How do general practitioners respond to reports of abnormal chest X-rays?

General practitioners (GPs) in the UK have long had direct access to hospital radiological services, which in theory shortens investigation time and improves the quality of service. Chest X-rays (CXRs) account for a substantial proportion of requests, and we investigated what happened when an abnormality was detected. In one year, 204 GPs in the Nottingham area requested CXRs in 605 patients. 362 were reported normal, 165 abnormal but hospital follow-up not indicated and 71 abnormal with radiological follow-up or hospital referral indicated (mass lesion suspicious of tumours 27, infective shadowing 35, other 9). 64 of the 71 were seen in hospital within three months, and in those with suspected cancer the median time to follow-up was 20 days. These results show that GPs do act on the results of abnormal CXRs, but only 37% of those with a mass suspicious of cancer were seen in hospital within two weeks as recommended by the British Thoracic Society. Time might be saved if GPs agreed to direct referral from the radiology department to respiratory physicians.     

Geriatric day hospital: opportunity or threat? A qualitative exploratory study of the referral behaviour of Belgian general practitioners

Background  

In order to address the challenges of an ageing population the Belgian government decided to allocate resources to the creation of geriatric day hospitals (GDHs). Although GDHs are meant to be a strategy to support general practitioners (GPs) caring for the frail elderly, few Belgian GPs seem to refer to a GDH. This study aims to explore the barriers and facilitating factors of GPs' referral to GDHs.     

How do general practitioners and specialists value their mutual communication? A survey

Background  

Communication between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists is important, if we want patients to receive the right type of care at the right moment. Most communication takes place through telephone contact, letters concerning information on patients more recently also by email, and joint postgraduate training. As much research has been aimed at the content of communication between GPs and specialists, we wished to address the procedural aspects of this communication.     

How is your health in general? A qualitative study on self-assessed health

Background: The single-item measure on self-assessed healthhas been widely used, as it presents researchers with a summaryof an individual's general state of health. A qualitative studywas initiated to find out which particular aspects are includedin health self-assessments; which aspects do people considerwhen answering the question ‘How is your health in general?’.Subgroup differences were studied with respect to gender, age,health status and health assessment. Methods: Qualitative studywith stratification by background characteristic, health statusand health assessment (n=40). Results: Almost 80% of the participantsreferred to one or more physical aspects (chronic illness, physicalproblems, medical treatment, age-related complaints, prognosis,bodily mechanics, and resilience). However, when assessing theirhealth, participants also include aspects that go beyond thephysical dimension of health. In total, 80 percent of the participants—whetheror not in addition to physical aspects—referred to otherhealth dimensions. Besides physical aspects, participants consideredthe extent to which they are able to perform (functional dimension–28%), the extent to which they adapted to, or their attitudetowards an existing illness (coping dimension –28%), andsimply the way they feel (wellbeing dimension –20%). Inthis study, health behaviour or lifestyle factors (behaviouraldimension –3%) proved to be relatively unimportant inhealth selfassessments. Conclusions Self-assessed health provedto be a multidimensional concept. For most part, subgroup differencesin self-assessed health could be attributed to experience withill health: being relatively inexperienced with health problemsversus having a history of health problems.     

How do health practitioners in a large Australian public hospital identify and respond to reproductive abuse? A qualitative study

Objective : Reproductive abuse is defined as a deliberate attempt to control or interfere with a woman’s reproductive choices. It is associated with a range of negative health outcomes and presents a hidden challenge for health practitioners. There is a dearth of research on reproductive abuse, particularly qualitative research. This study aims to address this gap by exploring how health practitioners in a large Australian public hospital identify and respond to reproductive abuse. Methods : We conducted semi‐structured interviews with n=17 health practitioners working across multiple disciplines within a large metropolitan public hospital in Victoria. Data were analysed thematically. Results : Three themes were developed: Figuring out that something is wrong; Creating a safe space to work out what she wants; and Everyone needs to do their part. Conclusions : Practitioners relied on intuition developed through experience to identify reproductive abuse. Once identified, most practitioners described a woman‐led response promoting safety; however, there were inconsistencies in how this was enacted across different professions. Lack of clarity around the level of response required was also a barrier. Implications for public health : Our findings highlight the pressing need for evidence‐based guidelines for health practitioners and a ‘best practice’ model specific to reproductive abuse.     

