Experiences of hospital-based multidisciplinary team meetings in oncology: An interview study among participating general practitioners

Background: Cancer care has become complex, requiring healthcare professionals to collaborate to provide high-quality care. Multidisciplinary oncological team (MDT) meetings in the hospital have been implemented to coordinate individual cancer patients’ care. General practitioners (GPs) are invited to join, but their participation is minimal.

Objectives: Aim of this study is to explore participating GPs’ perceptions of their current role and to understand their preferences towards effective role execution during MDT meetings.

Methods: In May to June 2014, semi-structured interviews (n?=?16) were conducted involving GPs with MDT experience in Belgium. The analysis was done according to qualitative content analysis principles.

Results: Attendance of an MDT meeting is perceived as part of the GP’s work, especially for complex patient care situations. Interprofessional collaborative relationships and the GP’s perceived benefit to the MDT meeting discussions are important motivators to participate. Enhanced continuity of information flow and optimized organizational time management were practical aspects triggering the GP’s intention to participate. GPs valued the communication with the patient before and after the meeting as an integral part of the MDT dynamics.

Conclusion: GPs perceive attendance of the MDT meeting as an integral part of their job. Suggestions are made to enhance the efficiency of the meetings.     

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.     

Even if they are not aware of it,general practitioners improve well-being in their adolescent patients

Background: Most adolescents consult their general practitioner (GP) for common reasons, somatic or administrative but many of them have hidden feelings of distress.

Objectives: To assess the immediate impact of ‘ordinary’ consultations on feelings of distress among adolescents and to compare adolescents experiencing difficulties (D) to those with no difficulties (N). To analyse how accurately GPs assess the impact of their consultation on adolescents’ feelings.

Methods: GPs were randomly selected from two non-contiguous French administrative areas between April and June 2006. Fifty-three GPs gave two questionnaires to the first 10 to 15 adolescents aged 12 to 20 seen in consultation. One questionnaire was issued before the consultation and the other one afterwards. Adolescents had to position themselves about different aspects of well-being and say where they would seek help if they had problems. A GP questionnaire assessed how well they estimated their impact on the adolescent’s feeling of well-being.

Results: Six hundred and sixty-five adolescents were assessed. They reported feeling better about their health, being able to talk, having someone to talk to or to confide in and on feeling understood. The D group (n?=?147) felt significantly better compared to the N group (n?=?518). GPs tended to underestimate this improvement, especially regarding adolescents in the D group feeling better about their health.

Conclusions: Consulting a GP generates increased well-being among adolescents, especially for those experiencing difficulties. GPs tend to underestimate the positive impact they may have. Further studies are needed to explore if this benefit is permanent over time.     

The daily practice of (suspected) coeliac disease management by general practitioners: A qualitative approach

Background: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in diagnosing coeliac disease (CD). However, data on GP management of (suspected) CD patients is sparse.

Objectives: To provide insights into the daily practice of diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of CD by GPs.

Methods: A qualitative study using topic list-based semi-structured in-depth interviews with Dutch GPs with more than five years’ experience carried out between January and March 2017. GPs were purposively sampled. The number of GPs interviewed depended on when data saturation was reached. We applied content analysis to the semi-structured interviews.

Results: Seven GPs were interviewed, five of whom were female. Analysis of the interviews resulted in three main themes: ‘awareness,’ ‘diagnostics’ and ‘management.’ Vague gastrointestinal symptoms and diarrhoea were often mentioned as a possible presentation of CD. Antibodies were used in CD diagnosis, although some GPs would start a gluten-free diet as a first diagnostic tool. Some GPs diagnosed CD only based on positive antibodies without referring to secondary care or duodenal biopsy analysis. GPs mentioned no role for primary care physicians in the follow-up of CD and noted the important role of dieticians in CD management.

Conclusion: The different views of GPs on how to diagnose and monitor CD could be a basis for further research to improve CD detection rate and CD care.     

