How women with a family history of breast cancer and their general practitioners act on genetic advice in general practice: prospective longitudinal study.
Project description:PurposeGeneral practitioners (GPs) are part of the US physician workforce, but little is known about who they are, what they do, and how they differ from family physicians (FPs). We describe self-identified GPs and compare them with board-certified FPs.MethodsAnalysis of data on 102,604 Doctor of Medicine and Doctor of Osteopathy physicians in direct patient care in the United States in 2016, who identify themselves as GPs or FPs. The study used linking databases (American Medical Association Masterfile, American Board of Family Medicine [ABFM], Area Health Resource File, Medicare Public Use File) to examine personal, professional, and practice characteristics.ResultsOf the physicians identified, 6,661 self-designated as GPs and 95,943 self-designated as FPs. Of the self-designated GPs, 116 had been ABFM certified and were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 102,488 physicians, those who self-designated as GPs but were never ABFM certified constituted the GP group (n = 6,545, 6%). Self-designated FPs that were ABFM certified made up the FP group (n = 79,449, 78%). The remaining self-designated FPs not ABFM certified constituted the uncertified group (n = 16,494, 16%). GPs differed from FPs in every characteristic examined. Compared with FPs, GPs are more likely to be older, male, Doctors of Osteopathy, graduates of non-US medical schools, and have no family medicine residency training. GPs practice location is similar to FPs, but GPs are less likely to participate in Medicare or to work in hospitals.ConclusionsGPs in the United States are a varied group that differ from FPs. Researchers, educators, and policy makers should not lump GPs together with FPs in data collection, analysis, and reporting.
Project description:BackgroundIn order to integrate genomic medicine into routine patient care and stratify personal risk, it is increasingly important to record family history (FH) information in general/family practice records. This is true for classic genetic disease as well as multifactorial conditions. Research suggests that FH recording is currently inadequate.ObjectivesTo provide an up-to-date analysis of the frequency, quality, and accuracy of FH recording in UK general/family practice.MethodsAn exploratory study, based at St Leonard's Practice, Exeter-a suburban UK general/family practice. Selected adult patients registered for over 1 year were contacted by post and asked to complete a written FH questionnaire. The reported information was compared with the patients' electronic medical record (EMR). Each EMR was assessed for its frequency (how often information was recorded), quality (the level of detail included), and accuracy (how closely the information matched the patient report) of FH recording.ResultsTwo hundred and forty-one patients were approached, 65 (27.0%) responded and 62 (25.7%) were eligible to participate. Forty-three (69.4%) EMRs contained FH information. The most commonly recorded conditions were bowel cancer, breast cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. The mean quality score was 3.64 (out of 5). There was little negative recording. 83.2% of patient-reported FH information was inaccurately recorded or missing from the EMRs.ConclusionFH information in general/family practice records should be better prepared for the genomic era. Whilst some conditions are well recorded, there is a need for more frequent, higher quality recording with greater accuracy, especially for multifactorial conditions.
Project description:Interventions: Group 1: We want to evaluate the frequency of a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenomas in 40-54 year old persons in a general practitioner (GP) setting and identify the variables (e.g. demographic, genetic, epigenetic and proteomic biomarkers) that are associated with it. In addition, we want to detect informed decision, anxiety and regret with respect to screening. The health care assistant in the general practice will contact eligible patients and complete the Network against colorectal cancer questionnaire. For those who have a positive family history the GP will provide family members related to CRC patients with adequate evidence-based information and describe prevention strategies. We plan to examine the participant´s family history of CRC in detail and further variables (e.g. demographics) associated with an increased risk will be collected. Additional stool and blood samples will be collected from study-participants who decide to undergo a colonoscopy (n~350) and analyzed in the German Cancer Research Center (DKZF) Heidelberg to see whether further relevant variables are associated with an increased risk of CRC
We expect that about 8,750 person in 50 general practices in Hesse will be asked, of those about 875 are expected to have a positive family history of colorectal cancer. Of those, we expect around 350 persons to follow the invitation to have a colonoscopy.
