A rural/urban comparison of the roles of the general practitioner in colorectal cancer management

Do General Practitioners in a Visiting Medical Officer Arrangement Improve the Perceived Quality of Care of Rural and Remote Patients? A Qualitative Study in Australia

Background: In rural and remote Australia, general practitioners (GPs) provide care across the continuum from primary to secondary care, often in Visiting Medical Officer (VMO) arrangements with a local hospital. However, little is known about the role of GP-VMOs in improving the perceived quality of care and health outcomes for rural and remote communities. Methods: We collected qualitative data from three GP-VMOs (all aged >55 years) and 10 patients (all aged over 65 years) in three local health districts of New South Wales, Australia. Thirteen in-depth interviews were conducted between October 2020 and February 2021. We employed thematic analysis to identify key roles of GP-VMOs in improving the perceived quality of care and health outcomes of rural and remote patients. Results: Our study advances the current understanding regarding the role of GP-VMOs in improving the perceived quality of services and health outcomes of rural and remote patients. Key roles of GP-VMOs in improving the perceived quality of care include promoting the continuity of care and integrated health services, cultivating trust from local communities, and enhancing the satisfaction of patients. Conclusions: GP-VMOs work across primary and secondary care creating better linkages and promoting the continuity of care for rural and remote communities. Employing GP-VMOs in rural hospitals enables the knowledge and sensitivity gained from their ongoing interactions with patients in primary care to be effectively utilised in the delivery of hospital care.

Effects of employing primary care doctors in hospital to improve the quality of care and health outcomes of rural patients: A systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To describe effects of employing primary care doctors in hospital care and their roles in improving the quality of care and health outcomes of rural and remote patients.

DESIGN

A systematic scoping review.

SETTING

Peer-reviewed publications were sourced from 3 online journal databases (PUBMED, SCOPUS and Web of Science).

PARTICIPANTS

All study designs from peer-reviewed journals that discussed effects of employing primary care doctors in hospital care Interventions: employing primary care doctors in hospital care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Positive and negative consequences of employing primary care doctors in hospital care, and the roles of primary care doctors in improving the quality of care and health outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Positive outcomes included improved access to specialised treatment, improved continuity of care, reduced waiting list and admission rates, improved skills, competence and confidence of primary care doctors, and increased satisfaction from both health providers and patients/families. Negative consequences reported included increased prescriptions and poorly documented history and physical examinations.

CONCLUSION

Employing primary care doctors in hospital care can fill the gaps in the delivery of acute care, emergency medicine and maternity care. Primary care doctors bring advanced clinical skills and a patient-centred approach to the hospital care. They also improve the quality of referrals leading to freed-up clinical capacity of tertiary hospitals to treat more serious conditions. The provision of acute or emergency care and secondary care in rural and remote areas should be directed towards patient-oriented not provider-oriented policies.

Danish general practitioners' management of patients with COPD: a nationwide survey

BACKGROUND

In Denmark, general practitioners (GPs) have the main responsibility for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Internationally, COPD appears to be significantly under-treated, which could be explained by 'therapeutic nihilism' or lack of knowledge.

AIM

To investigate: (1) To what extent COPD management provided by GPs includes the core elements of pharmacological treatment, smoking cessation and physical activity, and (2) To what extent GPs need educational support and consulting with a specialist in pulmonary medicine.

DESIGN

A national cross-sectional web-based survey conducted in April-June 2019. The survey included items on COPD management and educational support needs.

SETTING

Danish general practice.

SUBJECTS

A population of approximately 3400 GPs (all GPs in Denmark).

RESULTS

We received response from 470 GPs (14% response rate). Overall, the respondents reported that they offered COPD management including all relevant treatment elements. Smoking cessation was supported in 58% and physical activity was supported in 23% of the respondents. Future consultations on smoking cessation were planned by 35% and physical activity by 15% respondents. GPs responded to 'needing educational support in COPD management' to a 'high degree' in 8% and to 'some degree' in 43%.

