Patient enablement after a consultation with a general practitioner-Explaining variation between countries, practices and patients

[Systematic review of the primary care quality assessment instruments used in the last 10 years]

OBJECTIVE

There are numerous instruments in the scientific literature for the evaluation of the quality of Primary Care (PC) and to know which of them are the most used and in which countries provides more information to make a well-founded decision. The aim is to determine which, between 2013 and 2023, have been the instruments used to assess the international quality of PC, its evolution and geographical distribution.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Embase. From March to December 2023.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

1) Validation studies of specific assessment instruments to measure the quality of PC and/or the satisfaction of patients, providers or managers. 2) carried out in the field of PC and 3) published between 1/01/2013 and 01/02/2023. 83 full-text articles were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

From each publication, an instrument used to evaluate the quality of the PC, attributes of the PC it evaluates, recipient of the evaluation, user, provider or manager, year, and country.

RESULTS

Fifteen PC assessment instruments were found. The most widely used is the Primary Care Assessing Tool (PCAT), with wide geographical distribution, versions in several languages, is more limited in Europe, except in Spain, and is mostly used in the Primary Care Assessing Tool (PCAT).

CONCLUSIONS

The PCAT, due to its cultural adaptability, availability in several languages, its ability to evaluate the fundamental principles of PC enunciated by the World Health Organization and to contemplate the perspectives of all health agents, is a complete, versatile, and consistent questionnaire for the evaluation of the quality of PC.

[IPAs mentioning PCS mobilize a care model based on patient partnership]

The Impact program aims to structure the care provided by advanced practice nurses (APNs) for people with chronic illnesses, based on the humanistic health partnership model. This model, based on patient partnership, is enriched by measurement tools that take into account four determinants of adaptation to chronic illness. Impact aims to improve patient partnership, individualize care and integrate IPAs into a research dynamic.

The relationship between patient enablement and help-seeking in the context of blood cancer symptoms

OBJECTIVE

Approaches to improve earlier diagnosis of cancer often focus on symptom awareness as a key driver of help-seeking behaviour and other psychological influences are less well understood. This is the first study to explore the role of patient enablement on help-seeking for people experiencing potential blood cancer symptoms.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, nationally representative survey was completed by 434 respondents (>18 years). Questions asked about symptom experiences, medical help-seeking and re-consultation. Existing patient enablement items were included in the newly developed Blood Cancer Awareness Measure. We collected data on patient socio-demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Of those responding to the survey 224/434 (51.6%) reported experiencing at least one potential blood cancer symptom. Half of those experiencing symptoms (112/224) had sought medical help. Results from logistic regression analysis showed that higher scores on patient enablement were associated with being less likely to seek help (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.89, Confidence Interval [CI] 0.81-0.98) after controlling for socio-demographics. Separate analyses showed that higher enablement was associated with being more comfortable to re-consult if symptoms didn't go away or got worse (OR 1.31, CI 1.16-1.48); after a test result suggested there was nothing to worry about, but symptoms persisted (OR 1.23, CI 1.12-1.34) or to request further tests, scans or investigations (OR 1.31, CI 1.19-1.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to our hypotheses, patient enablement was associated with lower likelihood of help-seeking for potential blood cancer symptoms. Yet enablement appears to play an important role in likelihood of re-consulting when symptoms persist, get worse or need further investigation.

Assessing awareness of blood cancer symptoms and barriers to symptomatic presentation: measure development and results from a population survey in the UK

BACKGROUND

Low levels of cancer awareness may contribute to delays in seeking medical help and subsequent delays in diagnosis. For blood cancer this may be a particularly prominent problem due to the high prevalence of undifferentiated symptoms such as bodily pain, weakness, nausea and weight loss, resulting in low symptom awareness. The delay is exacerbated by the dismissal of similar symptoms which are often interpreted as mild disease, resulting in multiple consultations prior to diagnosis. This study describes the development of a Cancer Awareness Measure for Blood Cancer (Blood CAM) and presents results from a population-representative survey using the measure.

