Cardiovascular risk management in patients with coronary heart disease in primary care: variation across countries and practices. An observational study based on quality indicators

Background

Dementia is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. An earlier rather than later diagnosis allows persons with dementia and their families to plan ahead and access appropriate management. However, most diagnoses are made by general practitioners (GPs) later in the course of the disease and are associated with management that is poorly adherent to recommended guidelines. This trial examines the effectiveness of a peer led dementia educational intervention for GPs.

Methods

The study is a cluster randomised trial, conducted across three states and five sites. All GPs will complete an audit of their consenting patients aged 75 years or more at three time points - baseline, 12 and 24 months. GPs allocated to the intervention group will receive two educational sessions from a peer GP or nurse, and will administer the GPCOG to consenting patients at baseline and 12 months. The first education session will provide information about dementia and the second will provide individualised feedback on audit results. GPs in the waitlist group will receive the RACGP Guidelines by post following the 12 month audit Outcomes: Primary outcomes are carer and consumer quality of life and depression. Secondary outcomes include: rates of GP identification of dementia compared to a more detailed gold standard assessment conducted in the patient's home; GP identification of differential diagnoses including reversible causes of cognitive impairment; and GP referral to specialists, Alzheimers' Australia and support services. A "case finding" and a "screening" group will be compared and the psychometrics of the GPCOG will be examined. Sample size: Approximately 2,000 subjects aged 75 years and over will be recruited through approximately 160 GPs, to yield approximately 200 subjects with dementia (reducing to 168 by 24 months).

Discussion

The trial outlined in this paper has been peer reviewed and supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. At the time of submission of this paper 2,034 subjects have been recruited and the intervention delivered to 114 GPs.

Trial registration

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12607000117415.     

Mammographic surveillance of asymptomatic breast cancer relatives in general practice: rate of re-attendance and GP- and patient-related barriers

BACKGROUND: Several guidelines have been formulated for mammographic screening of breast cancer relatives. No studies have examined the adherence of GPs and their patients to these recommendations. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the rate of re-attendance of breast cancer relatives for mammographic screening requested by GPs and specify the barriers for non-attending follow-up mammography. METHODS: The study included all asymptomatic women aged 35 years or older with a first-degree family history of breast cancer, referred for mammography to our department of radiology by their GP between 1 January 1992 and 1 September 1994. Reasons for not re-attending mammography within 2 years were obtained by sending a questionnaire to GPs and, if necessary, telephone calls to GPs or their patients. The questionnaire was accompanied by a reminder, in which we advised re-attendance. The number of women who still underwent repeated mammographic screening within the 2 months following the reminder was determined. RESULTS: In 123 out of 234 patients (52.6%) follow-up mammography had been performed within 2 years. Barriers to undergoing follow-up mammography were GP-related in 70.3% of cases and patient-related in 29.7%. Of the 111 non-re-attenders, 52 (47.7%) still underwent follow-up mammography within 2 months after the reminder. This examination was performed more often if the barriers to re-attendance were GP-related rather than patient-related (57.7% versus 24.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 13.0- 53.9). Significantly more patients re-attended after the reminder if the GP-related barrier was an insufficient retrieval system rather than disagreement with mammography guidelines (81.3% versus 20.0%, 95% CI 40.4-82.0). CONCLUSIONS: Many breast cancer relatives did not undergo regular mammographic screening. Non-re-attendance resulted from a limited degree of acceptance and implementation of the screening recommendations by physicians as well as reluctance of the patient to adhere to such recommendations. A reminder, generated by a radiology department, may increase the performance of follow-up mammography.      

Patient affiliation with GPs in Australia--who is and who is not and does it matter?

Aims and rationale

Recent government reports have proposed voluntary enrolment with general practitioners for certain groups of patients to enhance their continuity of care.We examine which groups of patients are presently “de facto” affiliated with GPs, and whether affiliated patients are more likely to receive advice from their GPs on primary preventative matters such as weight, exercise and smoking.