Formal quality criteria for websites do not guarantee complete health information of good quality: we need more attention to information on prognosis

Abstract

Background: General practitioners (GPs) and patients can have different ideas about the causes of fatigue, which may hinder management of fatigue.

Objective: To investigate the causal attributions of patients and their GPs for fatigue, their level of agreement, and the association between patients’ attributions, and fatigue characteristics and other illness perceptions.

Methods: Baseline data, collected between 2004 and 2006, of a prospective cohort study among 642 adult patients presenting to Dutch primary care practices (n = 147) with a main symptom of fatigue, were used. Patient causal attributions and illness perceptions were measured using the revised illness perception questionnaire (fatigue version). GP causal attributions were measured with an open question included in the form that was completed at the end of the patient's visit. Fatigue severity was measured using the checklist individual strength.

Results: Psychosocial causes were among the most often reported causal attributions by both patients and GPs. In 33% of 519 cases, the GP had no idea about the cause whereas the patient did. Overall, the agreement between the first reported causal attribution of patients and GPs was low. Qualitative differences in the labelling of causes were also found. Type of attribution (physical vs psychosocial/psychological) was associated with duration of fatigue (40 vs 25 months), and personal control (score 17.4 vs. 18.9).

Conclusion: Most patients and GPs had ideas about the causes of fatigue, but differences were found in the first reported causes and the labelling of causes. The findings may provide leads for optimizing communication about fatigue.     

Reducing the use of out-of-hours primary care services: A survey among Dutch general practitioners

Background: Out-of-hours primary care services have a high general practitioner (GP) workload with increasing costs, while half of all contacts are non-urgent.

Objectives: To identify views of GPs to influence the use of the out-of-hours GP cooperatives.

Methods: Cross-sectional survey study among a random sample of 800 GPs in the Netherlands.

Results: Of the 428 respondents (53.5% response rate), 86.5% confirmed an increase in their workload and 91.8% felt that the number of patient contacts could be reduced. A total of 75.4% GP respondents reported that the 24-h service society was a ‘very important’ reason why patients with non-urgent problems attended the GP cooperative; the equivalent for worry or anxiety was 65.8%, and for easy accessibility, 60.1%. Many GPs (83.9%) believed that the way telephone triage is currently performed contributes to the high use of GP cooperatives. Measures that GPs believed were both desirable and effective in reducing the use of GP cooperatives included co-payment for patients, stricter triage, and a larger role for the telephone consultation doctor. GPs considered patient education, improved telephone accessibility of daytime general practices, more possibilities for same-day appointments, as well as feedback concerning the use of GP cooperatives to practices and triage nurses also desirable, but less effective.

Conclusion: This study provides several clues for influencing the use of GP cooperatives. Further research is needed to examine the impact and safety of these strategies.

Key Messages

• GPs believe that the number of patient contacts with the GP cooperative could be reduced.

• Strategies to reduce the use of GP cooperatives perceived as both effective and advisable by GPs are introducing co-payment for patients, stricter triage and a larger role for the telephone consultation doctor.

     

Course of glycaemia in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes patients 2.5 years after optimizing oral treatment in general practice

Abstract

Objective: To investigate GPs’ perceptions of consultation outcomes and to investigate the associations between these and outcomes perceived by the patients. Design: 25 GPs and 10 patients for each GP filled in a questionnaire about the outcome of the same consultation. The questions in the questionnaires were formulated from concepts found in preceding qualitative studies. Their answers were analysed and compared. Setting: GPs and patients from 16 group practices in Norrbotten, Sweden. Results: The GPs had the apprehension that their consultations would lead to cure/symptom relief in half of their consultations. They believed that their patients were satisfied up to 90% and that up to 75% had been reassured, understood more or could cope better. The GPs were satisfied themselves with up to 95% of the consultations, they enhanced their relationship to their patient up to 70%. Their affirmative concordance with their patients was high regarding satisfaction, intermediate regarding patient reassurance and patient understanding and lowest regarding cure/symptom relief.

