现代混合全科医学在质量方面面临哪些挑战?一项多站点纵向研究。

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2024.0184
Rebecca Payne, Francesca Dakin, Ellen MacIver, Nadia Swann, Tabitha Pring, Aileen Clarke, Asli Kalin, Lucy Moore, Emma Ladds, Joseph Wherton, Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Laiba Husain, Nina Hemmings, Sietse Wieringa, Trisha Greenhalgh
{"title":"现代混合全科医学在质量方面面临哪些挑战?一项多站点纵向研究。","authors":"Rebecca Payne, Francesca Dakin, Ellen MacIver, Nadia Swann, Tabitha Pring, Aileen Clarke, Asli Kalin, Lucy Moore, Emma Ladds, Joseph Wherton, Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Laiba Husain, Nina Hemmings, Sietse Wieringa, Trisha Greenhalgh","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Since 2022, general practice has shifted from responding to the acute challenges of COVID-19 to restoring full services using a hybrid of remote, digital, and in-person care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine how quality domains are addressed in contemporary UK general practice.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Multi-site, mostly qualitative longitudinal case study, placed in UK national policy context.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data were collected from longitudinal ethnographic case studies of 12 general practices (2021-2023), multi-stakeholder workshops, stakeholder interviews, patient surveys, official reports, and publicly accessible patient experience data. Data were coded thematically and analysed using multiple theories of quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quality efforts in UK general practice occur in the context of cumulative impacts of financial austerity, loss of resilience, increasingly complex patterns of illness and need, a diverse and fragmented workforce, material and digital infrastructure that is unfit for purpose, and physically distant and asynchronous ways of working. Providing the human elements of traditional general practice (such as relationship-based care, compassion, and support) is difficult and sometimes even impossible. Systems designed to increase efficiency have introduced new forms of inefficiency and have compromised other quality domains such as accessibility, patient-centredness, and equity. Long-term condition management varies in quality. Measures to mitigate digital exclusion (such as digital navigators) are welcome but do not compensate for extremes of structural disadvantage. Many staff are stressed and demoralised.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Contemporary hybrid general practice features changes (digitalisation, physical distancing, extension of roles, and protocolisation) that have had the unintended effect of dehumanising, compromising, and fragmenting care. Policymakers and practices should urgently address the risks to patients and the traditional core values of general practice should be urgently addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca Payne, Francesca Dakin, Ellen MacIver, Nadia Swann, Tabitha Pring, Aileen Clarke, Asli Kalin, Lucy Moore, Emma Ladds, Joseph Wherton, Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Laiba Husain, Nina Hemmings, Sietse Wieringa, Trisha Greenhalgh\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Since 2022, general practice has shifted from responding to the acute challenges of COVID-19 to restoring full services using a hybrid of remote, digital, and in-person care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine how quality domains are addressed in contemporary UK general practice.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Multi-site, mostly qualitative longitudinal case study, placed in UK national policy context.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data were collected from longitudinal ethnographic case studies of 12 general practices (2021-2023), multi-stakeholder workshops, stakeholder interviews, patient surveys, official reports, and publicly accessible patient experience data. Data were coded thematically and analysed using multiple theories of quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quality efforts in UK general practice occur in the context of cumulative impacts of financial austerity, loss of resilience, increasingly complex patterns of illness and need, a diverse and fragmented workforce, material and digital infrastructure that is unfit for purpose, and physically distant and asynchronous ways of working. Providing the human elements of traditional general practice (such as relationship-based care, compassion, and support) is difficult and sometimes even impossible. Systems designed to increase efficiency have introduced new forms of inefficiency and have compromised other quality domains such as accessibility, patient-centredness, and equity. Long-term condition management varies in quality. Measures to mitigate digital exclusion (such as digital navigators) are welcome but do not compensate for extremes of structural disadvantage. Many staff are stressed and demoralised.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Contemporary hybrid general practice features changes (digitalisation, physical distancing, extension of roles, and protocolisation) that have had the unintended effect of dehumanising, compromising, and fragmenting care. Policymakers and practices should urgently address the risks to patients and the traditional core values of general practice should be urgently addressed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0184\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0184","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 自 2022 年以来,全科医学已从应对 COVID-19 的急性挑战转变为恢复全面服务,使用远程和数字模式以及传统的亲自护理。目的 研究当代英国全科医疗如何解决质量领域的问题。设计与环境 多站点、主要是定性的纵向案例研究,置于国家政策背景下。方法 通过对 12 家全科医疗机构的纵向人种学案例研究(2021-2023 年)、多方利益相关者研讨会、利益相关者访谈、患者调查、官方报告以及可公开获取的患者体验数据收集数据。采用医学研究所的领域、Starfield 的初级保健核心特征以及社会学和社会技术理论对数据进行了主题编码和分析。结果 英国在全科医疗质量方面所做的努力是在财政紧缩、恢复能力丧失、疾病和需求模式日趋复杂、员工队伍多样化且分散、基础设施不适用以及工作方式分散等因素的累积影响下进行的。提供传统全科服务中的人性化元素是困难的,有时甚至是不可能的。为提高效率而设计的分诊系统引入了新的低效率形式,并损害了其他质量领域。长期病症管理的质量参差不齐;尽管带来了一些便利,但一些实践依赖于患者远程、不同步的数据输入,以及资质不足的工作人员提供的零散护理。减少数字排斥的措施无法弥补极端的结构性劣势。许多员工压力过大,士气低落。结论 当代混合式全科实践的特点是,非人化、损害和分散护理的意外效果。患者和全科医学核心价值所面临的风险亟待解决。
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
Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study.

Background: Since 2022, general practice has shifted from responding to the acute challenges of COVID-19 to restoring full services using a hybrid of remote, digital, and in-person care.

Aim: To examine how quality domains are addressed in contemporary UK general practice.

Design and setting: Multi-site, mostly qualitative longitudinal case study, placed in UK national policy context.

Method: Data were collected from longitudinal ethnographic case studies of 12 general practices (2021-2023), multi-stakeholder workshops, stakeholder interviews, patient surveys, official reports, and publicly accessible patient experience data. Data were coded thematically and analysed using multiple theories of quality.

Results: Quality efforts in UK general practice occur in the context of cumulative impacts of financial austerity, loss of resilience, increasingly complex patterns of illness and need, a diverse and fragmented workforce, material and digital infrastructure that is unfit for purpose, and physically distant and asynchronous ways of working. Providing the human elements of traditional general practice (such as relationship-based care, compassion, and support) is difficult and sometimes even impossible. Systems designed to increase efficiency have introduced new forms of inefficiency and have compromised other quality domains such as accessibility, patient-centredness, and equity. Long-term condition management varies in quality. Measures to mitigate digital exclusion (such as digital navigators) are welcome but do not compensate for extremes of structural disadvantage. Many staff are stressed and demoralised.

Conclusion: Contemporary hybrid general practice features changes (digitalisation, physical distancing, extension of roles, and protocolisation) that have had the unintended effect of dehumanising, compromising, and fragmenting care. Policymakers and practices should urgently address the risks to patients and the traditional core values of general practice should be urgently addressed.

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
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Future Health Today: A pragmatic cluster randomised trial of quality improvement activities in general practice for patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer. Lived experiences of end-of-life care at home in the UK: a scoping review of qualitative research. What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Relationship between research activity and the performance of English general practices: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study.
×
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