1
|
Atkins E, Birmpili P, Kellar I, Glidewell L, Cromwell DA. Documentary analysis of national and international guidance for community clinicians referring patients with suspected chronic limb-threatening ischaemia. BMJ Open Qual 2024; 13:e002784. [PMID: 38769026 PMCID: PMC11110609 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delayed referral of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI) from the community to vascular services may increase risk of amputation due to delayed revascularisation. Lack of appropriate guidance for clinicians in the community may contribute to this problem. This documentary analysis investigated referral guidance available to primary care clinicians. METHODS National and international documents providing guidance on CLTI management were identified by searching sources including Medline, Embase, Guidelines International Network and College/Society websites. Data were extracted on referral recommendations, target audience and author groups. Recommendations were coded according to the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy. Clinical practice guideline quality and ease of implementation were assessed independently by two reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and Guideline Implementability Appraisal (GLIA) tools, respectively. RESULTS 12 documents containing guidance on CLTI referrals were included. Five were clinical practice guidelines. Nine targeted clinicians in the community among their audience, yet only one included a primary care clinician in their author group. Recommendations on identification and referral of CLTI were often in non-specific language and frequently assumed specialist knowledge of vascular disease. Just 4 of the 93 behaviour change techniques were identified in the guidance documents. Three relevant domains of the AGREE II tool were scored for five clinical practice guidelines: stakeholder involvement (range 21.4%-52.4%, mean 42.9%), clarity of presentation (range 71.4%-92.9%, mean 82.9%) and applicability (25.0%-57.1%, mean 36.8%). The GLIA tool identified barriers to ease of implementation for all five clinical practice guidelines. CONCLUSIONS Most guidance for clinicians in the community on the management of CLTI has been written without their input and assumes knowledge of vascular disease, which may be lacking. Future guidance development should involve community clinicians, consider using additional behaviour change techniques, and improve the applicability and ease of implementation of recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eleanor Atkins
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
| | - Panagiota Birmpili
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
- Hull York Medical School, Hull, UK
| | | | | | - David A Cromwell
- Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cronin M, McLoughlin K, Foley T, McGilloway S. Supporting family carers in general practice: a scoping review of clinical guidelines and recommendations. BMC PRIMARY CARE 2023; 24:234. [PMID: 37932659 PMCID: PMC10626724 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-023-02188-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Increasing numbers of family carers are providing informal care in community settings. This creates a number of challenges because family carers are at risk of poor physical and psychological health outcomes, with consequences both for themselves and those for whom they provide care. General Practitioners (GPs), who play a central role in community-based care, are ideally positioned to identify, assess, and signpost carers to supports. However, there is a significant gap in the literature in respect of appropriate guidance and resources to support them in this role. METHODS A scoping review was undertaken to examine clinical guidelines and recommendations for GPs to support them in their role with family carers. This involved a multidisciplinary team, in line with Arksey & O'Malley's framework, and entailed searches of ten peer-reviewed databases and grey literature between September-November 2020. RESULTS The searches yielded a total of 4,651 English language papers, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion after removing duplicates, screening titles and abstracts, and performing full-text readings. Ten papers focused on resources/guidelines for GPs, twenty were research papers, three were review papers, one was a framework of quality markers for carer support, and one was an editorial. Data synthesis indicated that nine (90%) of the guidelines included some elements relating to the identification, assessment, and/or signposting of carers. Key strategies for identifying carers suggest that a whole practice approach is optimal, incorporating a role for the GP, practice staff, and for the use of appropriate supporting documentation. Important knowledge gaps were highlighted in respect of appropriate clinical assessment and evidence-based signposting pathways. CONCLUSION Our review addresses a significant gap in the literature by providing an important synthesis of current available evidence on clinical guidelines for GPs in supporting family carers, including strategies for identification, options for assessment and potential referral/signposting routes. However, there is a need for greater transparency of the existing evidence base as well as much more research to evaluate the effectiveness and increase the routine utilisation, of clinical guidelines in primary care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Cronin
- Centre for Mental Health and Community Research, Department of Psychology and Social Sciences Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland.