Conclusion: The GPs’ were lacking in their ability to assess the patients’ increased understanding and the concordance between their own and the patients’ expectation of cure/symptom relief was low.     

Patient attitudes towards and experiences with an intervention programme to reduce chronic acid-suppressing drug intake in primary care

Abstract

Objective: Many patients are using acid-suppressing drugs (ASD) unnecessary. An insurance company initiated intervention programme aiming at reduction of chronic ASD use, was introduced in primary care-practices. We evaluated the attitude and experiences of the participating patients. Methods: A survey was conducted among a random sample of 2376 long-term ASD users using a validated questionnaire that combined CAHPS and QUOTE methodology. Using a psychometric principal component analysis we assessed the role of GPs in three scales: quality of support; communication and conduct; involvement in decisions. Both the importance of and experiences with quality items, transformed into quality impact indices, were measured. Results: Of 2376 questionnaires distributed, 1808 (76%) were returned, 1270 (54%) were valid. 188 were of patients that participated in the programme. The majority was dissatisfied with the GPs’ support: no information about rebound side effects (76%), lifestyle habits (68%), and reasons to stop (50%). Compared to the non-participants 9% more participants stopped ASD use (P = 0.04).

Conclusion: A majority of patients on chronic ASD was prepared to participate in the drug-reduction programme. Although 16% succeeded in stopping ASD use, the majority was dissatisfied with the role of the GP. Improved GP support might have make more patients stop using ASD.     

Barriers in screening for dementia in elderly migrants in primary care and the use of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale. A mixed cross-sectional and qualitative study

BackgroundIn the migrant population, there is a higher risk of dementia. However, dementia is underdiagnosed in this population due to the underuse of appropriate screening tools. The Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) is designed for culturally and linguistically diverse populations.ObjectivesTo gain insights into the primary care cognitive screening strategy for dementia in migrants and to evaluate the experiences with the RUDAS tool by general practitioners (GPs).MethodsGPs were questioned about barriers in dementia screening in the migrant population and asked to apply the RUDAS. A mixed-methods study was conducted among Flemish GPs. In an online survey, the currently used methods for screening for dementia in migrants and the barriers were investigated. In a qualitative pilot study, the user experience of the RUDAS scale was explored.ResultsA total of 122/322 GPs participated (response rate 38%), 102 (83.6%) of all responding GPs mentioned language problems as the most apparent barrier. Most GPs believed the Mini Mental State Examination was inappropriate for migrants but they were unaware of an alternative. Due to lack of time and target population, only two GPs effectively applied the RUDAS. The tool was found easy to understand and less challenging in case of language problems. The main reason for not using RUDAS was the suspected time consumption.ConclusionGPs find screening for dementia in migrant patients a challenging act, mainly due to language barriers. GPs are not confident enough with the appropriate screening strategies and tools adjusted to the needs of migrant patients. Abbreviations: GP: general practitioner; RUDAS: Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale; MMSE: Mini Mental State Examination.     

Deciding whether to consult the GP or an emergency department: A qualitative study of patient reasoning in Switzerland

Background: Non-urgent care is an important factor responsible for rising healthcare costs and general practitioners (GPs) are known to be more cost-effective than emergency departments (EDs).

Objectives: To understand the reasons why patients confronted with a medical problem perceived as urgent choose to consult either a GP or an ED.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study in Switzerland, using data collected between 2014 and 2015 through semi-structured interviews of adults with non-vital medical problems. Half were recruited after an ambulatory consultation in an ED, and half were patients who consulted their GP. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed, coded, and analysed according to the constant comparative method.

Results: The main reason given by patients who consulted their GP first was the quality of the relationship. The more meaningful the relationship, the more likely patients were to seek advice from their GP. One marker of a privileged relationship was GPs supplying their mobile phone number to the patient. The perceived nature of the complaint, for example, symptoms considered as life-threatening or severe pain, together with the expected waiting time in an ED were additional factors influencing the patients’ choice.

