Interdisciplinary cooperation of GPs in palliative care at home: A nationwide survey in the Netherlands

Objective. To investigate the occurrence and predictors of interdisciplinary cooperation of GPs with other caregivers in palliative care at home. Design. In a prospective study among 96 general practices, the GPs involved identified all dying patients during the study period of 12 months. The GPs received an additional post-mortem questionnaire for each patient who died during the study period, and registered the healthcare providers with whom they cooperated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of GP cooperation with other caregivers. Setting. Second Dutch National Survey in General Practice. Subjects. A total of 743 patients who received palliative care according to their GP. Main outcome measures. Interdisciplinary cooperation between GP and other healthcare providers. Results. During the study period, 2194 patients died. GPs returned 1771 (73%) of the questionnaires. According to the GPs, 743 (46%) of their patients received palliative care. In 98% of these palliative care patients, the GP cooperated with at least one other caregiver, with a mean number of four. Cooperation with informal caregivers (83%) was most prevalent, followed by cooperation with other GPs (71%) and district nurses (63%). The best predictors of cooperation between GPs and other caregivers were the patient's age, the underlying disease, and the importance of psychosocial care. Conclusion. In palliative care patients, GP interdisciplinary cooperation with other caregivers is highly prevalent, especially with informal caregivers and other primary care collaborators. Cooperation is most prevalent in younger patients, patients with cancer as underlying disease, and if psychosocial care is important.     

Alcohol use disorders in Europe: A comparison of general population and primary health care prevalence rates

Aims. Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are prevalent in Europe but occurrence in primary care and the proportion of treated cases are understudied. This study reports prevalence of AUDs and their treatment in European primary health care settings and compares them with general population estimates. Procedure. We sampled 358 general practitioners (GPs, refusal rate: 56.4%) across six European countries (Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Poland, and Spain) who assessed 13,003 patients including providing AUD diagnoses. A subsample of 8,476 patients (refusal rate: 17.8%) was interviewed subsequently, assessing DSM-IV AUD diagnoses via the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Final AUD diagnoses combined GP and patient interview information. Findings. Past year AUDs were prevalent with 11.8% (95% CI: 11.2–12.5%) across all regions, which is 1.6 times the European general population AUD estimate. Of those diagnosed with AUDs, 17.7% (95% CI: 15.4–20.0%) received professional help. Compared to general population estimates, AUDs and their treatment were more prevalent in primary care settings in most countries, with disproportionally high AUD rates in Italy and Spain and unexpectedly low AUD rates in Hungary. Conclusions. We found higher prevalence and treatment rates of AUDs in primary health care compared to general population surveys, with large variability between the observed countries.     

Consumer satisfaction among patients and their general practitioners about involving nurse specialists in primary care for patients with urinary incontinence

Scand J Caring Sci; 2013; 27; 253–259 Consumer satisfaction among patients and their general practitioners about involving nurse specialists in primary care for patients with urinary incontinence Background: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a very common problem, but existing guidelines on UI are not followed. To bring care in line with guidelines, we planned an intervention to involve nurse specialists on UI in primary care and assessed this in a randomised controlled trial. Alongside this intervention, we assessed consumer satisfaction among patients and general practitioners (GPs). Methods: Patients’ satisfaction with the care provided by either nurse specialists (intervention group) or GPs (control group), respectively, was measured with a self‐completed questionnaire. GPs’ views on the involvement of nurse specialists were measured in a structured telephone interview. Results: The patient satisfaction score on the care offered by nurse specialists was 8.4 (scale 1–10), vs. 6.7 for care‐as‐usual by GPs. Over 85% of patients would recommend nurse specialist care to their best friends and 77% of the GPs considered the role of the nurse specialist to be beneficial, giving it a mean score of 7.2. Conclusions: Although the sample was relatively small and the stability of the results only provisionally established, substituting UI care from GP to nurse specialist appears to be welcomed by both patients and GPs. Small changes like giving additional UI‐specific information and devoting more attention to UI (which had been given little attention before) would provide a simple instrument to stimulate patients to change their behaviour in the right direction.     

Who is the key worker in palliative home care?

