.2% of URTI visits resulted in antibiotic prescription. Penicillin, the recommended antibiotic for sore throat when indicated, was the antibiotic of choice in only 52.9% of sore throat cases prescribed antibiotics. Broader spectrum antibiotics were prescribed more frequently in older age groups. Frequency of antibiotic prescribing for sore throat is high and broad, despite Australian Therapeutic guideline recommendations. Multiple, sustained interventions to reduce prescribing, including availability of effective S. pyogenes vaccines that could reduce the incidence of streptococcal pharyngitis, could obviate the need to prescribe antibiotics and support ongoing efforts to promote antimicrobial stewardship.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140614968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-16DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02353-0
Katharina Schmalstieg-Bahr, Sophia MacDonald, Nadine Pohontsch, Sebastian Debus, Martin Scherer
Vascular surgery patients admitted to the hospital are often multimorbid. In case of questions regarding chronic medical problems different specialties are consulted, which leads to a high number of treating physicians and possibly contradicting recommendations. The General Practitioner´s (GP) view could minimize this problem. However, it is unknown for which medical problems a GP would be consulted and if regular GP-involvement during rounds would be considered helpful by the specialists. The aim of this study was to establish and describe a General Practice rounding service (GP-RS), to evaluate if the GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital and beneficial to the specialists and to explore GP-consult indications. The GP-RS was established as a pilot project. Between June-December 2020, a board-certified GP from the Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) joined the vascular surgery team (UKE) once-weekly on rounds. The project was evaluated using a multi-methods approach: semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with vascular surgery physicians that had either participated in the GP-RS (G1), had not participated (G2), other specialists usually conducting consults on the vascular surgery floor (G3) and with the involved GP (G4). Interviews were analyzed using Kuckartz’ qualitative content analysis. In addition, two sets of quantitative data were descriptively analyzed focusing on the reasons for a GP-consult: one set from the GP-RS and one from an established, conventional “as needed” GP-consult service. 15 interviews were conducted. Physicians perceived the GP-RS as beneficial, especially for surgical patients (G1-3). Optimizing medication, avoiding unnecessary consults and a learning effect for physicians in training (G1-4) were named as other benefits. Critical voices saw an increased workload through the GP-RS (G1, G3) and some consult requests as too specific for a GP (G1-3). Based on data from 367 vascular surgery patients and 80 conventional GP-consults, the most common reasons for a GP-consult were cardiovascular diseases including hypertension and diabetes. A GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital. Studies of GP co-management model with closer follow ups would be needed to objectively improve patient care and reduce the overall number of consults. Not applicable.
{"title":"Asking the generalist – evaluation of a General Practice rounding and consult service","authors":"Katharina Schmalstieg-Bahr, Sophia MacDonald, Nadine Pohontsch, Sebastian Debus, Martin Scherer","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02353-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02353-0","url":null,"abstract":"Vascular surgery patients admitted to the hospital are often multimorbid. In case of questions regarding chronic medical problems different specialties are consulted, which leads to a high number of treating physicians and possibly contradicting recommendations. The General Practitioner´s (GP) view could minimize this problem. However, it is unknown for which medical problems a GP would be consulted and if regular GP-involvement during rounds would be considered helpful by the specialists. The aim of this study was to establish and describe a General Practice rounding service (GP-RS), to evaluate if the GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital and beneficial to the specialists and to explore GP-consult indications. The GP-RS was established as a pilot project. Between June-December 2020, a board-certified GP from the Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) joined the vascular surgery team (UKE) once-weekly on rounds. The project was evaluated using a multi-methods approach: semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with vascular surgery physicians that had either participated in the GP-RS (G1), had not participated (G2), other specialists usually conducting consults on the vascular surgery floor (G3) and with the involved GP (G4). Interviews were analyzed using Kuckartz’ qualitative content analysis. In addition, two sets of quantitative data were descriptively analyzed focusing on the reasons for a GP-consult: one set from the GP-RS and one from an established, conventional “as needed” GP-consult service. 