METHODS

A rapid systematic review identified constructs relevant to blood cancer. Items were taken from previous awareness measures and other literature and reviewed by expert groups including health care professionals and patients. Cognitive interviews were conducted with ten members of the public to check comprehension and clarity. A total sample of 434 participants completed the survey at Time 1 and n = 302 at Time 2 (two weeks later).

RESULTS

Internal reliability was high across the different constructs included in the questionnaire (> 0.70) and test-retest reliability was moderate to good (0.49-0.79). The most commonly recognised blood cancer symptoms were unexplained weight loss (68.9%) and unexplained bleeding (64.9%) and the least commonly recognised symptoms were night sweats (31.3%) breathlessness and rash/itchy skin (both 44%). In terms of symptom experience, fatigue was the most commonly reported symptom (26.7%) followed by night sweats (25.4%). Exploratory factor analysis of barriers to presenting at primary care revealed three distinct categories of barriers; emotional, external/practical and service/healthcare professional related. Service and emotional barriers were most common.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a valid and reliable tool to assess blood cancer awareness and showed variable awareness of blood cancer symptoms which can help target public health campaigns. We also incorporated additional measures (e.g. confidence to re-consult, ability to understand symptoms) that could be used to tailor public messaging for blood cancer and for other harder to suspect and diagnose cancers.

The influence of cultural and religious factors on cross-national variations in the prevalence of chronic back and neck pain: an analysis of data from the global burden of disease 2019 study

Introduction

Low back pain and neck pain are among the most commonly reported forms of chronic pain worldwide, and are associated with significant distress, disability and impairment in quality of life. Though these categories of pain can be analyzed and treated from a biomedical perspective, there is evidence that they are both related to psychological variables such as depression and anxiety. The experience of pain can be significantly influenced by cultural values. For example, cultural beliefs and attitudes can influence the meaning attached to the experience of pain, the responses of others to a sufferer's pain, and the likelihood of seeking medical care for particular symptoms. Likewise, religious beliefs and practices can influence the both experience of pain and the responses to it. These factors have also been associated with variations in the severity of depression and anxiety.

Methods

In the current study, data on the estimated national prevalence of both low back pain and neck pain, obtained from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD 2019), is analyzed in relation to cross-national variations in cultural values, as measured using Hofstede's model (n =115 countries) and in religious belief and practice, based on the most recent Pew Research Center survey (n = 105 countries). To address possible confounding factors, these analyses were adjusted for variables known to be associated with chronic low back or neck pain, namely smoking, alcohol use, obesity, anxiety, depression and insufficient physical activity.

Results

It was found that the cultural dimensions of Power Distance and Collectivism were inversely correlated with the prevalence of chronic low back pain, and Uncertainty Avoidance was inversely correlated with the prevalence of chronic neck pain, even after adjustment for potential confounders. Measures of religious affiliation and practice were negatively correlated with the prevalence of both conditions, but these associations were not significant after adjusting for cultural values and confounders.

Discussion

These results highlight the existence of meaningful cross-cultural variations in the occurrence of common forms of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Psychological and social factors that could account for these variations are reviewed, along with their implications for the holistic management of patients with these disorders.

Good communication was valued as more important than accessibility according to 707 Nordic primary care patients: a report from the QUALICOPC study

OBJECTIVE

To explore Nordic patients' ranking of the importance of different aspects of general practice.

DESIGN

Patients ranked the importance of 47 statements reflecting five quality domains: communication, involvement, accessibility, continuity, and comprehensiveness.

SETTING

Nordic general practice.