Abstract

Objective. Palliative home care involves coordination of care between the professionals involved. The NICE guideline on supportive and palliative care (UK) recommends that teams, regardless of their base, should promote continuity for patients. This may involve nomination of a coordinating “key worker”. This study aimed to explore who acts as key worker and who ought to take on this role in the views of patients, relatives, and primary care professionals. Furthermore, it aimed to explore the level of agreement on this issue between study participants. Design. Interview and questionnaire study. Setting. Former County of Aarhus, Denmark (2008–2009). Subjects. Ninety-six terminally ill cancer patients, their relatives, general practitioners (GPs), and community nurses (CNs). Main outcome measures. Actual key worker as valued by patients, relatives, and primary care professionals; ideal key worker as valued by patients and relatives. Results. Patients, relatives, GPs, and CNs most often saw themselves as having been the key worker. When asked about the ideal key worker, most patients (29%; 95%CI: 18;42) and relatives (32%; 95%CI: 22;45) pointed to the GP. Using patients’ views as reference, we found very limited agreement with relatives (47.7%; k = 0.05), with GPs (30.4%; k = 0.01) and with CNs (25.0%; k = 0.04). Agreement between patients and relatives on the identity of the ideal key worker was of a similar dimension (29.6%; k = 0.11).

Conclusion. Poor agreement between patients, relatives, and professionals on actual and ideal key worker emphasizes the need for matching expectations and clear communication about task distribution in palliative home care.     

GP group profiles and involvement in mental health care

Rationale and objectives Mental health is one of the leading causes of morbidity worldwide. Its impact in terms of cost and loss of productivity is considerable. Improving the efficiency of mental health care system has thus been a high priority for decision makers. In the context of current reforms that privilege the reinforcement of primary mental health care and integration of services, this article brings new lights on the role of general practitioners (GPs) in managing mental health, and shared‐care initiatives developed to deal with more complex cases. The study presents a typology of GPs providing mental health care, by identifying clusters of GP profiles associated with the management of patients with common or serious mental disorders (CMD or SMD). Methods GPs in Quebec (n = 398) were surveyed on their practice, and socio‐demographic data were collected. Results Cluster analysis generated five GP profiles, including three that were closely tied to mental health care (labelled, respectively: group practice GPs, traditional pro‐active GPs and collaborative‐minded GPs), and two not very implicated in mental health (named: diversified and low‐implicated GPs, and money‐making GPs). Conclusion The study confirmed the central role played by GPs in the treatment of patients with CMD and their relative lack of involvement in the care of patients with SMD. Study results support current efforts to strengthen collaboration among primary care providers and mental health specialists, reinforce GP training, and favour multi‐modal clinical and collaborative strategies in mental health care.     

Interdisciplinary cooperation of GPs in palliative care at home: a nationwide survey in The Netherlands

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the occurrence and predictors of interdisciplinary cooperation of GPs with other caregivers in palliative care at home. DESIGN: In a prospective study among 96 general practices, the GPs involved identified all dying patients during the study period of 12 months. The GPs received an additional post-mortem questionnaire for each patient who died during the study period, and registered the healthcare providers with whom they cooperated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of GP cooperation with other caregivers. SETTING: Second Dutch National Survey in General Practice. SUBJECTS: A total of 743 patients who received palliative care according to their GP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Interdisciplinary cooperation between GP and other healthcare providers. RESULTS: During the study period, 2194 patients died. GPs returned 1771 (73%) of the questionnaires. According to the GPs, 743 (46%) of their patients received palliative care. In 98% of these palliative care patients, the GP cooperated with at least one other caregiver, with a mean number of four. Cooperation with informal caregivers (83%) was most prevalent, followed by cooperation with other GPs (71%) and district nurses (63%). The best predictors of cooperation between GPs and other caregivers were the patient's age, the underlying disease, and the importance of psychosocial care. CONCLUSION: In palliative care patients, GP interdisciplinary cooperation with other caregivers is highly prevalent, especially with informal caregivers and other primary care collaborators. Cooperation is most prevalent in younger patients, patients with cancer as underlying disease, and if psychosocial care is important.     

What type of service provision do patients with chronic pain want from primary care providers?

Purpose. The aim of this study was to explore what types of service provision patients with chronic pain wanted from their general practitioners (GP).

Method. A small scale survey measured anxiety and depression and quantified the extent to which patients wanted four different types of help from their GP (explanation and understanding, medical treatment, psychological support and information). An opportunistic sample of 155 patients (30.3% male and 69.7% female) was recruited from three general practice surgeries in the northwest region of Northern Ireland. Ninety-one participants self-reported chronic pain and there were 64 in the no pain group.