Methods

A nationally representative cross sectional survey of Australian residents aged 18 years or over was conducted via telephone in 2008. Data from 1146 participants were analysed in both tabular forms and with logistic regression.

Findings

Most Australian adults are affiliated, de facto, with an individual GP or a GP practice (11% often go to different GPs). Factors associated with affiliation were patient age, education, satisfaction with their GP and urban or rural location. Patients with poor or fair self assessed health are relatively unlikely to be affiliated with a GP. Weak support was found for the hypothesis that affiliated patients were more likely to receive primary preventative advice on weight and diet and no support found in relation to exercise, smoking or alcohol consumption.

Benefits to the community

The study suggests policy on voluntary patient enrolment should focus on providing continuity of care to those with poor health. If further studies confirm affiliation does not enhance preventive health advice, further policy interventions may be appropriate.     

Developing resources to support the diagnosis and management of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalitis (CFS/ME) in primary care: a qualitative study

Background

Primary care improvement is the cornerstone of current reforms. Mental disorders (MDs) are a leading cause of morbidity worldwide and widespread in industrialised countries. MDs are treated mainly in primary care by general practitioners (GPs), even though the latter ability to detect, diagnose, and treat patients with MDs is often considered unsatisfactory. This article examines GPs' management of MDs in an effort to acquire more information regarding means by which GPs deal with MD cases, impact of such cases on their practices, factors that enable or hinder MD management, and patient-management strategies.

Methods

This study employs a mixed-method approach with emphasis on qualitative investigation. Based on a previous survey of 398 GPs in Quebec, Canada, 60 GPs representing a variety of practice settings were selected for further study. A 10-minute-long questionnaire comprising 27 items was administered, and 70-minute-long interviews were conducted. Quantitative (SPSS) and qualitative (NVivo) analyses were performed.

Results

At least 20% of GP visits were MD-related. GPs were comfortable managing common MDs, but not serious MDs. GPs' based their treatment of MDs on pharmacotherapy, support therapy, and psycho-education. They used clinical intuition with few clinical tools, and closely followed their patients with MDs. Practice features (salary or hourly fees payment; psycho-social teams on-site; strong informal networks), and GPs' individual characteristics (continuing medical education; exposure and interest in MDs; traits like empathy) favoured MD management. Collaboration with psychologists and psychiatrists was considered key to good MD management. Limited access to specialists, system fragmentation, and underdeveloped group practice and shared-care models were impediments. MD management was seen as burdensome because it required more time, flexibility, and emotional investment. Strategies exist to reduce the burden (one-problem-per-visit rule; longer time slots). GPs found MD practice rewarding as patients were seen as grateful and more complying with medical recommendations compared to other patients, generally leading to positive outcomes.

Conclusions

To improve MD management, this study highlights the importance of extending multidisciplinary GP practice settings with salary or hourly fee payment; access to psychotherapeutic and psychiatric expertise; and case-discussion training involving local networks of GPs and MD specialists that encourage both knowledge transfer and shared care.     

The death of a patient: a model for reflection in GP training

Background

The Dutch government has chosen a policy of strengthening palliative care in order to enable patients to die at home according to their preference. In order to facilitate this care by GPs, we wanted to know how to support them in their training. Therefore we examined the ways in which the death of a patient influences the doctor both at a professional and at a personal level.

Methods

Based on a qualitative study, we developed a model for reflection for GP trainees on the meaning of the death of patients and its influence on the GP.The qualitative study was done in 2007 and is based on open in-depth interviews and a focus group. We recruited 18 participants who were highly professional GPs and experienced in talking about the death of patients. We invited GPs from a list of experienced GPs, who in addition are also second-opinion GPs for euthanasia (SCEN-physicians) and from a pool of GP trainers, our intention being to include GPs holding a variety of world views. Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the results. Themes were first identified independently by three researchers, then after discussion these three sets were rearranged to one list of themes and their mutual relation were determined. A model for the interaction of the GP at professional and at a personal level was formulated.