SUBJECTS

Patients ≥18 years in general practitioners waiting rooms.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Items rated as important or very important by ≥ 90% in all countries were identified. Associations with patient characteristics were analysed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

209 Danish, 175 Norwegian, 129 Finnish, 112 Swedish and 82 Icelandic patients responded. Ten statements were ranked as important or very important by ≥90% in each country. Six pertained to communication, three to patient involvement and one to the comprehensiveness of care. No items regarding accessibility or continuity exceeded the 90% limit. The item most frequently rated as very important was 'I understand what the GP explains''. Female patients were more likely to value personal treatment (OR = 2.9; 95%CI 1.5-5.5) and receiving instructions if things went wrong (1.7; 1.2-2.2). Older patients >65 years put less emphasis than those <35 on whether the GP takes them seriously (0.4; 0.3-0.5) and on the importance of instructions (0.5; 0.4-0.7). Patients with chronic diseases were less concerned (0.6; 0.4-0.8) with receiving instructions, but valued strongly that a GP knows when to refer (2.2; 1.5-3.3).

CONCLUSION

Patients in all countries assigned high value to good communication. Availability was deemed important but came secondary to good communication.

IMPLICATIONS

Organisational framework for general practice must allow for acceptable communication quality as well as availability.Key pointsIn order to identify relevant service areas for quality improvement in primary care, we aimed to increase knowledge of patient ranked importance of different dimensions of care.Nordic primary care patients valued good communication and involvement in decisions higher than accessibility to care.A singular focus on the access of care when developing services may not be in accordance with patient preferences.

Patient-reported experiences of consultation with an advanced nurse practitioner: Factor structure and reliability analysis of the patient enablement and satisfaction survey

AIM

The aim was to analyse the psychometric properties of a patient-reported-experience measure, the Patient Enablement and Satisfaction Survey (PESS), when used to evaluate the care provided by Advanced Nurse Practitioners (ANPs) in terms of factor structure and internal consistency. The PESS is a 20-item, patient-completed data collection tool that was originally developed to measure patient experience and enablement following consultation with nurses in general practice.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey; validity and reliability analysis.

METHODS

The sample in this study consisted of 178 patients who consulted with 26 ANPs working in four different specialities. Data were collected between June and December 2019. An exploratory factor analysis of the PESS was conducted to determine convergent validity which was supported by parallel analysis and the traditional Kaiser criterion. The internal consistency of individual PESS items was determined via Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, the Average Variance Extracted tests and item-subscale/total score correlations.

RESULTS

A three-factor structure (PESS-ANP) was found through exploratory factor analysis and this was supported by parallel analysis, the traditional Kaiser criterion and the percentage of variance explained criterion. A high degree of internal consistency was reported across all factors. One question was omitted from the analysis ('Overall Satisfaction') following the identification of problematic cross-loadings. The three factor solution was identified as: patient satisfaction, quality of care provision and patient enablement.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study propose a three-factor model that is sufficiently reliable for analysing the experience and enablement of patients following consultation with an ANP.

IMPACT

Increasingly, patient-reported experience measures are being used to evaluate patients' experience of receiving care from a healthcare professional. The PESS was identified to be reliable in evaluating the experience of patients who receive care from an ANP while a three-factor structure was proposed that can capture specific attributes of this care.

Patient enablement after a consultation with a general practitioner-Explaining variation between countries, practices and patients

BACKGROUND

Patient enablement is a concept developed to measure quality in primary health care. The comparative analysis of patient enablement in an international context is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To explain variation in patient enablement between patients, general practitioners (GPs) and countries. To find independent variables associated with enablement.

DESIGN

We constructed multi-level logistic regression models encompassing variables from patient, GP and country levels. The proportions of explained variances at each level and odds ratios for independent variables were calculated.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 7210 GPs and 58 930 patients in 31 countries were recruited through the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study framework. In addition, data from the Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) study and Hofstede's national cultural dimensions were combined with QUALICOPC data.

RESULTS

In the final model, 50.6% of the country variance and 18.4% of the practice variance could be explained. Cultural dimensions explained a major part of the variation between countries. Several patient-level and only a few practice-level variables showed statistically significant associations with patient enablement. Structural elements of the relevant health-care system showed no associations. From the 20 study hypotheses, eight were supported and four were partly supported.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

There are large differences in patient enablement between GPs and countries. Patient characteristics and patients' perceptions of consultation seem to have the strongest associations with patient enablement. When comparing patient-reported measures as an indicator of health-care system performance, researchers should be aware of the influence of cultural elements.