Collaboration between general practitioners and social workers: a scoping review

'There's a will, but not a way': Norwegian GPs' experiences of collaboration with child welfare services - a grounded theory study

BACKGROUND

Adverse childhood experiences can have immediate effects on a child's wellbeing and health and may also result in disorders and illness in adult life. General practitioners are in a good position to identify and support vulnerable children and parents and to collaborate with other agencies such as child welfare services. There is a need for better integration of relevant services. The aim of this study is to explore GPs' experiences of the collaboration process with child welfare services.

METHOD

This is a qualitative grounded theory study, with data consisting of ten semi-structured interviews with general practitioners across Norway.

RESULTS

The doctors' main concern was: 'There's a will, but not a way'. Three subordinate stages of the collaboration process were identified: (I) Familiar territory, with a whole-person approach to care by the doctor. (II) Unfamiliar territory, when child welfare becomes involved. Here, a one-way window of information and a closed door to dialogue perpetuate the doctors' lack of knowledge about child welfare services and uncertainty about what is happening to their patients. (III) Fragmented territory, where doctors experience lost opportunities to help and missing pieces in the patient's history.

CONCLUSION

General practitioners are willing to contribute to a collaborative process with child welfare, but this is hampered by factors such as poor information flow and opportunities for dialogue, and limited knowledge of the partner. This implies lost opportunities for doctors to help families and contribute their knowledge and potential actions to a child welfare case. It can also impede whole-person care and lead to fragmentation of patient pathways. To counteract this, electronic two-way communication could enable a collaborative process and relationships that enhance coordination between the parties. Making space for all parties and their individual roles was considered important to create a positive collaborative environment.

Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review

Objective

We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics.

Methods

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual on scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) for quantitative and qualitative studies in English, Spanish, French, and German with no time limit. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open.

Results

Of the 839 articles identified, 66 met the criteria for study eligibility, from which 61 instruments were identified. The publications were from 18 different countries, with most studies employing an observational design and including mostly adult patients. Among all instruments, 22 were reported as validated, which we present in this paper. Overall, quality criteria were reported differently, with studies generally providing little detail. Most of the instruments were used as paper and pencil questionnaires. We found considerable heterogeneity in the theoretical conceptualisation, definition, and measurement of PSPs, ranging from psychiatric case findings to specific social problems.

Discussion and conclusion

This review presents a number of tools and methods that have been studied and used in general practice research. Adapted and tailored to local circumstances, practice populations, and needs, they could be useful for identifying patients with PSPs in daily GP practice; however, this requires further research. Given the heterogeneity of studies and instruments, future research efforts should include both a more structured evaluation of instruments and the incorporation of consensus methods to move forward from instrument research to actual use in daily practice.

Gunnar Inghe: A founding father of Scandinavian social medicine and still highly relevant

Gunnar Inghe (1910-1977) was a founding father of Scandinavian social medicine and the first editor of the Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine. He worked as a physician for social care clients in Stockholm from 1944 to 1961 and was professor in social medicine from 1961 to 1975. We (F.D. and U.J.) were his last two PhD students. As we were recollecting the 50-year history of the Scandinavian Journal of Public Health in 2022, it became evident to us how relevant Gunnar Inghe's work, 45 years after his death, still is for today's social medicine, population health research and policy in Scandinavia. We shall explain why with five examples of Inghe's work: reproductive health, health of paupers, foundation of the discipline, international solidarity and collaboration between medical and social care.