Results

Forty three themes emerged from the interviews and focus group. These themes fell into three groups: professional values and experiences, personal values and experiences, and the opinions of the GPs as to what constitutes a good death. We constructed a model of the doctor-patient relationship on the basis of these findings. This model enables GP trainees identifying the unique character of the doctor-patient relationship as well as its reciprocity when the two were confronted by the patient's impending death.

Conclusions

In dealing with the approaching death of a patient the unique interaction between patient and doctor and the cumulative experiences of doctors with their patients brings about a shift in the GP's own values. The professional development of GP trainees may be facilitated by reflection on the interaction of their own values and beliefs.

     

Impact of practitioner's training in the management of alcohol dependence: a quasi-experimental 18-month follow-up study

Background  

In many European countries, medical education on alcohol remains inadequate in terms of both quantity and quality. The expansion of GP training and care protocols would improve the management and outcome of alcoholic patients. Our purpose was to assess the impact of a multifaceted intervention by trained GPs in the management of alcohol-dependent patients.     

Do general practitioners recognize mild cognitive impairment in their patients?

Objectives

The need for recognition of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in primary care is increasingly discussed because MCI is a risk factor for dementia. General Practitioners (GPs) could play an important role in the detection of MCI since they have regular and long-term contact with the majority of the elderly population. Thus the objective of this study is to find out how well GPs recognize persons with MCI in their practice population.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Primary care chart registry sample.

Participants

3,242 non-demented GP patients aged 75–89 years.

Measurements

GPs assessed the cognitive status of their patients on the Global Deterioration Scale (GDS). Thereafter, trained interviewers collected psychometric data by interviewing the patients at home. The interview data constitute the basis for the definition of MCI cases (gold standard).

Results

The sensitivity of GPs to detect MCI was very low (11–12%) whereas their specificity amounts to 93–94%. Patients with MCI with a middle or high level of education more often got a false negative assignment than patients with a low educational level. The risk of a false positive assignment rose with the patients’ degree of comorbidity. GPs were better at detecting MCI when memory or two and more MCIdomains were impaired.

Conclusion

The results show that GPs recognise MCI in a very limited number of cases when based on clinical impression only. A further development of the MCI concept and its operationalisation is necessary. Emphasis should be placed on validated, reliable and standardised tests for routine use in primary care encompassing other than only cognitive domains and on case finding approaches rather than on screening. Then a better attention and qualification of GPs with regard to the recognition of MCI might be achievable.     

Patients' requests for radiological imaging: A qualitative study on general practitioners' perspectives

Background

With the increasing availability of information, patients are becoming more informed about radiology procedures and requesting imaging studies. This qualitative study aims to explore factors that influence general practitioners' (GPs) decisions to fulfil patient requests for imaging studies during clinical consultation.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 GPs working across five private medical centres in Northwest Sydney. Conventional content analysis was used with emergent themes to identify GPs perspectives.

Results

Six themes stood out from the interviews with GPs fulfilling patient requests for imaging studies. They included four pertaining to patient factors: patient expectations, ‘therapeutic scans’, ‘impressive labels’ and entitled. Two further themes pertained to the GP perspective and included defensive medicine, and ‘new patients’. Requests are fulfilled from anxious or health-obsessed patients, with GPs worrying about litigation if they refuse. However, GPs decline requests from patients with entitlement attitudes or during first visits.

Discussion

The findings suggest that GPs struggle to balance their responsibilities as gatekeepers of imaging with patients' expectations of request fulfilment. Clear guidelines on the appropriate use of diagnostic imaging and its limitations could help patients understand its proper use and ease anxiety. Additionally, education and training for GPs could help them manage patient expectations and provide appropriate care.