15 interviews were conducted. Physicians perceived the GP-RS as beneficial, especially for surgical patients (G1-3). Optimizing medication, avoiding unnecessary consults and a learning effect for physicians in training (G1-4) were named as other benefits. Critical voices saw an increased workload through the GP-RS (G1, G3) and some consult requests as too specific for a GP (G1-3). Based on data from 367 vascular surgery patients and 80 conventional GP-consults, the most common reasons for a GP-consult were cardiovascular diseases including hypertension and diabetes. A GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital. Studies of GP co-management model with closer follow ups would be needed to objectively improve patient care and reduce the overall number of consults. Not applicable.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140589140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The management of persons with multimorbidity challenges healthcare systems tailored to individual diseases. A person-centred care approach is advocated, in particular for persons with multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to describe the co-creation and piloting of a proactive, person-centred chronic care approach for persons with multimorbidity in general practice, including facilitators and challenges for successful implementation. A participatory action research (PAR) approach was applied in 13 general practices employing four subsequent co-creation cycles between 2019 and 2021. The target population included adults with ≥3 chronic conditions. Participating actors were general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses (PNs), patients (target group), the affiliated care cooperation, representatives of a health insurer and researchers. Each cycle consisted of a try-out period in practice and a reflective evaluation through focus groups with healthcare providers, interviews with patients and analyses of routine care data. In each cycle, facilitators, challenges and follow-up actions for the next cycle were identified. Work satisfaction among GPs and PNs was measured pre and at the end of the final co-creation cycle. Identified essential steps in the person-centred chronic care approach include (1) appropriate patient selection for (2) an extended person-centred consultation, and (3) personalised goalsetting and follow-up. Key facilitators included improved therapeutic relationships, enhanced work satisfaction for care providers, and patient appreciation of extended time with their GP. Deliberate task division and collaboration between GPs and PNs based on patient, local setting, and care personnel is required. Challenges and facilitators for implementation encompassed a prioritisation tool to support GPs appropriately who to invite first for extended consultations, appropriate remuneration and time to conduct extended consultations, training in delivering person-centred chronic care available for all general practice care providers and an electronic medical record system accommodating comprehensive information registration. A person-centred chronic care approach targeting patients with multimorbidity in general practice was developed and piloted in co-creation with stakeholders. More consultation time facilitated better understanding of persons’ situations, their functioning, priorities and dilemma’s, and positively impacted work satisfaction of care providers. Challenges need to be tackled before widespread implementation. Future evaluation on the quadruple aims is recommended.
{"title":"Development of a person-centred care approach for persons with chronic multimorbidity in general practice by means of participatory action research","authors":"Mieke JL Bogerd, Pauline Slottje, Jettie Bont, Hein PJ Van Hout","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02364-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02364-x","url":null,"abstract":"The management of persons with multimorbidity challenges healthcare systems tailored to individual diseases. A person-centred care approach is advocated, in particular for persons with multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to describe the co-creation and piloting of a proactive, person-centred chronic care approach for persons with multimorbidity in general practice, including facilitators and challenges for successful implementation. A participatory action research (PAR) approach was applied in 13 general practices employing four subsequent co-creation cycles between 2019 and 2021. The target population included adults with ≥3 chronic conditions. Participating actors were general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses (PNs), patients (target group), the affiliated care cooperation, representatives of a health insurer and researchers. Each cycle consisted of a try-out period in practice and a reflective evaluation through focus groups with healthcare providers, interviews with patients and analyses of routine care data. In each cycle, facilitators, challenges and follow-up actions for the next cycle were identified. Work satisfaction among GPs and PNs was measured pre and at the end of the final co-creation cycle. Identified essential steps in the person-centred chronic care approach include (1) appropriate patient selection for (2) an extended person-centred consultation, and (3) personalised goalsetting and follow-up. Key facilitators included improved therapeutic relationships, enhanced work satisfaction for care providers, and patient appreciation of extended time with their GP. Deliberate task division and collaboration between GPs and PNs based on patient, local setting, and care personnel is required. Challenges and