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.     

How do general practitioners assess the criteria for due care for euthanasia in concrete cases?

OBJECTIVE: In the Netherlands the law states that physicians are allowed to grant a request for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (EAS) if specific criteria for due care are met. This study investigated which sources physicians use to determine whether three of these criteria (unbearable and hopeless suffering, and no realistic alternatives for treatment) are met. METHODS: The data were collected for the project Support and Consultation on Euthanasia in the Netherlands. General practitioners (GPs) received a written questionnaire concerning the most recent request for EAS that they had received. Of the 3614 (60%) GPs who returned the questionnaire, 1681 described the most recent request for EAS. RESULTS: The study shows that physicians used different types of sources, and more than one source, to determine whether the criteria were met. More sources were used when the criteria were met or when a request resulted in EAS. The determination of every criterion required a different approach, but for all criteria discussions with colleagues were important. CONCLUSIONS: Using less sources when a criterion is not met could possibly lead to less extensive consideration of the criteria, and therefore to assessing too easily that the request does not meet the criteria for due care.     

How do residents of aged care homes perceive physical activity and functional independence? A qualitative study

Limited evidence exists concerning knowledge and understanding of how to optimally support residents’ physical activity, mobility and functional independence in residential aged care homes. An interpretive qualitative study was conducted to explore residents’ perceptions and experiences of opportunities for physical activity and functional independence, and how physical activity and functional independence are challenged in their care home environment. Purposefully sampled 24 participants (male = 13) from five not‐for‐profit residential aged care homes in the outskirts of a metropolitan area in Australia, were interviewed between August and September 2017. Maintaining independence was found to be the utmost priority for nearly all participants in this study. Yet, many did not make the connection between physical activity and independence, and regarded ‘exercise’ as an inappropriate activity for them, perceiving it as high‐impact, high‐intensity activity in commercial gyms that was only appropriate for the young. Walking and gardening were found to be most popular. Walking could be a physical activity, social activity, solo recreational activity and a means of maintaining mobility and functional independence—all of which residents considered to be appropriate to them and achievable. The study identified key factors influencing physical activity and functional independence of residents: levels of activity prior to living in residential aged care, ageism, social capital and loss of a loved one, pain and staff support. Findings highlight the need for a ‘flexible and inclusive’ approach in facilitating the resident's physical activity, and a greater role for staff in encouraging residents’ engagement in, and communicating the benefits and requirements of, physical activity, through, for example, motivational interviewing.     

Medical overuse and quaternary prevention in primary care – A qualitative study with general practitioners

Background

Medical overuse is a topic of growing interest in health care systems and especially in primary care. It comprises both over investigation and overtreatment. Quaternary prevention strategies aim at protecting patients from unnecessary or harmful medicine. The objective of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of relevant aspects of medical overuse in primary care from the perspective of German general practitioners (GPs). We focused on the scope, consequences and drivers of medical overuse and strategies to reduce it (=quaternary prevention).

Methods

We used the qualitative Grounded Theory approach. Theoretical sampling was carried out to recruit GPs in Bavaria, Germany. We accessed the field of research through GPs with academic affiliation, recommendations by interview partners and personal contacts. They differed in terms of primary care experience, gender, region, work experience abroad, academic affiliation, type of specialist training, practice organisation and position. Qualitative in-depth face-to-face interviews with a semi-structured interview guide were conducted (n =?13). The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was carried out using open and axial coding.

Results

GPs defined medical overuse as unnecessary investigations and treatment that lack patient benefit or bear the potential to cause harm. They observed that medical overuse takes place in all three German reimbursement categories: statutory health insurance, private insurance and individual health services (direct payment). GPs criticised the poor acceptance of gate-keeping in German primary care. They referred to a low-threshold referral policy and direct patient access to outpatient secondary care, leading to specialist treatment without clear medical indication. The GPs described various direct drivers of medical overuse within their direct area of influence. They also emphasised indirect drivers related to system or societal processes. The proposed strategies for reducing medical overuse included a well-founded wait-and-see approach, medical education, a trustful doctor-patient relationship, the improvement of primary/health care structures and the involvement of patients and society.

Conclusions

GPs are frequently located at the starting point of the diagnostic and treatment process. They have the potential to play a vital role in quaternary prevention. This requires a debate going beyond the medical profession and involving society as a whole.