Patient Contributions

Patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experiences or members of the public were not directly involved in the design, conduct, analysis or interpretation of the study. However, our study was conducted in primary care facilities where the GPs were interviewed about patients' requests for diagnostic imaging based on their own initiatives. GPs' perspectives in managing patient expectations and healthcare utilisation were explored within the Australian Medicare system, where medical imaging and image-guided procedures come at little to no cost to the individual. The study findings contribute to a better understanding of the challenges faced by GPs in dealing with patient consumerism and requests for diagnostic imaging, as well as factors influencing request fulfilment or denial. Insights gained from this study may inform future research about delivering patient-centred care within a similar context.     

Experiences of general practitioners participating in oncology meetings with specialists to support GP-led survivorship care; an interview study from the Netherlands

Background: Due to ageing, increasing cancer incidence and improved treatment, the number of survivors of cancer increases. To overcome the growing demand for hospital care survivorship by the involvement of the general practitioner (GP) has been suggested. Dutch GPs started a project to offer survivorship care to their patients with the help of monthly oncology meetings with hospital specialists.

Objectives: To evaluate the experiences of GPs with monthly oncology meetings in a GP-practice to support GP-led survivorship care of colon cancer patients.

Methods: This is a qualitative study in primary care centres in a region in the Netherlands around one hospital. GPs were recruited from practices organizing monthly oncology meetings with hospital specialists. Ten of 15 participating GPs were interviewed until saturation. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and two independent researchers analysed the data.

Results: The oncology meetings and individual care plans attributed to a feeling of shared responsibility for the patients by the GP and the specialist. The meetings helped the GPs to be informed about the patients in the diagnostic and treatment phase, which was followed by a clear moment of transfer from hospital to primary care. GPs were better equipped to treat comorbidity and were more confident in providing survivorship care. Due to lack of reimbursement for survivorship care, the internal motivation of the GP must high.

Conclusion: The oncology meetings fulfil the need for information and communication. Close cooperation between GPs and oncology specialists appears to be an essential factor for GPs to value GP-led survivorship care positively.     

Cluster randomized trial of a multifaceted primary care decision-support intervention for inherited breast cancer risk

BACKGROUND: GPs are increasingly expected to meet the needs of patients concerned about their risk of inherited breast cancer, but may lack skills or confidence to use complex management guidelines. We developed an evidence-based, multifaceted intervention intended to promote confidence and skills in this area. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention in improving GP confidence in managing patients concerned about genetic risk of breast cancer. METHODS: DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in the Grampian region of Scotland. SUBJECTS: GPs and the patients they referred for genetic counselling for risk of breast cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GPs' self-reported confidence in four activities related to genetics; rates of referral of patients at elevated genetic risk; and referred patients' understanding of cancer risk factors. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between intervention and control arms in the primary or secondary outcomes. A possible effect of the intervention on the proportion of referred patients who were at elevated risk could not be discounted. Only a small proportion of intervention GPs attended the educational session, were aware or the software, or made use of it in practice. CONCLUSIONS: No convincing evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention was found, probably reflecting barriers to its use in routine practice.     

Swiss residents' arguments for and against a career in medicine

Background

Though new technologies like Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) may be accurate, they often diffuse into practice before thorough assessment of their value in diagnosis and management, and of their effects on patient outcome and costs. MRI of the knee is a common investigation despite concern that it is not always appropriate. There is wide variation in general practitioners (GPs) access to, and use of MRI, and in the associated costs. The objective of this study was to resolve uncertainty whether GPs should refer patients with suspected internal derangement of the knee for MRI or to an orthopaedic specialist in secondary care.

Methods/Design

The design consisted of a pragmatic multi-centre randomised trial with two parallel groups and concomitant economic evaluation. Patients presenting in general practice with suspected internal derangement of the knee and for whom their GP was considering referral to an orthopaedic specialist in secondary care were eligible for inclusion. Within practices, GPs or practice nurses randomised eligible and consenting participants to the local radiology department for an MRI examination, or for consultation with an orthopaedic specialist. To ensure that the waiting time from GP consultation to orthopaedic appointment was similar for both trial arms, GPs made a provisional referral to orthopaedics when requesting the MRI examination. Thus we evaluated the more appropriate sequence of events independent of variations in waiting times. Follow up of participants was by postal questionnaires at six, twelve and 24 months after randomisation. This was to ensure that the evaluation covered all events up to and including arthroscopy.