facilitators for implementation encompassed a prioritisation tool to support GPs appropriately who to invite first for extended consultations, appropriate remuneration and time to conduct extended consultations, training in delivering person-centred chronic care available for all general practice care providers and an electronic medical record system accommodating comprehensive information registration. A person-centred chronic care approach targeting patients with multimorbidity in general practice was developed and piloted in co-creation with stakeholders. More consultation time facilitated better understanding of persons’ situations, their functioning, priorities and dilemma’s, and positively impacted work satisfaction of care providers. Challenges need to be tackled before widespread implementation. Future evaluation on the quadruple aims is recommended.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140589221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-15DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02345-0
Callum J. Leese, Robert H. Mann, Hussain Al-Zubaidi, Emma J. Cockcroft
Regular physical activity (PA) results in extensive physical, psychological, and social benefits. Despite primary care being a key point of influence for PA behaviours in the UK, research indicates poor application of PA interventions in this context. To address this, the Royal College of General Practitioners’ (RCGP) developed and implemented the Active Practice Charter (APC). The aim of the study was to evaluate the perceived impact and acceptability of the APC initiative from the perspective of primary healthcare professionals (PHPs). An online exploratory cross-sectional survey was designed to assess the perceived impact, experiences, and challenges of the APC initiative, from the perspective of PHPs. The survey was distributed by the RCGP via email to 184 registered APC practices across the UK. Responses were reviewed from staff (n = 33) from 21 APC practices. Initiatives used by APC practices included: educational programmes, partnerships with PA providers, referral systems, and infrastructure investment. Perceived benefits included: increased awareness about PA, staff cohesion, and improved well-being. However, staff felt the APC had limited effect due to implementation barriers, including: a lack of engagement, time, resources, and funding. This is the first evaluation of any nationwide UK-based initiative engaging GP practices in promoting PA. Acknowledging the limitations in response rate, although support exists for the RCGP APC, the evaluation highlights challenges to its implementation. Nonetheless, the wide reach of the RCGP, combined with the cited staff and patient benefits, demonstrates the significant potential of the APC initiative. Given the need to address physical inactivity nationally, further development the APC offers a possible solution, with further research required to overcome the challenges to implementation.
{"title":"A movement for movement: an exploratory study of primary healthcare professionals’ perspectives on implementing the Royal College of General Practitioners’ active practice charter initiative","authors":"Callum J. Leese, Robert H. Mann, Hussain Al-Zubaidi, Emma J. Cockcroft","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02345-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02345-0","url":null,"abstract":"Regular physical activity (PA) results in extensive physical, psychological, and social benefits. Despite primary care being a key point of influence for PA behaviours in the UK, research indicates poor application of PA interventions in this context. To address this, the Royal College of General Practitioners’ (RCGP) developed and implemented the Active Practice Charter (APC). The aim of the study was to evaluate the perceived impact and acceptability of the APC initiative from the perspective of primary healthcare professionals (PHPs). An online exploratory cross-sectional survey was designed to assess the perceived impact, experiences, and challenges of the APC initiative, from the perspective of PHPs. The survey was distributed by the RCGP via email to 184 registered APC practices across the UK. Responses were reviewed from staff (n = 33) from 21 APC practices. Initiatives used by APC practices included: educational programmes, partnerships with PA providers, referral systems, and infrastructure investment. Perceived benefits included: increased awareness about PA, staff cohesion, and improved well-being. However, staff felt the APC had limited effect due to implementation barriers, including: a lack of engagement, time, resources, and funding. This is the first evaluation of any nationwide UK-based initiative engaging GP practices in promoting PA. Acknowledging the limitations in response rate, although support exists for the RCGP APC, the evaluation highlights challenges to its implementation. Nonetheless, the wide reach of the RCGP, combined with the cited staff and patient benefits, demonstrates the significant potential of the APC initiative. Given the need to address physical inactivity nationally, further development the APC offers a possible solution, with further research required to overcome the challenges to implementation.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-11DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02358-9
Jeremy Wei Song Choo, Aminath Shiwaza Moosa, Jeremy Wei Mei Koh, Chirk Jenn Ng, Ngiap Chuan Tan