Conclusion: Our study showed that when patients are confronted with what they perceive as a medical emergency, the quality of the relationship with the GP, in particular the continuity of care provided, seem to be the major reasons why they consult their GP rather than an ED.     

Emergency anaphylaxis protocols: A cross-sectional analysis of general practice surgeries and pharmacies in both the urban and rural setting in Ireland

Background: The incidence of anaphylaxis appears to be increasing worldwide with cases in the community outnumbering those in the hospital setting. General practice (GP) surgeries and pharmacies, based in the community, are often the first point of contact for many patients suffering from anaphylaxis.

Objectives: To determine if studied GP surgeries and pharmacies have an anaphylaxis protocol on site and have access to an anaphylaxis kit; to explore GP’s and pharmacists’ personal experiences with management of anaphylaxis.

Methods: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was performed examining anaphylaxis protocols in a sample of general practices and pharmacies from some counties in Ireland. This consisted of a sample from rural and urban settings. The study commenced in October 2014.

Results: Nineteen of 24 GPs (79%) and 9 (29%) pharmacies had an anaphylaxis protocol (P?<?0.001). Twenty-four (100%) GP practices and 12 pharmacies (39%) surveyed had an anaphylaxis kit on site. Twelve GPs (50%) had treated a patient with anaphylaxis in the surgery while 8 (33%) had treated a patient in the community. One pharmacist (3%) had witnessed anaphylaxis in practice. Two pharmacies and one GP had been contacted by local businesses to alert them to a case of anaphylaxis.

Conclusion: In contrast to national and international guidelines only 79% of GPs and 29% of pharmacies in this study from Ireland had an anaphylaxis protocol onsite.     

GPs’ experiences with out-of-hours GP cooperatives: A survey study from the Netherlands

Background: Out-of-hours primary care has been provided by general practitioner (GP) cooperatives since the year 2000 in the Netherlands. Early studies in countries with similar organizational structures showed positive GP experiences. However, nowadays it is said that GPs experience a high workload at the cooperative and that they outsource a considerable part of their shifts.

Objectives: To examine positive and negative experiences of GPs providing out-of-hours primary care, and the frequency and reasons for outsourcing shifts.

Methods: A cross-sectional observational survey among 688 GPs connected to six GP cooperatives in the Netherlands, using a web-based questionnaire.

Results: The response was 55% (n = 378). The main reasons for working in GP cooperatives were to retain registration as GP (79%) and remain experienced in acute care (74%). GPs considered the peak hours (81%) and the high number of patients (73%) as the most negative aspects. Most GPs chose to provide the out-of-hours shifts themselves: 85% outsourced maximally 25% of their shifts. The percentage of outsourced shifts increased with age. Main reasons for outsourcing were the desire to have more private time (76%); the high workload in daytime practice (71%); and less the workload during out-of-hours (46%).

Conclusion: GPs are motivated to work in out-of-hours GP cooperatives, and they outsource few shifts. GPs consider the peak load and the large number of (non-urgent) help requests as the most negative aspects. To motivate and involve GPs for 7 × 24-h primary care, it is important to set limits on their workload.     

Access to diagnostic tests during GP out-of-hours care: A cross-sectional study of all GP out-of-hours services in the Netherlands

Background: In general practice, excluding serious conditions is one of the cornerstones of the consultation. Diagnostic tests are widely used to assist the decision-making process in these cases. Little is known about general practitioners’ (GPs) access to diagnostic tests at GP out-of-hours services.

Objectives: To determine GPs’ access to diagnostic tests—imaging, function tests, laboratory tests, and point-of-care tests (POCT)—during GP out-of-hours care and to assess whether access to diagnostic facilities differs between services located adjacent to or separate from an accident and emergency (A&E) department.

Methods: Cross-sectional survey of all 117 GP out-of-hours services in the Netherlands in 2014.

