英国肌肉骨骼疾病患者在全科诊所预约首次接触物理治疗师的经历:定性研究。

IF 1.5 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY Musculoskeletal Care Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1002/msc.1908
Kirsten Lamb, Christine Comer, Nicola Walsh, Julia Smith, Krystal Tang, Gretl McHugh
{"title":"英国肌肉骨骼疾病患者在全科诊所预约首次接触物理治疗师的经历:定性研究。","authors":"Kirsten Lamb, Christine Comer, Nicola Walsh, Julia Smith, Krystal Tang, Gretl McHugh","doi":"10.1002/msc.1908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>First Contact Physiotherapy Practitioners (FCPPs) provide expert care for patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in General Practice. Access to FCPPs can facilitate timely care and efficient use of health services. However, there is little evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP appointments.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the experiences of patients with MSK conditions who have accessed an FCPP appointment in a General Practice setting in the UK.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Exploratory qualitative design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with MSK conditions who had experience of accessing FCPP appointments were recruited via social media. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded via MS Teams. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 13 patients interviewed, there were 10 females and three males, with an age range between 20 and 80 years. The main themes identified were: (1) Awareness of FCPP, (2) Access routes, (3) Facilitators to access, (4) Barriers to access, (5) Likelihood of re-accessing FCPP. Awareness of FCPP was generally low amongst participants. There were a variety of routes to access FCPP appointments; some were felt to be sub-optimal by participants. Facilitators included quick/easy access to FCPP. Barriers included difficulty contacting General Practitioner (GP) surgeries and public perception of needing to see a GP initially. The likelihood of re-consultation with a FCPP was low when participants had disappointing care experiences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides new evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP. It explores positive and negative aspects of access from patients' perspectives. It also highlights areas for improvement in terms of GP staff/patient awareness and understanding of FCPP.</p>","PeriodicalId":46945,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Care","volume":"22 2","pages":"e1908"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The experiences of patients with musculoskeletal conditions accessing first contact physiotherapy practitioner appointments in general practice in the UK: A qualitative study.\",\"authors\":\"Kirsten Lamb, Christine Comer, Nicola Walsh, Julia Smith, Krystal Tang, Gretl McHugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/msc.1908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>First Contact Physiotherapy Practitioners (FCPPs) provide expert care for patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in General Practice. Access to FCPPs can facilitate timely care and efficient use of health services. However, there is little evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP appointments.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the experiences of patients with MSK conditions who have accessed an FCPP appointment in a General Practice setting in the UK.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Exploratory qualitative design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with MSK conditions who had experience of accessing FCPP appointments were recruited via social media. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded via MS Teams. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 13 patients interviewed, there were 10 females and three males, with an age range between 20 and 80 years. The main themes identified were: (1) Awareness of FCPP, (2) Access routes, (3) Facilitators to access, (4) Barriers to access, (5) Likelihood of re-accessing FCPP. Awareness of FCPP was generally low amongst participants. There were a variety of routes to access FCPP appointments; some were felt to be sub-optimal by participants. Facilitators included quick/easy access to FCPP. Barriers included difficulty contacting General Practitioner (GP) surgeries and public perception of needing to see a GP initially. The likelihood of re-consultation with a FCPP was low when participants had disappointing care experiences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides new evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP. It explores positive and negative aspects of access from patients' perspectives. It also highlights areas for improvement in terms of GP staff/patient awareness and understanding of FCPP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"volume\":\"22 2\",\"pages\":\"e1908\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1908\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1908","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:首诊物理治疗师(FCPPs)在全科诊所为肌肉骨骼(MSK)疾病患者提供专业护理。第一时间联系物理治疗师可促进及时护理和有效利用医疗服务。然而,有关患者预约 FCPP 的经历的证据却很少:目的:探讨在英国全科诊所预约 FCPP 的 MSK 患者的经历:设计:探索性定性设计:通过社交媒体招募曾接受过 FCPP 预约的 MSK 患者。通过 MS Teams 进行半结构化访谈并进行记录。采用主题分析法对数据进行分析:在接受访谈的 13 名患者中,有 10 名女性和 3 名男性,年龄在 20 岁至 80 岁之间。确定的主要主题有(1) 对 FCPP 的认识,(2) 获取途径,(3) 获取的便利因素,(4) 获取的障碍,(5) 再次获取 FCPP 的可能性。参与者对 FCPP 的认知度普遍较低。获得 FCPP 预约的途径多种多样,其中一些途径被参与者认为是次优的。促进因素包括快速/方便地获得 FCPP。障碍包括难以联系全科医生 (GP) 诊所,以及公众认为需要先看全科医生。当参与者的就医经历令人失望时,再次咨询 FCPP 的可能性很低:本研究提供了有关患者就诊 FCPP 经验的新证据。它从患者的角度探讨了就医的积极和消极方面。它还强调了在全科医生/患者对 FCPP 的认识和理解方面需要改进的地方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The experiences of patients with musculoskeletal conditions accessing first contact physiotherapy practitioner appointments in general practice in the UK: A qualitative study.

Background: First Contact Physiotherapy Practitioners (FCPPs) provide expert care for patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in General Practice. Access to FCPPs can facilitate timely care and efficient use of health services. However, there is little evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP appointments.

Objective: To explore the experiences of patients with MSK conditions who have accessed an FCPP appointment in a General Practice setting in the UK.

Design: Exploratory qualitative design.

Methods: Patients with MSK conditions who had experience of accessing FCPP appointments were recruited via social media. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded via MS Teams. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: Of 13 patients interviewed, there were 10 females and three males, with an age range between 20 and 80 years. The main themes identified were: (1) Awareness of FCPP, (2) Access routes, (3) Facilitators to access, (4) Barriers to access, (5) Likelihood of re-accessing FCPP. Awareness of FCPP was generally low amongst participants. There were a variety of routes to access FCPP appointments; some were felt to be sub-optimal by participants. Facilitators included quick/easy access to FCPP. Barriers included difficulty contacting General Practitioner (GP) surgeries and public perception of needing to see a GP initially. The likelihood of re-consultation with a FCPP was low when participants had disappointing care experiences.

Conclusion: This study provides new evidence about patient experiences of accessing FCPP. It explores positive and negative aspects of access from patients' perspectives. It also highlights areas for improvement in terms of GP staff/patient awareness and understanding of FCPP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Musculoskeletal Care
Musculoskeletal Care RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Care is a peer-reviewed journal for all health professionals committed to the clinical delivery of high quality care for people with musculoskeletal conditions and providing knowledge to support decision making by professionals, patients and policy makers. This journal publishes papers on original research, applied research, review articles and clinical guidelines. Regular topics include patient education, psychological and social impact, patient experiences of health care, clinical up dates and the effectiveness of therapy.
期刊最新文献
Improving Musculoskeletal Health by Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Approaches Into Research Practices. Patients' Experiences, Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Physiotherapy Follow-Up After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Phenomenological Qualitative Study Protocol. Physical Activity, Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing, Body Awareness, Depression and Disease Activity in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis and Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross-Sectional Explorative Study. Physiotherapists' Treatment Strategies and Delineation of Areas of Responsibility for People With Musculoskeletal Conditions and Comorbidities in Private Physiotherapy Practice: A Qualitative Study. The Effect of Telerehabilitation-Based Self-Management Programme on Individuals With Scleroderma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1