Results. Even after statistically controlling for anxiety and depression, individuals in the chronic pain group had a greater need for emotional/psychological support and explanation and understanding from their GPs. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the need for more information or medical treatment.

Conclusions. A biopsychosocial approach should be employed in the management of chronic pain, however as this study shows, some primary care patients are still being treated within a biomedical framework. To address the unmet needs of this patient population, there is a need for clinical guidelines in the management of chronic pain in primary care settings. Limitations of the present research, with recommendations for future study are offered.     

The quality of GP consultation in two different salary systems A Finnish experience

Objective – To compare the quality of consultations between two Finnish employment contract systems: the capitation-based contract (CB) and the time-based contract (TB).

Design – Cross-sectional study based on paired questionnaires answered by patients and general practitioners (GPs).

Setting and subjects – 81 GPs with their patients from four health care centres in Finland, 2191 encounters.

Main outcome measures – Both patients’ and GPs’ opinions on the role of personal doctor, medico-professional quality, quality of communication, consultation conditions, economic quality (= number of examinations and treatments), and duration of consultation.

Results – Patients were more satisfied than the doctors with the quality of consultations. We found no differences between the groups in the patients’ opinions on the quality. The GPs in the CB group rated their work quality higher than the GPs in the TB group. The patients’ and the GPs’ understanding of the GP as a personal doctor varied so that the patients considered their GP as their personal doctor more often than the GPs in question.

Conclusions – The GPs with a capitation-based contract evaluated the quality of their work higher than other GPs. Patient satisfaction was not dependent on the GP's contract.     

NT-proBNP to exclude heart failure in primary care – a pragmatic,cluster-randomized study

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is difficult to recognize in primary care. N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) can be used as a rule-out test in HF due to its high negative predictive value. We aim to determine whether the number per 1000 patients of HF diagnoses increase among patients referred from primary care to an outpatient HF clinic, if general practitioners (GPs) were offered NT-proBNP in a real-life setting. All GP practices covered by Randers Regional Hospital were randomized to an intervention group (34 GP practices) and a control group (35 GP practices) in this pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial. The main outcome was the number of patients referred to echocardiography and diagnosed with HF in each group. The number of patients per 1000 diagnosed with HF in the two groups was the same (0.09 (0.02–0.16) vs. 0.14 (0.07–0.21), p?=?.3541). A total of 700?NT-proBNP analyses, of which 611 were unique, were requested from 31 GP practices in 17.5?months. A total of 184 patients were referred to echocardiography on suspicion of HF. The number of patients per 1000 referred in the intervention group was significantly higher (p?p?=?.019). Hence, increased diagnostic effectiveness could not be shown in this real-life setting.     

Colorectal cancer patients’ preferences for type of caregiver during survivorship care

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors are currently included in a secondary care-led survivorship care programme. Efforts are underway to transfer this survivorship care to primary care, but met with some reluctance by patients and caregivers. This study assesses (1) what caregiver patients prefer to contact for symptoms during survivorship care, (2) what patient factors are associated with a preferred caregiver, and (3) whether the type of symptom is associated with a preferred caregiver.

Methods: A cross-sectional study of CRC survivors at different time points. For 14 different symptoms, patients reported if they would consult a caregiver, and who they would contact if so. Patient and disease characteristics were retrieved from hospital and general practice records.

Results: Two hundred and sixty patients participated (response rate 54%) of whom the average age was 67, 54% were male. The median time after surgery was seven months (range 0–60 months). Patients were divided fairly evenly between tumour stages 1–3, 33% had received chemotherapy. Men, patients older than 65 years, and patients with chronic comorbid conditions preferred to consult their general practitioner (GP). Women, patients with stage 3 disease, and patients that had received chemotherapy preferred to consult their secondary care provider. For all symptoms, patients were more likely to consult their GP, except for (1) rectal blood loss, (2) weight loss, and (3) fear that cancer had recurred, in which case they would consult both their primary and secondary care providers. Patients appreciated all caregivers involved in survivorship care highly; with 8 out of 10 points.

Conclusions: CRC survivors frequently consult their GP in the current situation, and for symptoms that could alarm them to a possible recurrent disease consult both their GP and secondary care provider. Patient and tumour characteristics influence patients’ preferred caregiver.     