Despite the potential advantages of Internet-based diabetes self-management education, its adoption was not widespread among Singapore’s public primary care clinics (polyclinics). An interactive online tool was thus developed to help educate patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and was now ready for user testing before implementation. To explore the perceived utility and usability of the educational tool in patients with suboptimally-controlled T2DM in a Singapore primary care setting. In-depth interviews were used to gather qualitative data from multi-ethnic Asian adults who had suboptimally-controlled T2DM. A total of 17 IDIs were conducted between April 2022 to March 2023, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify emergent themes via thematic analysis. Regarding utility, users found the educational tool useful because it provided them with information that was comprehensive, accessible, reliable, and manageable. Regarding usability, the majority of users reported that the educational tool was easy to use, and suggested ways to improve navigational cues, visual clarity, readability and user engagement. Participants generally found the educational tool useful and easy to use. A revised educational tool will be developed based on their feedback and implemented in clinical practice.
{"title":"Empowering patients in primary care: a qualitative exploration of the usability and utility of an online diabetes self-management tool","authors":"Jeremy Wei Song Choo, Aminath Shiwaza Moosa, Jeremy Wei Mei Koh, Chirk Jenn Ng, Ngiap Chuan Tan","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02358-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02358-9","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the potential advantages of Internet-based diabetes self-management education, its adoption was not widespread among Singapore’s public primary care clinics (polyclinics). An interactive online tool was thus developed to help educate patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and was now ready for user testing before implementation. To explore the perceived utility and usability of the educational tool in patients with suboptimally-controlled T2DM in a Singapore primary care setting. In-depth interviews were used to gather qualitative data from multi-ethnic Asian adults who had suboptimally-controlled T2DM. A total of 17 IDIs were conducted between April 2022 to March 2023, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify emergent themes via thematic analysis. Regarding utility, users found the educational tool useful because it provided them with information that was comprehensive, accessible, reliable, and manageable. Regarding usability, the majority of users reported that the educational tool was easy to use, and suggested ways to improve navigational cues, visual clarity, readability and user engagement. Participants generally found the educational tool useful and easy to use. A revised educational tool will be developed based on their feedback and implemented in clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-09DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02341-4
Joanna Cholewa, Cecile Ponsar, Ségolène de Rouffignac, Benoit Pétré, Esther Van Poel, Sara Willems, Michel De Jonghe
The mental health and well-being of GPs is a critical issue as they play a vital role in providing healthcare services to individuals and communities. Research has shown that GPs often face high levels of stress, burnout, and mental health problems due to their demanding work environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs faced additional challenges which further impacted their mental health and well-being. This study aims to investigate the impact of systemic work-related stressors on the level of well-being of GPs in Belgium during the pandemic, with a particular emphasis on identifying regional variations between Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital. Data were collected with a self-reported online questionnaire from 479 GPs Belgian practices between December 2020 and August 2021 as part of the international PRICOV-19 study that explored the organization of general practices during COVID-19 in 38 countries to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Well-being was evaluated by the Mayo Clinic's expanded 9-item well-being index. The findings of this study reveal notable regional discrepancies in the degree of well-being experienced by Belgian GPs, with the Walloon region displaying the lowest level of well-being (37%) in a population highly susceptible to professional distress (57%). Among the key stressors contributing to such distress, financial difficulties among patients (p < 0.011), the fee-for-service payment system (p = 0.013), a lack of work-related purpose (p = 0.047), and inadequate work-life balance (p < 0.001) were identified as significant factors. When examining the influence of regional disparities, it was found that the sole significant interaction between work-related stressors and region regarding the probability of experiencing distress was related to the possibility of workload sharing among practice personnel. The findings from this study underscore the imperative for more comprehensive research aimed at scrutinizing the differences in well-being across the three regions in Belgium and identifying the systemic factors that influence the practice environment, as opposed to exclusively concentrating on enhancing individual resilience.