CONCLUSION

The survey suggested that COPD maintenance support provided by GPs seemed to be inadequate regarding smoking cessation and physical activity. Moreover, some GPs expressed a need for educational support in COPD management. More research is needed to understand the potential barriers to evidence-based delivery of COPD-management. Key points In Denmark, general practitioners (GPs) have the main responsibility for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The present study shows that non-pharmacological interventions such as supporting smoking cessation and particularly promoting physical activity received less attention than pharmacological treatment. The study suggests a need for educational support of the GPs in COPD management.

Regional differences in reasons for consultation and general practitioners' spectrum of services in northern Germany - results of a cross-sectional observational study

Background

Among other factors, the patients’ consultation reasons and GPs’ spectrum of services determine the process and outcome of the medical treatment. So far, however, there has been little information on differences in reasons for consultation and GPs’ services between urban and rural areas. Our study’s goal was thus to investigate these factors in relation to the regional location of GPs’ practices.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional observational study based on standardised GP interviews in a quota sampling design. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were divided into three regional categories (urban area, environs, rural area) and stratified proportionally to the population size. Differences in the number of reasons for consultation and services were analysed by multivariate linear regressions in mixed models adjusted for random effects on the levels of the German federal states and administrative districts. Differences in individual consultation reasons and services were identified by logistic regression via stepwise forward and backward selection.

Results

Primary care practices in 34 of the 37 selected administrative districts (91.9%) were represented in the dataset. In total, 211 GPs were personally interviewed. On average, GPs saw 344 patients per month with a slightly higher number of patients in rural areas. They reported 59.1 ± 15.4 different reasons for consultation and 30.3 ± 3.9 different services. There was no statistically significant regional variation in the number of different consultation reasons, but there was a broader service spectrum by rural GPs (ß = − 1.42; 95% confidence interval − 2.75/− 0.08; p = 0.038) which was statistically explained by a higher level of medical training. Additionally, there were differences in the frequency of individual consultation reasons and services between rural and urban areas.

Conclusion

GPs in rural areas performed more frequently services usually provided by medical specialists in urban areas. This might be caused by a low availability of specialists in rural areas. The association between medical training and service spectrum might imply that GPs compensate the specific needs of their patients by completing advanced medical training before or after setting up a medical practice.

Trial registration

The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02558322).

Australian GPs' perceptions of barriers and enablers to best practice palliative care: a qualitative study

Background

General Practitioners (GPs) often play an important role in caring for people at the end of life. While some international studies suggest that GPs experience a number of barriers to providing palliative care, little is known about views and experiences of GPs in Australia. This study explored Australian GPs’ perceptions of barriers and enablers to the provision of palliative care and provides new insights into how to implement best practice care at the end of life.

Methods

This was a qualitative study using 25 semi-structured phone interviews conducted with GPs practising in metropolitan and non-metropolitan New South Wales, Australia. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

GPs reported difficulties with palliative care provision due to i) the complex and often emotional nature of doctor-family-interaction; ii) a lack of evidence to guide care; and iii) the need to negotiate roles and responsibilities within the healthcare team. GPs listed a number of strategies to help deal with their workload and to improve communication processes between healthcare providers. These included appropriate scheduling of appointments, locally tailored mentoring and further education, and palliative care guidelines which more clearly outline the roles and responsibilities within multidisciplinary teams. GPs also noted the importance of online platforms to facilitate their communication with patients, their families and other healthcare providers, and to provide centralised access to locally tailored information on palliative care services. GPs suggested that non-government organisations could play an important role by raising awareness of the key role of GPs in palliative care provision and implementing an “official visitor” program, i.e. supporting volunteers to provide peer support or respite to people with palliative care needs and their families.

Conclusions

This study offers new insights into strategies to overcome well documented barriers to palliative care provision in general practice and help implement optimal care at the end of life. The results suggest that researchers and policy makers should adopt a comprehensive approach to improving the provision of palliative care which tackles the array of barriers and enablers identified in this study.

End-of-life care in rural general practice: how best to support commitment and meet challenges?