Primary outcome(s): Frequency of a family history of (colorectal) cancer and advanced adenomas in a GP setting
Study Design: Allocation: N/A: single arm study; Masking: Open (masking not used); Control: uncontrolled; Assignment: single; Study design purpose: screening
Project description:BackgroundDigital triage tools for sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing can potentially be used as a substitute for the triage that general practitioners (GPs) perform to lower their work pressure. The studied tool is based on medical guidelines. The same guidelines support GPs' decision-making process. However, research has shown that GPs make decisions from a holistic perspective and, therefore, do not always adhere to those guidelines. To have a high-quality digital triage tool that results in an efficient care process, it is important to learn more about GPs' decision-making process.ObjectiveThe first objective was to identify whether the advice of the studied digital triage tool aligned with GPs' daily medical practice. The second objective was to learn which factors influence GPs' decisions regarding referral for diagnostic testing. In addition, this study provides insights into GPs' decision-making process.MethodsA qualitative vignette-based study using semistructured interviews was conducted. In total, 6 vignettes representing patient cases were discussed with the participants (GPs). The participants needed to think aloud whether they would advise an STI test for the patient and why. A thematic analysis was conducted on the transcripts of the interviews. The vignette patient cases were also passed through the digital triage tool, resulting in advice to test or not for an STI. A comparison was made between the advice of the tool and that of the participants.ResultsIn total, 10 interviews were conducted. Participants (GPs) had a mean age of 48.30 (SD 11.88) years. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital triage tool and of all participants was the same. In those vignettes, the patients' risk factors were sufficiently clear for the participants to advise the same as the digital tool. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital tool differed from that of the participants. Patient-related factors that influenced the participants' decision-making process were the patient's anxiety, young age, and willingness to be tested. Participants would test at a lower threshold than the triage tool because of those factors. Sometimes, participants wanted more information than was provided in the vignette or would like to conduct a physical examination. These elements were not part of the digital triage tool.ConclusionsThe advice to conduct a diagnostic STI test differed between a digital triage tool and GPs. The digital triage tool considered only medical guidelines, whereas GPs were open to discussion reasoning from a holistic perspective. The GPs' decision-making process was influenced by patients' anxiety, willingness to be tested, and age. On the basis of these results, we believe that the digital triage tool for STI testing could support GPs and even replace consultations in the future. Further research must substantiate how this can be done safely.
Project description:BackgroundGeneral practitioners are usually responsible for the early detection of burden due to informal care and the coordination of adequate measures. Their individual perspectives and approaches for identifying and supporting caregiving relatives have hardly been examined yet.ObjectiveThe study therefore examined subjective perspectives of general practitioners regarding the identification and care of family caregivers in general practitioners' practices. The results will help to evaluate the needs for improvement and conditions for implementation of an instrument to identify informal carers.Material and methodsTo answer the question, we conducted 12 guideline-based expert interviews with general practitioners from Saxony-Anhalt. To evaluate the interviews, we used qualitative content analysis (Mayring).ResultsWith respect to the medical care and support of caring relatives, the examination of subjective attitudes and perspectives confirmed that general practitioners occupy a central position. It also showed possibilities to improve or to facilitate support of caring relatives. Time-dependent problems and a lack of communication complicate support. Home care services and regional consulting services are available but a systematic cooperation and coordination of competences is still lacking.ConclusionA screening instrument for family caregivers (identification, measuring subjective burden) represents a meaningful intervention. The special requirements and characteristics of interventions used in general medical practice have to be researched, the burden scale for family caregivers should be adapted and implemented accordingly. The cooperation of all actors must be a central aspect of future efforts.
Project description:In several health systems of advanced countries, reforms have changed primary care in the last two decades. The literature has assessed the effects of a variety of interventions and individual factors on the behavior of general practitioners (GPs). However, there has been a lack of investigation concerning the influence of the resources embedded in the GPs' personal advice networks (i.e., social capital) on GPs' capacity to meet defined objectives. The present study has two goals: (a) to assess the GPs' personal advice networks according to the social capital framework and (b) to test the influence of such relationships on GPs' capacity to accomplish organizational goals.The data collection relied on administrative data provided by an Italian local health authority (LHA) and a survey administered to the GPs of the selected LHA. The GPs' personal advice networks were assessed through an ad-hoc instrument and interpreted as egocentric networks. Multivariate regression analyses assessed two different performance measures.Social capital may influence the GPs' capacity to meet targets, though the influence differs according to the objective considered. In particular, the higher the professional heterogeneity of a GP personal advice network, the lower her/his capacity is to meet targets of prescriptive appropriateness.Our findings might help to design more effective primary care reforms depending on the pursued goals. However, further research is needed.