Discussion

The DAMASK trial should make a major contribution to the development of evidence-based partnerships between primary and secondary care professionals and inform the debate when MRI should enter the diagnostic pathway.     

A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, single-dose study assessing the efficacy of AMC/DCBA Warm lozenge or AMC/DCBA Cool lozenge in the relief of acute sore throat

Background

Over 75% of mental health problems begin in adolescence and primary care has been identified as the target setting for mental health intervention by the World Health Organisation. The mobiletype program is a mental health assessment and management mobile phone application which monitors mood, stress, coping strategies, activities, eating, sleeping, exercise patterns, and alcohol and cannabis use at least daily, and transmits this information to general practitioners (GPs) via a secure website in summary format for medical review.

Methods

We conducted a randomised controlled trial in primary care to examine the mental health benefits of the mobiletype program. Patients aged 14 to 24 years were recruited from rural and metropolitan general practices. GPs identified and referred eligible participants (those with mild or more mental health concerns) who were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (where mood, stress, and daily activities were monitored) or the attention comparison group (where only daily activities were monitored). Both groups self-monitored for 2 to 4 weeks and reviewed the monitoring data with their GP. GPs, participants, and researchers were blind to group allocation at randomisation. Participants completed pre-, post-, and 6-week post-test measures of the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale and an Emotional Self Awareness (ESA) Scale.

Results

Of the 163 participants assessed for eligibility, 118 were randomised and 114 participants were included in analyses (intervention group n = 68, comparison group n = 46). Mixed model analyses revealed a significant group by time interaction on ESA with a medium size of effect suggesting that the mobiletype program significantly increases ESA compared to an attention comparison. There was no significant group by time interaction for depression, anxiety, or stress, but a medium to large significant main effect for time for each of these mental health measures. Post-hoc analyses suggested that participation in the RCT lead to enhanced GP mental health care at pre-test and improved mental health outcomes.

Conclusions

Monitoring mental health symptoms appears to increase ESA and implementing a mental health program in primary care and providing frequent reminders, clinical resources, and support to GPs substantially improved mental health outcomes for the sample as a whole.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00794222.     

Accuracy of electronic patient record registration in chronic psychosis

Objective: It is already known that GPs readily identify a role for themselves in breast cancer genetics services, but tend to overestimate risk and admit to a lack of confidence. This study aimed to explore associations with accurate risk categorisation by GPs.

Method: A postal survey of all GPs in Nottinghamshire (UK) tested the ability of a GP to correctly categorise a family history of breast cancer and assessed GPs confidence in breast cancer genetic risk categorisation by comparing the process with explaining the risk of taking combined oral contraception, and asked about GPs' attitudes to different models for assessing risk in primary care.

Results: The response rate was 61.6% (n=391). Less than 24% of GPs indicated confidence in dealing with familial cancer scenarios. A total of 89.5% of GPs erroneously categorised a low-risk breast cancer family history as moderate or high risk. Accurate genetic risk categorisation for breast cancer was independently associated with the GP regarding counselling in primary care as useful (p<0.01), the GP not regarding direct referral to hospital as useful (p=0.02) and the GP regarding genetic teaching received whilst a principal as adequate (p=0.04). There was no association with self-reported confidence.

Conclusions: There was no relationship between accuracy of and self-reported confidence in genetic risk categorisation. Accurate categorisation was associated with regarding counselling in primary care as useful, and with adequate genetic teaching as a principal.     

The impact of adding cost information to a conversation aid to support shared decision making about low-risk prostate cancer treatment: Results of a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial

Background

Decision aids help patients consider the benefits and drawbacks of care options but rarely include cost information. We assessed the impact of a conversation-based decision aid containing information about low-risk prostate cancer management options and their relative costs.