| | | | - Tony Foley
- Department of General Practice, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - Sinéad McGilloway
- Centre for Mental Health and Community Research, Department of Psychology and Social Sciences Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
O'Brien E, Duffy S, Harkins V, Smith SM, O'Herlihy N, Walsh A, Clyne B, Wallace E. A scoping review of evidence-based guidance and guidelines published by general practice professional organizations. Fam Pract 2023:cmad015. [PMID: 36812366 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmad015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND General practitioners (GPs) need robust, up-to-date evidence to deliver high-quality patient care. There is limited literature regarding the role of international GP professional organizations in developing and publishing clinical guidelines to support GPs clinical decision making. OBJECTIVE To identify evidence-based guidance and clinical guidelines produced by GP professional organizations and summarize their content, structure, and methods of development and dissemination. METHODS Scoping review of GP professional organizations following Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Four databases were searched and a grey literature search was conducted. Studies were included if they were: (i) evidence-based guidance documents or clinical guidelines produced de novo by a national GP professional organization, (ii) developed to support GPs clinical care, and (iii) published in the last 10 years. GP professional organizations were contacted to provide supplementary information. A narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS Six GP professional organizations and 60 guidelines were included. The most common de novo guideline topics were mental health, cardiovascular disease, neurology, pregnancy and women's health and preventive care. All guidelines were developed using a standard evidence-synthesis method. All included documents were disseminated through downloadable pdfs and peer review publications. GP professional organizations indicated that they generally collaborate with or endorse guidelines developed by national or international guideline producing bodies. CONCLUSION The findings of this scoping review provide an overview of de novo guideline development by GP professional organizations and can support collaboration between GP organizations worldwide thus reducing duplication of effort, facilitating reproducibility, and identifying areas of standardization. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JXQ26.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emer O'Brien
- Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Seamus Duffy
- Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Velma Harkins
- Irish College of General Practitioners, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Susan M Smith
- Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin Ireland
| | | | - Aisling Walsh
- Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Barbara Clyne
- Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Emma Wallace
- Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
- Department of General Practice, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rourke L. Knowledge mobilization for primary care: Lessons learned from 40 years of the Rourke Baby Record. CANADIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN MEDECIN DE FAMILLE CANADIEN 2022; 68:721-725. [PMID: 36241413 PMCID: PMC9833132 DOI: 10.46747/cfp.6810721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Leslie Rourke
- Professor Emerita in Family Medicine at Memorial University of Newfoundland in St John’s.,Correspondence Dr Leslie Rourke; e-mail
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rourke L. Mobilisation des connaissances pour les soins primaires. CANADIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN MEDECIN DE FAMILLE CANADIEN 2022; 68:729-735. [PMID: 36241396 PMCID: PMC9833144 DOI: 10.46747/cfp.6810729] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Leslie Rourke
- Professeure émérite de médecine familiale à l’Université Memorial de Terre-Neuve, à St John’s
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
O'Brien E, Clyne B, Smith SM, O'Herlihy N, Harkins V, Wallace E. A scoping review protocol of evidence-based guidance and guidelines published by general practitioner professional organisations. HRB Open Res 2022; 4:53. [PMID: 35233505 PMCID: PMC8866908 DOI: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13268.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: General practitioners (GPs) strive to use a patient centered approach to achieve shared decision making by integrating clinical evidence, clinical judgement, and patient priorities. In order to achieve this standard of care, GPs require relevant, up to date and high quality evidence. Currently there is a gap in the literature regarding the role of GP professional organisations internationally in producing and publishing evidence based guidance and clinical guidelines for GPs. This protocol outlines a scoping review to identify what evidence-based guidance is produced by general practitioner professional organisations internationally in terms of topic content, the structure and methods used to develop guidance and ways of disseminating this guidance, to support general practice clinical decision making. Methods: This scoping review will be conducted using the framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), will be used to guide the reporting. Two researchers will search electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus), grey literature sources and contact international GP professional organisations directly to identify appropriate studies for inclusion. Key information will be categorised and classified to generate a summary of the methods used internationally to develop and implement evidence-based guides for general practitioners and a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Conclusions: This scoping review will examine current practice internationally regarding the role of General Practice professional organisations in producing and publishing clinical guidelines and evidence based guidance to support general practitioner's clinical decision making to benefit patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emer O'Brien