{"title":"General practitioners’ well-being in Belgium: results from the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study","authors":"Joanna Cholewa, Cecile Ponsar, Ségolène de Rouffignac, Benoit Pétré, Esther Van Poel, Sara Willems, Michel De Jonghe","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02341-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02341-4","url":null,"abstract":"The mental health and well-being of GPs is a critical issue as they play a vital role in providing healthcare services to individuals and communities. Research has shown that GPs often face high levels of stress, burnout, and mental health problems due to their demanding work environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs faced additional challenges which further impacted their mental health and well-being. This study aims to investigate the impact of systemic work-related stressors on the level of well-being of GPs in Belgium during the pandemic, with a particular emphasis on identifying regional variations between Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital. Data were collected with a self-reported online questionnaire from 479 GPs Belgian practices between December 2020 and August 2021 as part of the international PRICOV-19 study that explored the organization of general practices during COVID-19 in 38 countries to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Well-being was evaluated by the Mayo Clinic's expanded 9-item well-being index. The findings of this study reveal notable regional discrepancies in the degree of well-being experienced by Belgian GPs, with the Walloon region displaying the lowest level of well-being (37%) in a population highly susceptible to professional distress (57%). Among the key stressors contributing to such distress, financial difficulties among patients (p < 0.011), the fee-for-service payment system (p = 0.013), a lack of work-related purpose (p = 0.047), and inadequate work-life balance (p < 0.001) were identified as significant factors. When examining the influence of regional disparities, it was found that the sole significant interaction between work-related stressors and region regarding the probability of experiencing distress was related to the possibility of workload sharing among practice personnel. The findings from this study underscore the imperative for more comprehensive research aimed at scrutinizing the differences in well-being across the three regions in Belgium and identifying the systemic factors that influence the practice environment, as opposed to exclusively concentrating on enhancing individual resilience.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Children Snoring is a common childhood disorder that affects the growth and development of children and is detrimental to their health. Increasing awareness of Children Snoring among parents is important. To develop the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice of Parents towards Children Snoring Scale and test the reliability and validity of the scale. The development of the tool was divided into two phases involving 1257 parents from China. In the first phase, an initial project bank was created through a literature review. This was followed by a Delphi expert consultation, group discussion and pre-survey. The second stage screened the items and conducted an exploratory factor analysis, then conducted a confirmatory factor analysis and tested for reliability and validity. Support was found for the 25-item Knowledge-Attitude-Practice toward Children Snoring scale. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses provide support for four subscales: (parental basic cognition toward Children Snoring; parents’ perception of complications of Children Snoring; parents’ attitude towards Children Snoring; parents’ concern and prevention of Children Snoring). Internal consistency for the total scale was high (Cronbach’s α = 0.93). The intraclass correlation coefficient of test-retest reliability was 0.92 (95%CI: 0.85 to 0.95), which provided support for the stability of the scale. The Knowledge-Attitude-Practice of Parents towards Children Snoring scale shows promise as a measure that may be used by medical workers and community children’s health managers.