Methods

We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial in outpatient urology practices within a US-based academic medical center. We randomised five clinicians to four intervention sequences and enroled patients newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Primary patient-reported outcomes collected postvisit included the frequency of cost conversations and referrals to address costs. Other patient-reported outcomes included: decisional conflict postvisit and at 3 months, decision regret at 3 months, shared decision-making postvisit, financial toxicity postvisit and at 3 months. Clinicians reported their attitudes about shared decision-making pre- and poststudy, and the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. We used hierarchical regression analysis to assess patient outcomes. The clinician was included as a random effect; fixed effects included education, employment, telehealth versus in-person visit, visit date, and enrolment period.

Results

Between April 2020 and March 2022, we screened 513 patients, contacted 217 eligible patients, and enroled 117/217 (54%) (51 in usual care, 66 in the intervention group). In adjusted analyses, the intervention was not associated with cost conversations (β = .82, p = .27), referrals to cost-related resources (β = −0.36, p = .81), shared decision-making (β = −0.79, p = .32), decisional conflict postvisit (β = −0.34, p= .70), or at follow-up (β = −2.19, p = .16), decision regret at follow-up (β = −9.76, p = .11), or financial toxicity postvisit (β = −1.32, p = .63) or at follow-up (β = −2.41, p = .23). Most clinicians and patients had positive attitudes about the intervention and shared decision-making. In exploratory unadjusted analyses, patients in the intervention group experienced more transient indecision (p < .02) suggesting increased deliberation between visit and follow-up.

Discussion

Despite enthusiasm from clinicians, the intervention was not significantly associated with hypothesised outcomes, though we were unable to robustly test outcomes due to recruitment challenges. Recruitment at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted eligibility, sample size/power, study procedures, and increased telehealth visits and financial worry, independent of the intervention. Future work should explore ways to support shared decision-making, cost conversations, and choice deliberation with a larger sample. Such work could involve additional members of the care team, and consider the detail, quality, and timing of addressing these issues.

Patient or Public Contribution

Patients and clinicians were engaged as stakeholder advisors meeting monthly throughout the duration of the project to advise on the study design, measures selected, data interpretation, and dissemination of study findings.     

Educating Dutch General Practitioners in Dementia Advance Care Planning: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectivesAdvance care planning (ACP) is seldom initiated with people with dementia (PWD) and mainly focuses on medical end-of-life decisions. We studied the effects of an educational intervention for general practitioners (GPs) aimed at initiating and optimizing ACP, with a focus on discussing medical and nonmedical preferences of future care.DesignA single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial.Setting and participantsIn 2016, 38 Dutch GPs (all from different practices) completed the study. They recruited 140 PWD, aged ≥65 years at any stage and with any type of dementia, from their practice.MethodsIntervention group GPs were trained in ACP, including shared decision-making and role-playing exercises. Control group GPs provided usual care. The primary outcome was ACP initiation: the proportion of PWD that had at least 1 ACP conversation documented in their medical file. Key secondary outcomes were the number of medical (ie, resuscitation, hospital admission) and nonmedical (ie, activities, social contacts) preferences discussed. At the 6-month follow-up, subjects' medical records were analyzed using random effect logistics and linear models with correction for GP clustering.Results38 GP clusters (19 intervention; 19 control) included 140 PWD (intervention 73; control 67). Four PWD (2.9%) dropped out on the primary and key secondary outcomes. After 6 months, intervention group GPs initiated ACP with 35 PWD (49.3%), and control group GPs initiated ACP with 9 PWD (13.9%) [odds ratio (OR) 1.99; P = .002]. Intervention group GPs discussed 0.8 more medical [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3, 1.3; P = .003] and 1.5 more nonmedical (95% CI 0.8, 2.3; P < .001) preferences per person with dementia than control group GPs.Conclusions and ImplicationsOur educational intervention increased ACP initiation, and the number of nonmedical and medical preferences discussed. This intervention has the potential to better align future care of PWD with their preferences but because of the short follow-up, the GPs' long-term adoption remains unknown.