BACKGROUND

Few studies have specifically assessed the scope, nature and challenges of palliative and end-of-life care in rural general practice. These knowledge gaps limit the development of evidence-based policies and services for patients in the last months of life. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and other stakeholders on rural GPs' involvement and challenges in providing palliative and end-of-life care in regional Australia.

METHODS

A qualitative study involving five focus groups with 26 GPs based in rural/regional Western Australia together with 15 individual telephone interviews with four GPs and 11 other stakeholders involved in end-of-life care across Australia.

RESULTS

The rural GPs' central role in end-of-life care was recognized by the majority of participants but multiple challenges were also identified. Some challenges were comparable to those found in urban settings but others were more pronounced, including resource limitations and lack of training. Inappropriate payment models discouraged GPs' involvement in some aspects of end-of-life care, such as case conferences and home visits. Compared to GPs in urban settings, those in rural/regional communities often reported closer doctor-patient relationships and better care integration and collaboration. These positive aspects of care could be further developed to enhance service provision. Our study highlighted the importance of regular interactions with other professionals and patients in providing end-of-life care, but many GPs and other stakeholders found such interactions more challenging than the more "technical" aspects of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural/regional GPs appear to be disproportionately affected by inappropriate payment models and limited resources, but may benefit from closer doctor-patient relationships and better care integration and collaboration relative to urban GPs. Systematic collection of empirical data on GP management at end-of-life is required to build on these strengths and address the challenges.

The role of the GP in follow-up cancer care: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study is to explore the role of the general practitioners, family physicians and primary care physicians (GP) in the provision of follow-up cancer care.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL were systematically searched for primary research focussing on the role of the GP from the perspective of GPs and patients. Data were extracted using a standardised form and synthesised using a qualitative descriptive approach.

RESULTS

The initial search generated 6487 articles: 25 quantitative and 33 qualitative articles were included. Articles focused on patients' and GPs' perspectives of the GP role in follow-up cancer care. Some studies reported on the current role of the GP, barriers and enablers to GP involvement from the perspective of the GP and suggestions for future GP roles. Variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector exist. However, GPs and patients across the included studies supported a greater GP role in follow-up cancer care. This included greater support for care coordination, screening, diagnosis and management of physical and psychological effects of cancer and its treatment, symptom and pain relief, health promotion, palliative care and continuing normal general health care provision.

CONCLUSION

While there are variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector, GPs and patients across the reviewed studies supported a greater role by the GP.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Greater GP role in cancer care could improve the quality of patient care for cancer survivors. Better communication between the tertiary sector and GP across the cancer phases would enable clear delineation of roles.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Are Cancer Patients' Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors Associated with Contact to General Practitioners in the Last Phase of Life?

Introduction. General practitioners (GPs) play an important role in end of life care, which should be offered regardless of socioeconomic position and cultural factors. The aim was to analyse associations between GP contacts at the end of life and socioeconomic and cultural characteristics of Danish cancer patients. Method. Population-based study identifying 599 adults who died of cancer from March to November 2006, in Aarhus County, Denmark. Associations between health register-based data on "total GP face-to-face contacts" and "GP home visits" during the last 90 days of life and patients' socioeconomic and cultural characteristics were calculated. Results. Having low income (RR: 1.18 (95% CI: 1.03; 1.35)) and being immigrants or descendants of immigrants (RR: 1.17 (95% CI: 1.02; 1.35)) were associated with GP face-to-face contacts. However, patients living in large municipalities had lower likelihood of having both GP face-to-face contacts in general (RR: 0.85 (95% CI: 0.77;0.95)) and GP home visits (RR: 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80; 0.99)). Conclusion. This study indicates higher proportion of GP contacts to economically deprived patients and immigrants/descendants of immigrants. These subgroups were, however, small and results should be looked upon with caution. Furthermore, palliative needs were not included and together with urban/rural the underlying causes need further investigation.

Clinical pathway for the screening, assessment and management of anxiety and depression in adult cancer patients: Australian guidelines

PURPOSE

A clinical pathway for anxiety and depression in adult cancer patients was developed to guide best practice in Australia.

METHODS

The pathway was based on a rapid review of existing guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, stakeholder interviews, a Delphi process with 87 multidisciplinary stakeholders and input from a multidisciplinary advisory panel.