{"title":"Development and validation of a scale for the assessment of the knowledge-attitude-practice of parents towards children snoring","authors":"Siyan Guo, Xiaoyue Hu, Xiaokai Wang, Hongyan Tie, Qiujun Zhang, Caixia Li, Luying Qin, Hongxia Su","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02360-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02360-1","url":null,"abstract":"Children Snoring is a common childhood disorder that affects the growth and development of children and is detrimental to their health. Increasing awareness of Children Snoring among parents is important. To develop the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice of Parents towards Children Snoring Scale and test the reliability and validity of the scale. The development of the tool was divided into two phases involving 1257 parents from China. In the first phase, an initial project bank was created through a literature review. This was followed by a Delphi expert consultation, group discussion and pre-survey. The second stage screened the items and conducted an exploratory factor analysis, then conducted a confirmatory factor analysis and tested for reliability and validity. Support was found for the 25-item Knowledge-Attitude-Practice toward Children Snoring scale. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses provide support for four subscales: (parental basic cognition toward Children Snoring; parents’ perception of complications of Children Snoring; parents’ attitude towards Children Snoring; parents’ concern and prevention of Children Snoring). Internal consistency for the total scale was high (Cronbach’s α = 0.93). The intraclass correlation coefficient of test-retest reliability was 0.92 (95%CI: 0.85 to 0.95), which provided support for the stability of the scale. The Knowledge-Attitude-Practice of Parents towards Children Snoring scale shows promise as a measure that may be used by medical workers and community children’s health managers.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-06DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02321-8
Hannah Greenwood, Alexandra R. Davidson, Rae Thomas, Loai Albarqouni
Non-drug interventions are recommended for chronic condition prevention and management yet are underused in clinical practice. Understanding barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions may help implement non-drug interventions in primary care. We aimed to conduct an overview of reviews to identify and summarise common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions for common chronic conditions in primary care. We included qualitative and quantitative reviews that used systematic process or methods to examine barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions for chronic condition prevention and management in primary care settings. We searched 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL) from inception to September 2022. Two authors independently screened reviews. One author extracted and deductively coded data to Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) (and where relevant, Theoretical Domains Framework [TDF]). A second author validated 10% of extracted data and coding. Data was synthesised thematically using CFIR and TDF. One author assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using a modified AMSTAR 2 tool, with 10% validated by a second author. We assessed overlap between primary studies in included reviews. From 5324 records, we included 25 reviews, with data predominately from patients. Overall, 130 subthemes (71 barrier and 59 enabler) were identified across 4 CFIR domains (Innovation, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Individuals), and all TDF domains. Common barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for CFIR constructs of Innovation Adaptability, Innovation Cost, Innovation Relative Advantage, Local Attitudes, External Pressure, Local Conditions, Relational Connections, Available Resources, and Access to Knowledge and Information. For TDF domains, important barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for Knowledge, Skills, Environmental Context and Resources, Beliefs about Consequences, Reinforcement, and Emotion. We synthesised reviews to provide new insight into common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions to prevent and manage chronic conditions in primary care. The factors identified can inform the development of generalisable implementation interventions to enhance uptake of multiple non-drug interventions simultaneously. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022357583).
{"title":"Common barriers and enablers to the use of non-drug interventions for managing common chronic conditions in primary care: an overview of reviews","authors":"Hannah Greenwood, Alexandra R. Davidson, Rae Thomas, Loai Albarqouni","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02321-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02321-8","url":null,"abstract":"Non-drug interventions are recommended for chronic condition prevention and management yet are underused in clinical practice. Understanding barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions may help implement non-drug interventions in primary care. We aimed to conduct an overview of reviews to identify and summarise common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions for common chronic conditions in primary care. We included qualitative and quantitative reviews that used systematic process or methods to examine barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions for chronic condition prevention and management in primary care settings. We searched 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL) from inception to September 2022. Two authors independently screened reviews. One author extracted and deductively coded data to Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) (and where relevant, Theoretical Domains Framework [TDF]). A second author validated 10% of extracted data and coding. Data was synthesised thematically using CFIR and TDF. One author assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using a modified AMSTAR 2 tool, with 10% validated by a second author. We assessed overlap between primary studies in included reviews. From 5324 records, we included 25 reviews, with data predominately from patients. Overall, 130 subthemes (71 barrier and 59 enabler) were identified across 4 CFIR domains (Innovation, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Individuals), and all TDF domains. Common barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for CFIR constructs of Innovation Adaptability, Innovation Cost, Innovation Relative Advantage, Local Attitudes, External Pressure, Local Conditions, Relational Connections, Available Resources, and Access to Knowledge and Information. For TDF domains, important barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for Knowledge, Skills, Environmental Context and Resources, Beliefs about Consequences, Reinforcement, and Emotion. We synthesised reviews to provide new insight into common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions to prevent and manage chronic conditions in primary care. The factors identified can inform the development of generalisable implementation interventions to enhance uptake of multiple non-drug interventions simultaneously. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022357583).","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"87 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-06DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02356-x
Maria Mathews, Lindsay Hedden, Julia Lukewich, Emily Gard Marshall, Leslie Meredith, Lauren Moritz, Dana Ryan, Sarah Spencer, Judith B. Brown, Paul S. Gill, Eric K. W. Wong
Over the past two decades, Canadian provinces and territories have introduced a series of primary care reforms in an attempt to improve access to and quality of primary care services, resulting in diverse organizational structures and practice models. We examine the impact of these reforms on family physicians’ (FPs) ability to adapt their roles during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the provision of routine primary care. As part of a larger case study, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs in four Canadian regions: British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Ontario. During the interviews, participants were asked about their personal and practice characteristics, the pandemic-related roles they performed over different stages of the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers they experienced in performing these roles, and potential roles FPs could have filled. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was applied to identify recurring themes in the data. Sixty-eight FPs completed an interview across the four regions. Participants described five areas of primary care reform that impacted their ability to operate and provide care during the pandemic: funding models, electronic medical records (EMRs), integration with regional entities, interdisciplinary teams, and practice size. FPs in alternate funding models experienced fewer financial constraints than those in fee-for-service practices. EMR access enhanced FPs’ ability to deliver virtual care, integration with regional entities improved access to personal protective equipment and technological support, and team-based models facilitated the implementation of infection prevention and control protocols. Lastly, larger group practices had capacity to ensure adequate staffing and cover additional costs, allowing FPs more time to devote to patient care. Recent primary care system reforms implemented in Canada enhanced FPs’ ability to adapt to the uncertain and evolving environment of providing primary care during the pandemic. Our study highlights the importance of ongoing primary care reforms to enhance pandemic preparedness and advocates for further expansion of these reforms.
{"title":"Adapting care provision in family practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study exploring the impact of primary care reforms in four Canadian regions","authors":"Maria Mathews, Lindsay Hedden, Julia Lukewich, Emily Gard Marshall, Leslie Meredith, Lauren Moritz, Dana Ryan, Sarah Spencer, Judith B. Brown, Paul S. Gill, Eric K. W. Wong","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02356-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02356-x","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades, Canadian provinces and territories have introduced a series of primary care reforms in an attempt to improve access to and quality of primary care services, resulting in diverse organizational structures and practice models. We examine the impact of these reforms on family physicians’ (FPs) ability to adapt their roles during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the provision of routine primary care. As part of a larger case study, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs in four Canadian regions: British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Ontario. During the interviews, participants were asked about their personal and practice characteristics, the pandemic-related roles they performed over different stages of the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers they experienced in performing these roles, and potential roles FPs could have filled. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was applied to identify recurring themes in the data. Sixty-eight FPs completed an interview across the four regions. Participants described five areas of primary care reform that impacted their ability to operate and provide care during the pandemic: funding models, electronic medical records (EMRs), integration with regional entities, interdisciplinary teams, and practice size. FPs in alternate funding models experienced fewer financial constraints than those in fee-for-service practices. EMR access enhanced FPs’ ability to deliver virtual care, integration with regional entities improved access to personal protective equipment and technological support, and team-based models facilitated the implementation of infection prevention and control protocols. Lastly, larger group practices had capacity to ensure adequate staffing and cover additional costs, allowing FPs more time to devote to patient care. Recent primary care system reforms implemented in Canada enhanced FPs’ ability to adapt to the uncertain and evolving environment of providing primary care during the pandemic. Our study highlights the importance of ongoing primary care reforms to enhance pandemic preparedness and advocates for further expansion of these reforms.","PeriodicalId":9019,"journal":{"name":"BMC Family Practice","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：