Results: One-hundred-seventeen GP out-of-hours services participated in the survey; response rate 100%. Access to diagnostic tests during GP out-of-hours care varied across services, although generally there was limited access. Electrocardiography was available in 26% (30/117) of all services, conventional radiography in 19% (22/117), laboratory tests between 37% (43/117) and 65% (76/117). All services had glucose POCT and urine dipstick tests available while none utilized troponin POCT. We observed no relevant differences in access to diagnostic tests between services adjacent to or separate from an A&E department.

Conclusion: GPs in the Netherlands had limited and varying access to diagnostic tests during GP out-of-hours care in 2014. Out-of-hours services adjacent to A&E departments do not offer wider access to diagnostic tests. Further research on the accessibility of diagnostic tests in other European countries with similar and different GP out-of-hours care systems could shed further light on the effects of accessibility to diagnostic tests.

Key Messages

• Our study shows that in 2014, GPs in the Netherlands had limited and varying access to diagnostic tests (imaging, function tests, laboratory tests and point-of-care tests) during GP out-of-hours care.

• Diagnostic tests are not more widely available to GPs working at GP out-of-hours services adjacent to hospitals with an accident and emergency department.

     

Influence of patient characteristics on preventive service delivery and general practitioners’ preventive performance indicators: A study in patients with hypertension or diabetes mellitus from Hungary

Background: Regular primary healthcare (PHC) performance monitoring to produce a set of performance indicators for provider effectiveness is a fundamental method for improving guideline adherence but there are potential negative impacts of the inadequate application of this approach. Since performance indicators can reflect patient characteristics and working environments, as well as PHC team contributions, inadequate monitoring practices can reduce their effectiveness in the prevention of cardiometabolic disorders.

Objectives: To describe the influence of patients’ characteristics on performance indicators of PHC preventive practices in patients with hypertension or diabetes mellitus.

Methods: This cross-sectional analysis was based on a network of 165 collaborating GPs. A random sample of 4320 adults was selected from GP’s patient lists. The response rate was 97.3% in this survey. Sociodemographic status, lifestyle, health attitudes and the use of recommended preventive PHC services were surveyed by questionnaire. The relationship between the use of preventive services and patient characteristics were analysed using hierarchical regression models in a subsample of 1659 survey participants with a known diagnosis of hypertension or diabetes mellitus.

Results: Rates of PHC service utilization varied from 18.0% to 97.9%, and less than half (median: 44.4%; IQR: 30.8–62.5) of necessary services were used by patients. Patient attitude was as strong of an influencing factor as demographic properties but was remarkably weaker than patient socioeconomic status.

Conclusion: These findings emphasize that PHC performance indicators have to be evaluated concerning patient characteristics.     

General practitioners’ perspectives on primary care consultations for suicidal patients

Little is known about general practitioners’ (GPs’) perspectives, management of and interactions with suicidal patients prior to the patient's suicide. The aims of the study were to explore GPs’ interpretations of patient communication and treatment in primary care leading up to suicide and to investigate the relationship between GPs and mental health services prior to a patient's suicide. Thirty‐nine semi‐structured interviews with GPs of people who had died by suicide were conducted as part of a retrospective study. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach. The following themes emerged from GP interviews: (i) GP interpretations of suicide attempts or self‐harm; (ii) professional isolation; and (iii) GP responsibilities versus patient autonomy. GPs recruited for the study may have different views from GPs who have never experienced a patient suicide or who have experienced the death of a patient by suicide who was not under the care of specialist services. Our findings may not be representative of the rest of the United Kingdom, although many of the issues identified are likely to apply across services. This study highlighted the following recommendations for future suicide prevention in general practice: increasing GP awareness of suicide‐related issues and improving training and risk assessment skills; removing barriers to accessing therapies and treatments needed in primary care; improving liaison and collaboration between services to provide better patient outcomes; and increasing awareness in primary care about why patients may not want treatments offered by focusing on each individual's situational context.