RESULTS

The pathway recommends formalized routine screening for anxiety and depression in patients with cancer at key points in the patient's journey. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System or distress thermometer with problem checklist is recommended as brief screening tools, combined with a more detailed tool, such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, to identify possible cases. A structured clinical interview will be required to confirm diagnosis. When anxiety or depression is identified, it is recommended that one person in a treating team takes responsibility for coordinating appropriate assessment, referral and follow-up (not necessarily carrying these out themselves). A stepped care model of intervention is proposed, beginning with the least intensive available that is still likely to provide significant health gain. The exact intervention, treatment length and follow-up timelines, as well as professionals involved, are provided as a guide only. Each service should identify their own referral network based on local resources and current service structure, as well as patient preference.

DISCUSSION

This clinical pathway will assist cancer services to design their own systems to detect and manage anxiety and depression in their patients, to improve the quality of care.

Keeping primary care "in the loop": General practitioners want better communication with specialists and hospitals when caring for people diagnosed with cancer

AIM

To investigate general practitioners' (GP) perceptions about communication when providing cancer care.

METHODS

A self-report survey, which included an open response section, was mailed to a random sample of 1969 eligible Australian GPs. Content analysis of open response comments pertaining to communication was undertaken in order to ascertain GPs' views about communication issues in the provision of cancer care.

RESULTS

Of the 648 GPs who completed the survey, 68 (10%) included open response comments about interprofessional communication. Participants who commented on communication were a median age of 50 years and worked 33 h/week; 28% were male and 59% practiced in the metropolitan area. Comments pertaining to communication were coded using five non-mutually exclusive categories: being kept in the loop; continuity of care; relationships with specialists; positive communication experiences; and strategies for improving communication.GPs repeatedly noted the importance of receiving detailed and timely communication from specialists and hospitals, particularly in relation to patients' treatment regimes and follow-up care. Several GPs remarked that they were left out of "the information loop" and that patients were "lost" or "dumped" after referral.

CONCLUSION

While many GPs are currently involved in some aspects of cancer management, detailed and timely communication between specialists and GPs is imperative to support shared care and ensure optimal patient outcomes. This research highlights the need for established channels of communication between specialist and primary care medicine to support greater involvement by GPs in cancer care.

Australian general practitioners' preferences for managing the care of people diagnosed with cancer

AIM

To investigate general practitioners' (GPs) preferences for involvement in the management of people diagnosed with the seven most frequent cancers and any barriers to or concerns about an expanded role for GPs.

METHODS

A self-report survey was mailed to a random sample of 1969 Australian GPs.

RESULTS

In all, 33% (648) of GPs participated. Participants were a median of 50 years and worked 38 h per week; 53% were male and 68% practiced in metropolitan areas. Most participants preferred to be involved in cancer prevention (86%) and initial diagnosis (85%). Fewer were interested in monitoring for recurrence (70%), follow up after treatment (68%), coordinating psychological support (70%) and palliative care (68%). Only 52% of GPs had a preference for providing supportive care to manage the symptoms of cancer treatment, 45% for managing postoperative care and 40% for coordinating treatment. On multivariate analysis, preference for involvement in more aspects of cancer management increased with age (P = 0.030), if the GP practiced in rural compared to metropolitan areas (P = 0.005), was a partner in a practice compared to a sole practitioner (P = 0.003), had previously received cancer-specific training (P < 0.001) or was interested in future training (P < 0.001). Open responses identified limited time, communication and information transfer between GP and specialists as important barriers to involvement in cancer management.

CONCLUSION

While many GPs are currently involved in some aspects of cancer management, with training, good communication and support from specialists this role may be successfully expanded.

Out-of-hours medical care for terminally ill patients: A survey of availability and preferences of general practitioners

BACKGROUND

Continuity of care is one of the core values of good medical care for terminally ill patients. The availability of one's own general practitioner (GP) out of hours is regarded as important for personal continuity. Few data are available about the extent of out-of-hours care given by GPs to their terminally ill patients.