     

Stool submission by general practitioners in SW England ¿ when, why and how? A qualitative study

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: We know little about when and why general practitioners (GPs) submit stool specimens in patients with diarrhoea. The recent UK-wide intestinal infectious disease (IID2) study found ten GP consultations for every case reported to national surveillance. We aimed to explore what factors influence GP's decisions to send stool specimens for laboratory investigation, and what guidance, if any, informs them. METHODS: We used qualitative methods that enabled us to explore opinions and ask open questions through 20 telephone interviews with GPs with a range of stool submission rates in England, and a discussion group with 24 GPs. Interviews were transcribed and subjected to content analysis. RESULTS: Interviews: GPs only sent stool specimens to microbiology if diarrhoea persisted for over one week, after recent travel, or the patient was very unwell. Very few had a systematic approach to determine the clinical or public health need for a stool specimen. Only two GPs specifically asked patients about blood in their stool; only half asked about recent antibiotics, or potential food poisoning, and few asked about patients' occupations. Few GPs gave patients advice on how to collect specimens.Results from interviews and discussion group in relation to guidance: All reported that the HPA stool guidance and patient collection instructions would be useful in their clinical work, but only one GP (an interviewee) had previously accessed them. The majority of GPs would value links to guidance on electronic requests. Most GPs were surprised that a negative stool report did not exclude all the common causes of IID. CONCLUSIONS: GPs value stool culture and laboratories should continue to provide it. Patient instructions on how to collect stool specimens should be within stool collection kits. Through readily accessible guidance and education, GPs need to be encouraged to develop a more systematic approach to eliciting and recording details in the patient's history that indicate greater risk of severe infection or public health consequences. Mild or short duration IID (under one week) due to any cause is less likely to be picked up in national surveillance as GPs do not routinely submit specimens in these cases.     

Why do patients want to have their blood tested? A qualitative study of patient expectations in general practice

Background

While in general practice chronic non-specific abdominal complaints are common, there is insufficient data on the clinical course and the management of these complaints. Aim of this study was to present a primary care based profile of these chronic complaints including health care involvement, health status and clinical course.

Methods

Thirty general practitioners (GPs) and patients from their practices participated in a prospective follow-up study. All patients and GPs were asked to complete questionnaires at baseline and at 6, 12 and 18 months of follow-up. The GPs provided information on diagnostic and therapeutic management and on referral concerning 619 patients with chronic non-specific abdominal complaints, while 291 patients provided information about health status and clinical course of the complaints.

Results

When asked after 18 months of follow-up, 51,7% of the patients reported an equal or worsened severity of complaints. General health perception was impaired and patients had high scores on SCL-anxiety and SCL-depression scales. Diagnostic tests other than physical examination and laboratory tests were not frequently used. Medication was the most frequent type of treatment. The persistence of chronic non-specific abdominal complaints was quite stable.

Conclusion

Once non-specific chronic abdominal complaints have become labelled as chronic by the attending physician, little improvement can be expected. The impact on patients' physiological and psychological well-being is large. GPs use a variety of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Research into the evidence base of currently applied management strategies is recommended.     

How do general practitioners use ‘safety netting’ in acutely ill children?

Background: ‘Safety netting’ advice allows general practitioners (GPs) to cope with diagnostic uncertainty in primary care. It informs patients on ‘red flag’ features and when and how to seek further help. There is, however, insufficient evidence to support useful choices regarding ‘safety netting’ procedures.

Objectives: To explore how GPs apply ‘safety netting’ in acutely ill children in Flanders.

Methods: We designed a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured interviews with 37 GPs across Flanders. Two researchers performed qualitative analysis based on grounded theory components.

Results: Although unfamiliar with the term, GPs perform ‘safety netting’ in every acutely ill child, guided by their intuition without the use of specific guidelines. They communicate ‘red flag’ features, expected time course of illness and how and when to re-consult and try to tailor their advice to the context, patient and specific illness. Overall, GPs perceive ‘safety netting’ as an important element of the consultation, acknowledging personal and parental limitations, such as parents’ interpretation of their advice. GPs do not feel a need for any form of support in the near future.

Conclusion: GPs apply ‘safety netting’ intuitively and tailor the content. Further research should focus on the impact of ‘safety netting’ on morbidity and how the advice is conveyed to parents.