Problems and challenges in relation to the treatment of patients with multimorbidity: General practitioners’ views and attitudes

Objective. To explore views and attitudes among general practitioners (GPs) and researchers in the field of general practice towards problems and challenges related to treatment of patients with multimorbidity. Setting. A workshop entitled Patients with multimorbidity in general practice held during the Nordic Congress of General Practice in Tampere, Finland, 2013. Subjects. A total of 180 GPs and researchers. Design. Data for this summary report originate from audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim plenary discussions as well as 76 short questionnaires answered by attendees during the workshop. The data were analysed using framework analysis. Results. (i) Complex care pathways and clinical guidelines developed for single diseases were identified as very challenging when handling patients with multimorbidity; (ii) insufficient cooperation between the professionals involved in the care of multimorbid patients underlined the GPs’ impression of a fragmented health care system; (iii) GPs found it challenging to establish a good dialogue and prioritize problems with patients within the timeframe of a normal consultation; (iv) the future role of the GP was discussed in relation to diminishing health inequality, and current payment systems were criticized for not matching the treatment patterns of patients with multimorbidity. Conclusion. The participants supported the development of a future research strategy to improve the treatment of patients with multimorbidity. Four main areas were identified, which need to be investigated further to improve care for this steadily growing patient group.     

Psychiatric caseness is a marker of major depressive episode in general practice

Objective

Screening for a major depressive episode (MDE) in high-risk groups of patients within the primary care setting has been suggested by several Central Health Organizations. The objective of this study was to investigate whether patients rated as “psychiatric cases” by their general practitioner (GP) were likely to suffer from MDE and therefore qualified for systematic diagnostic screening.

Design

Cross-sectional survey of primary care patients assessed through depression screening questionnaires and GP consultations.

Setting

A total of 676 general practices in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

Subjects

A total of 8879 unselected primary care patients.

Main outcome measures

Sensitivity, specificity, and Youden Index of the GPs'' diagnoses of depression and psychiatric caseness versus patients'' MDE status.

Results

The proportion of primary care patients receiving a false-positive diagnosis of depression by their GP ranged from 12.4% to 25.2% depending on country. The corresponding numbers for the false-negative diagnoses were 0.5–2.5%. Among patients with MDE, GPs recognize the disease in 56–75% of cases. However, GPs recognize as many as 79–92% of patients with MDE as “psychiatric cases”.

Conclusions

This report confirms that misclassifications of MDE are common in the primary care setting. In addition, it shows that psychiatric caseness is a valid marker for the presence of MDE in primary care patients. This relationship should be considered in future screening recommendations.Key Words: Depression, diagnosis, family practice, mass screening, questionnairesPatients with a major depressive episode (MDE) are often overlooked in the primary care setting. Central Health Organizations suggest screening for MDE in high-risk categories of primary care patients. This study investigated whether patients rated as “psychiatric cases” by their GPs were likely to suffer from MDE and therefore qualified for systematic diagnostic screening.

• Misclassifications of MDE were common in the present sample of primary care patients.
• Among primary care patients with MDE, general practitioners (GPs) recognized the disease in 56–75% of the cases.
• Up to 92% of patients with MDE were identified as psychiatric cases by their GP. This relationship should be considered in future screening recommendations.

Major depressive episode (MDE) is the most common mental disorder in primary care [1]. General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in detecting and treating mental disorders, including MDE [2]. Diagnosis and treatment of MDE in primary care remains a difficult challenge for GPs and misclassifications are common. There are two types of misclassifications of MDE, namely false negative (patients meeting MDE criteria, but who are not recognized as depressed by their GPs) and false positive (perceived to suffer from MDE by the GPs without fulfilling the MDE criteria) [3–7]. These misclassifications have obvious adverse effects for the patients and procedures to minimize their likelihood of occurrence are required. The purpose of this study was to examine the GPs'' diagnostic capability in relation to MDE and to evaluate whether patients rated as “psychiatric cases” by their GP were likely to suffer from MDE.     

Women at risk of coronary heart disease experience barriers to diagnosis and treatment: A qualitative interview study

Objective To describe the types of patients admitted to the first Dutch general practitioner (GP) hospital, their health-related quality of life and its substitute function.

Design A prospective observational study.