AIM

The objective of this study was to determine to which level GPs are available out of hours for their own terminally ill patients and to elicit what factors are relevant to this availability.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The research questions were investigated using a cross-sectional study of Dutch GPs. A questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 691 Dutch GPs.

RESULTS

The response rate was 47% (n = 327). Of the respondents, 86% was willing to provide out-of-hours care for their own terminally ill patients. These figures are higher than reported in previous studies. This study shows that out-of-hours availability correlates most strongly with the GPs' perception of duties of care. Availability is negatively influenced if the GP is in a salaried job, if he or she works in a city based practice, or if home is far from the practice. A correlation between age, sex, and experience of GPs and availability for out-of- hours care for their terminally ill patients was not confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

The reported out-of-hours availability of GPs for terminally ill patients is still high. GPs' perception of their duty of care might change in the next generations, and the increasing number of salaried GPs, living far from their practice, might threaten out-of-hours availability for terminally ill patients. GPs' perception of their duty of care might change in the next generations, and the increasing number of salaried GPs living far from their practice might threaten out-of-hours availability for terminally ill patients.

General Practitioners' perceptions of their role in cancer care and factors which influence this role

Effective cancer care depends on inter-sectoral and inter-professional communication. General Practitioners (GPs) play a pivotal role in managing the health of most Australians, but their role in cancer care is unclear. This qualitative study explored GPs' views of this role and factors influencing their engagement with cancer care. Twelve metropolitan and non-metropolitan GPs in Queensland, Australia, were recruited between April and May 2008, and three focus groups and one interview were conducted using open-ended questions. The transcripts were analysed thematically. The first theme, GPs' perceptions of their role, comprised subthemes corresponding to four phases of the trajectory. The second theme, Enhancing GPs' involvement in ongoing cancer care, comprised subthemes regarding enhanced communication and clarification of roles and expectations. GPs' role in cancer care fluctuates between active advocacy during diagnosis and palliation, and ambivalent redundancy in between. The role is influenced by socioeconomic, clinical and geographical factors, patients' expectations and GPs' motivation. Not all participants wanted an enhanced role in cancer care, but all valued better specialist-GP communication. Role clarification is needed, together with greater mutual trust between GPs and specialists. Key needs included accessible competency training and mentoring for doctors unfamiliar with the system. Existing system barriers and workforce pressures in general practice must be addressed to improve the sharing of cancer care. Only one metropolitan focus group was conducted, so saturation of themes may not have been reached. The challenges of providing cancer care in busy metropolitan practices are multiplied in non-metropolitan settings with less accessible resources and where distance affects specialist communication. Non-metropolitan GPs learn from experience how to overcome referral and communication challenges. While the GPs identified solutions to their concerns, the role can be daunting. GPs are motivated to provide long-term care for their patients, but need to be acknowledged and supported by the health system.

Predictors of Canadian physicians' prevention counseling practices

OBJECTIVE

To understand predictors of Canadian physicians' prevention counseling practices.

METHODS

A national mailed survey of a random sample of Canadian physicians conducted November 2007-May 2008.

RESULTS

Primary care physicians (n=3213) responded to the survey (41% response rate); those with better personal health habits, female physicians, and physicians aged 45-64 years old were more likely to report "usually/always" counseling patients than did others, but there were no significant differences by province, origin of one's MD degree, or practice location. There was a clear and consistent relationship between personal and clinical prevention practices: non-smokers were significantly more likely to report counseling patients on smoking cessation; those who drank alcohol less frequently, drank lower quantities or binged less often were more likely to counsel on alcohol; those exercising more to counsel patients more about exercise; those eating more fruits and vegetables to counsel patients more often about nutrition; and those with lower weight were more likely to counsel about nutrition, weight or exercise. Physicians who strongly agreed or agreed that "they will perform better counseling if they have healthy habits" averaged higher rates of counseling (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Personal characteristics of Canadian physicians help predict prevention counseling. These data suggest that by encouraging physicians to be healthy, we can improve healthy habits among their patients--an innovative, beneficent, evidence-based approach to encouraging physicians to counsel patients about prevention.