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Barbara Clyne
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Susan M. Smith
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Noirin O'Herlihy
- Irish College of General Practitioners, 4/5 Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, D02XR68, Ireland
| | - Velma Harkins
- Irish College of General Practitioners, 4/5 Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, D02XR68, Ireland
| | - Emma Wallace
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
O'Brien E, Clyne B, Smith SM, O'Herlihy N, Harkins V, Wallace E. A scoping review protocol of evidence-based guidance and guidelines published by general practitioner professional organisations. HRB Open Res 2022; 4:53. [PMID: 35233505 PMCID: PMC8866908 DOI: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13268.3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: General practitioners (GPs) strive to use a patient centered approach to achieve shared decision making by integrating clinical evidence, clinical judgement, and patient priorities. In order to achieve this standard of care, GPs require relevant, up to date and high quality evidence. Currently there is a gap in the literature regarding the role of GP professional organisations internationally in producing and publishing evidence based guidance and clinical guidelines for GPs. This protocol outlines a scoping review to identify what evidence-based guidance is produced by general practitioner professional organisations internationally in terms of topic content, the structure and methods used to develop guidance and ways of disseminating this guidance, to support general practice clinical decision making. Methods: This scoping review will be conducted using the framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), will be used to guide the reporting. Two researchers will search electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus), grey literature sources and contact international GP professional organisations directly to identify appropriate studies for inclusion. Key information will be categorised and classified to generate a summary of the methods used internationally to develop and implement evidence-based guides for general practitioners and a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Conclusions: This scoping review will examine current practice internationally regarding the role of General Practice professional organisations in producing and publishing clinical guidelines and evidence based guidance to support general practitioner’s clinical decision making to benefit patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emer O'Brien
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Barbara Clyne
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Susan M. Smith
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| | - Noirin O'Herlihy
- Irish College of General Practitioners, 4/5 Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, D02XR68, Ireland
| | - Velma Harkins
- Irish College of General Practitioners, 4/5 Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, D02XR68, Ireland
| | - Emma Wallace
- Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, D02H903, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Tsopra R, Frappe P, Streit S, Neves AL, Honkoop PJ, Espinosa-Gonzalez AB, Geroğlu B, Jahr T, Lingner H, Nessler K, Pesolillo G, Sivertsen ØS, Thulesius H, Zoitanu R, Burgun A, Kinouani S. Reorganisation of GP surgeries during the COVID-19 outbreak: analysis of guidelines from 15 countries. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2021; 22:96. [PMID: 34000985 PMCID: PMC8127252 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-021-01413-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 03/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in managing the COVID-19 outbreak. However, they may encounter difficulties adapting their practices to the pandemic. We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the pandemic from 15 countries. METHODS A network of GPs collaborated together in a three-step process: (i) identification of key recommendations of GP surgery reorganisation, according to WHO, CDC and health professional resources from health care facilities; (ii) collection of key recommendations included in the guidelines published in 15 countries; (iii) analysis, comparison and synthesis of the results. RESULTS Recommendations for the reorganisation of GP surgeries of four types were identified: (i) reorganisation of GP consultations (cancelation of non-urgent consultations, follow-up via e-consultations), (ii) reorganisation of GP surgeries (area partitioning, visual alerts and signs, strict hygiene measures), (iii) reorganisation of medical examinations by GPs (equipment, hygiene, partial clinical examinations, patient education), (iv) reorganisation of GP staff (equipment, management, meetings, collaboration with the local community). CONCLUSIONS We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak from 15 countries. These guidelines focus principally on clinical care, with less attention paid to staff management, and the area of epidemiological surveillance and research is largely neglected. The differences of guidelines between countries and the difficulty to apply them in routine care, highlight the need of advanced research in primary care. Thereby, primary care would be able to provide recommendations adapted to the real-world settings and with stronger evidence, which is especially necessary during pandemics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosy Tsopra
- INSERM, Université de Paris, Sorbonne Université, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Information Sciences to support Personalized Medicine, F-75006, Paris, France. .,Department of Medical Informatics, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, AP-HP, Paris, France.