Project description:BackgroundPharmacists are being increasingly employed as part of general practice teams globally, and their input has been associated with several clinical and economic benefits. However, there is a paucity of research focussing on general practitioners' (GPs') perceptions of pharmacist integration into practices in countries where this novel role for pharmacists is yet to become commonplace.ObjectiveTo explore GPs' perceptions of integrating pharmacists into general practices and to identify the behavioural determinants of GPs integrating pharmacists into practices.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with GPs practising in Ireland, who were sampled using a combination of purposive, convenience, and snowball sampling. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, which then were analysed using conventional content analysis and directed content analysis employing the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).ResultsSeventeen GPs were interviewed between November 2021 and February 2022. Seven TDF domains were identified as predominant in influencing GPs' perceptions of pharmacist integration into general practices. These perceptions were mostly positive, especially regarding patient outcomes, cost savings, and improving access to care. However, there were concerns about funding the role, affecting others' workloads, and pharmacists' training needs to work in practices.ConclusionThis study's theory-informed insight provides a deeper understanding of GPs' perceptions of pharmacists working in general practice and behaviours which can be targeted to help optimize integration. These findings should be utilized in future service development to preempt and address GPs' concerns ahead of pharmacist integration, as well as to inform the development of general practice-based pharmacist roles going forward.
Project description:BackgroundPharmacist services in general practice are expanding worldwide, with evidence to show pharmacists' presence in general practice has financial, workload, and clinical benefits. Yet, little is known globally about general practitioners' (GPs') views on their presence in general practice.ObjectiveTo synthesize the qualitative research evidence on GPs' views of pharmacist services in general practice.MethodsQualitative evidence synthesis; 8 electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2021 for qualitative studies that reported the views of GPs regarding pharmacist services in general practice. Data from included studies were analyzed using thematic synthesis. The Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach was used to assess the confidence in individual review findings.ResultsNineteen studies were included, which captured the views of 159 GPs from 8 different countries. Four analytical themes describing the factors that should be considered in the development or optimization of pharmacist services in general practice, based on the views of GPs, were developed from the coded data and descriptive themes: (i) optimal environment for a pharmacist, (ii) the ideal pharmacist characteristics, (iii) complex stakeholder relationships, and (iv) benefits of an effective pharmacist.ConclusionBased on the synthesis of GPs' views, we have created a conceptual model of factors that should be considered by policymakers, GPs, pharmacists, and other relevant stakeholders when developing or optimizing pharmacist services in general practice going forward.
Project description:Although tobacco smoking is the world's most important preventable cause of many chronic diseases (including COPD and asthma) and premature death, many physicians do not routinely apply smoking cessation in the daily health care of their patients. Two widely felt important concerns of physicians are that smoking cessation as part of a treatment is time-consuming and may jeopardize their relationship with patients. Very Brief Advice (VBA) is a non-confrontational method, which could assist general practitioners (GPs) as a simple, quick first step in getting patients to stop smoking. In this study, we investigated the opinions and experiences of GPs with VBA in their routine care in two rounds of telephone interviews with 19 GPs. The interviews were recorded and transcribed and subsequently analysed with NVivo12. We observed that the GPs had a very positive experience with using VBA. They found the method to be efficient as to the time involved, patient-friendly and easy to implement.
Project description:We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of burnout among French general practitioners in private practice and to study the risk and protective factors of burnout. A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted with French GPs working in a private practice in France who were asked to fulfil an internet questionnaire. We used the secure internet application REDCap®. Exclusion criteria were only working in a hospital, substitute doctors, and internship students. There was a putative sample size of 88,886 GPs. We retrieved the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), occupational characteristics (type of installation, emergency regulated shifts, night shifts, university supervisor, weekly hours worked, seniority), and personal characteristics such as age, gender, marital status, and number of children. We included 1926 GPs among the 2602 retrieved questionnaires. A total of 44.8% of French liberal GPs were experiencing burnout, with 4.8% (95%CI 3.9-5.9%) experiencing severe burnout. The risk factors of severe burnout were male gender (RR = 1.91, 95%CI 1.15-3.16), working in a suburban area (5.23, 2.18-12.58), and having more than 28 appointments per day (1.95, 1.19-3.19). Working more than 50 h weekly showed a tendency to increase the risk of severe burnout (1.55, 0.93-2.59, p = 0.095), with a significant increase in the risk of low and moderate burnout (1.31, 1.02-1.67 and 1.86, 1.34-2.57, respectively). Protective factors were mainly resident training, which decreased the risk of both low, moderate, and severe burnout (0.65, 0.51-0.83; 0.66, 0.48-0.92; and 0.42, 95%CI 0.23-0.76, respectively). Performing home visits decreased the risk of severe burnout (0.25, 0.13-0.47), as did group practice for intermediate level of burnout (0.71, 0.51-0.96). GPs are at a high risk of burnout, with nearly half of them in burnout, with burnout predominantly affecting males and those between the ages of 50 and 60 years old. The main risk factors were a high workload with more than 28 appointments per day or 50 h of work per week, and the main protective factors were related to social cohesion such having a teaching role and working in a group practice with back-office support.