Setting The remaining 20-bed ward of a former district general hospital west of Amsterdam; a region with 62?000 inhabitants and 26 GPs.

Subjects All patients admitted during the 12 months between 1 June 1999 and 1 June 2000.

Main outcome measures Patients’ health-related quality of life (Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey, Groningen Activities Restriction Scale), GPs assessments of severity of illness (DUSOI/WONCA Severity of Illness Checklist) and alternative modes of care.

Results In total, 218 admissions were recorded divided into 3 bed categories: GP beds (n=131), rehabilitation beds (n=62) and nursing home beds (n=25). The mean age of all patients was 76 years. Main reasons for admission were immobilization due to trauma at home (GP beds), rehabilitation from surgery (rehabilitation beds) and stroke (nursing home beds). Overall, patients showed a poor health-related quality of life on admission. If the GP beds had not been available, the GPs estimated that the admissions would have been almost equally divided among home care, nursing home and hospital care. The severity of the diagnosis on admission of the ‘hospital-care group’ appeared to be significantly higher than the other care groups.

Conclusion The GP hospital appears to provide a valuable alternative to home care, nursing home care and hospital care, especially for elderly patients with a poor health-related quality of life who are in need of short medical and nursing care.     

General practitioners’ treatment orientations towards low back pain: Influence on treatment behaviour and patient outcome

Background: In low back pain (LBP) treatment and research attention has shifted from a biomedical towards a biopsychosocial approach. Patients’ LBP beliefs and attitudes were found to predict long‐term outcome, and recently it has been suggested that the health care providers’ ideas about LBP are also important predictors of treatment behaviour and outcome. Aims: In the present study we examined whether (1) differences in General Practitioners’ (GP) LBP treatment orientation are associated with differences in actual treatment behaviour and (2) whether treatment orientation is related to LBP outcome in patients. Methods: Two hundred twenty two patients consulting their GP with a new episode of LBP were recruited and completed questionnaires on (among others) LBP outcome (graded chronic pain scale) at baseline, during 12 months of follow‐up and at the end of the study. Data on treatment were collected from the GPs. The GPs also completed a set of questionnaires on LBP treatment orientation. Associations between measures of treatment orientation, treatment recommendations, treatment behaviour and LBP outcome were analysed. Results: A biomedical treatment orientation was found to be associated with more concern about tissue damage and the effect of physical activity on pain and recovery in vignettes. No associations were found between treatment orientation measures, actual treatment behaviour and LBP outcome. Conclusions: Associations were not found as expected. Still these findings are relevant and may feed a clinically important debate on widely accepted assumptions about the role and influence of health care providers in changing patients’ pain behaviours.     

Are general practitioners characteristics associated with the quality of type 2 diabetes care in general practice? Results from the Norwegian ROSA4 study from 2014

Objective: To explore the associations between general practitioners (GPs) characteristics such as gender, specialist status, country of birth and country of graduation and the quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

Design: Cross-sectional survey.

Setting and subjects: The 277 GPs provided care for 10082 patients with T2DM in Norway in 2014. The GPs characteristics were self-reported: 55% were male, 68% were specialists in General Practice, 82% born in Norway and 87% had graduated in Western Europe. Of patients, 81% were born in Norway and 8% in South Asia. Data regarding diabetes care were obtained from electronic medical records and manually verified.

Main outcome measures: Performance of recommended screening procedures, prescribed medication and level of HbA1c, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol stratified according to GPs characteristics, adjusted for patient and GP characteristics.

Result: Female GPs, specialists, GPs born in Norway and GPs who graduated in Western Europe performed recommended procedures more frequently than their counterparts. Specialists achieved lower mean HbA1c (7.14% vs. 7.25%, p?p?=?0.018) and lower mean systolic blood pressure (133.0?mmHg vs. 134.7?mmHg, p?p?Conclusion: Several quality indicators for type 2 diabetes care were better if the GPs were specialists in General Practice.

• Key Points

• Research on associations between General Practitioners (GPs) characteristics and quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes is limited.

• Specialists in General Practice performed recommended procedures more frequently, achieved better HbA1c and blood pressure levels than non-specialists.

• GPs who graduated in Western Europe performed screening procedures more frequently and achieved lower diastolic blood pressure compared with their counterparts.

• There were few significant differences in the quality of care between GP groups according to their gender and country of birth.