| | - Paul Frappe
- Department of general practice, Faculty of medicine Jacques Lisfranc, University of Lyon, Saint-Etienne, France.,Inserm UMR 1059, Sainbiose DVH, University of Lyon, Saint-Etienne, France.,Inserm CIC-EC 1408, University of Lyon, Saint-Etienne, France.,College of General Practice / Collège de la Médecine Générale, Paris, France
| | - Sven Streit
- Institute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Ana Luisa Neves
- Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Center for Health Technology and Services Research / Department of Community Medicine, Health Information and Decision, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Persijn J Honkoop
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Berk Geroğlu
- İzmir Karşıyaka District Health Directorate, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Tobias Jahr
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, OE 5430, Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany
| | - Heidrun Lingner
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Medizinische Psychologie, OE 5430, Hannover, Germany.,Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL)/ BREATH - Biomedical Research in Endstage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover, Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany
| | - Katarzyna Nessler
- Department of Family Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.,Vasco da Gama Movement, Wonca Europe, Kraków, Poland
| | | | - Øyvind Stople Sivertsen
- Torshovdalen Health Center, Oslo, Norway.,Editor of the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Raluca Zoitanu
- National Federation of Family Medicine Employers in Romania (FNPMF), București, Romania
| | - Anita Burgun
- INSERM, Université de Paris, Sorbonne Université, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Information Sciences to support Personalized Medicine, F-75006, Paris, France.,Department of Medical Informatics, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou & Necker Children's Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Shérazade Kinouani
- INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team HEALTHY, UMR 1219, university of Bordeaux, F-33000, Bordeaux, France.,Department of General Practice, University of Bordeaux, 146 rue Léo Saignat, F-33000, Bordeaux, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Smith CF, Kristensen BM, Andersen RS, Hobbs FR, Ziebland S, Nicholson BD. GPs' use of gut feelings when assessing cancer risk: a qualitative study in UK primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2021; 71:e356-e363. [PMID: 33753347 PMCID: PMC7997673 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp21x714269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2020] [Accepted: 10/01/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of gut feelings to guide clinical decision making in primary care has been frequently described but is not considered a legitimate reason for cancer referral. AIM To explore the role that gut feeling plays in clinical decision making in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING Qualitative interview study with 19 GPs in Oxfordshire, UK. METHOD GPs who had referred patients to a cancer pathway based on a gut feeling as a referral criterion were invited to participate. Interviews were conducted between November 2019 and January 2020, and transcripts were analysed using the one sheet of paper method. RESULTS Gut feeling was seen as an essential part of decision making that facilitated appropriate and timely care. GPs distanced their gut feelings from descriptions that could be seen as unscientific, describing successful use as reliant on experience and clinical knowledge. This was especially true for patients who fell within a 'grey area' where clinical guidelines did not match the GP's assessment of cancer risk, either because the guidance inadequately represented or did not include the patient's presentation. GPs sought to legitimise their gut feelings by gathering objective clinical evidence, careful examination of referral procedures, and consultation with colleagues. CONCLUSION GPs described their gut feelings as important to decision making in primary care and a necessary addition to clinical guidance. The steps taken to legitimise their gut feelings matched that expected in good clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Benedikte Møller Kristensen
- Research Unit for General Practice, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University and University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Rikke Sand Andersen
- Institute for Public Health - General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Fd Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Sue Ziebland
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Brian D Nicholson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Weller CD, Richards C, Turnour L, Team V. Understanding factors influencing venous leg ulcer guideline implementation in Australian primary care. Int Wound J 2020; 17:804-818. [PMID: 32150790 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the venous leg ulcer (VLU) management in primary health care settings located in Melbourne metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. We explored health professionals' perspective on the use of the Australian and New Zealand Venous Leg Ulcer Clinical Practice Guideline (VLU CPG) to identify the main challenges of VLU CPG uptake in clinical practice. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 general practitioners (GPs) and 20 practice nurses (PNs), including two Aboriginal health nurses. The Theoretical Domains Framework guided data collection and analysis. Data were analysed using a theory-driven analysis. We found a lack of awareness of the VLU CPGs, which resulted in suboptimal knowledge and limited adherence to evidence-based recommendations. Environmental factors, such as busy nature of clinical environment and absence of handheld Doppler ultrasound, as well as social and professional identity factors, such as reliance on previous experience and colleague's advice, influenced the uptake of the VLU CPGs in primary care. Findings of this study will inform development of interventions to increase the uptake of the VLU CPG in primary care settings and to reduce the evidence-practice gap in VLU management by health professionals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina D Weller
- Monash Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Catelyn Richards
- Monash Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Louise Turnour
- Monash Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Victoria Team
- Monash Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Fernández-Álvarez I, Zapata-Cachafeiro M, Vázquez-Lago J, López-Vázquez P, Piñeiro-Lamas M, García Rodríguez R, Figueiras A. Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0221326. [PMID: 31437201 PMCID: PMC6706057 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2018] [Accepted: 08/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To assess the impact of sources of drug information on antibiotic prescribing patterns (quantity and quality) among primary care physicians. Methods We conducted a cohort study on primary care physicians who were actively engaged in medical practice in 2010 in a region in north-west Spain (Galicia), fulfilling inclusion criteria (n = 2100). As the independent variable, we took the perceived utility of 6 sources of information on antibiotics, as measured by the validated KAAR-11 questionnaire. As dependent variables, we used: (1) a quality indicator (appropriate quality, defined as any case where 6 of the 12 indicators proposed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption Network [ESAC-Net] were better than the mean values for Spain); and, (2) a quantity indicator (high prescribing), defined as any case where defined daily doses (DDD) per 1 000 inhabitants per day of antibacterials for systemic use were higher than the mean values for Spain. The adjusted odds ratio for a change in the interquartile range (IqOR) for each sources of information on antibiotics was calculated using Generalized Linear Mixed Models. Results The questionnaire response rate was 68%. Greater perceived utility of pharmaceutical sales representatives increases the risk of having high prescribing (1/IqOR = 2.50 [95%CI: 1.63–3.66]) and reduces the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 2.28 [95%CI: 1.77–3.01]). Greater perceived utility of clinical guidelines increases the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]) and reduces the probability of high prescribing (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]). Conclusions Sources of information on antibiotics are an important determinant of the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Commercial sources of information influence prescribing negatively, and clinical guidelines are associated with better indicators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iria Fernández-Álvarez
- Preventive Medicine Service, Santiago de Compostela University Teaching Hospital, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Maruxa Zapata-Cachafeiro
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology & Public Health (CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública/CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Juan Vázquez-Lago
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Paula López-Vázquez
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - María Piñeiro-Lamas
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology & Public Health (CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública/CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | | | - Adolfo Figueiras
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology & Public Health (CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública/CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- * E-mail:
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Osteoporosis prevention: Where are the barriers to improvement in French general practitioners? A qualitative study. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0219681. [PMID: 31310619 PMCID: PMC6634405 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2019] [Accepted: 06/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis and treatment remain suboptimal. Objectives We conducted a qualitative study to understand barriers towards care initiation and levers to improve awareness and management of osteoporosis among general practitioners (GPs). Methods Semi-structured face-to face interviews were conducted with 16 GPs in the Rhône area of France to explore their knowledge and representations regarding osteoporosis. A thematic analysis of transcripts was performed to identify GPs’ perceptions on osteoporosis diagnosis, prevention, treatment and patients’ expectations. Results Interviewed GPs considered osteoporosis far less important than other chronic diseases. They questioned whether osteoporosis was a disease or normal aspect of ageing. They associated osteoporosis with fragility fractures, female sex, menopause, and old age but rarely with male sex. They regarded bone mineral density as the reference diagnostic test, but certain GPs indicated that they had difficulties to interpret the results and to know when to prescribe. Biphosphonates were mentioned as the reference treatment but some GPs expressed distrust about osteoporosis medications. Most of them did not think to screen for osteoporosis risk factors in their patients in a preventive medical approach. They mentioned the lack of time to implement prevention and were expecting clear and pragmatic guidelines, as well as information campaigns in general population to increase awareness on osteoporosis. Conclusion GPs tended to underestimate the salience of osteoporosis. Clear recommendations, better awareness of GPs and the general population could improve osteoporosis prevention and treatment.
Collapse
|
13
|
Von Wagner C, Stoffel ST, Freeman M, Laszlo HE, Nicholson BD, Sheringham J, Szinay D, Hirst Y. General practitioners' awareness of the recommendations for faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for suspected lower gastrointestinal cancers: a national survey. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e025737. [PMID: 30975679 PMCID: PMC6500239 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025737] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In July 2017, UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a diagnostic guidance (DG30) recommending the use of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for symptomatic patients who do not meet the urgent referral pathway for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). We assessed general practitioners' (GP) awareness of DG30 in primary care 6 months after its publication. DESIGN AND SETTING Cross-sectional online survey of GPs hosted by an English panel of Primary health care professionals. PARTICIPANTS In December 2017, 1024 GPs registered on an online panel (M3) based in England took part in an online survey. OUTCOMES AND VARIABLES We investigated a number of factors including previous experience of using FIT and guaiac faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs), the number of urgent referrals for CRC that GPs have made in the last year and their sociodemographic and professional characteristics that could be associated with their self-reported awareness of the FIT diagnostic guidance. RESULTS Of the 1024 GPs who completed the survey, 432 (42.2%) were aware of the current recommendation but only 102 (10%) had used it to guide their referrals. Awareness was lowest in North West England compared with London (30.5% vs 44.9%; adjusted OR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.92). Awareness of the FIT guidance was positively associated with test usage after the NICE update (adjusted OR: 13.00, 95% CI 6.87 to 24.61) and having specialist training (adjusted OR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.08). The number of urgent referrals, the previous use of FOBt, GPs' age and gender, work experience and practice size (both in terms of the number of GPs or patients at the practice) were not associated with awareness. CONCLUSIONS Less than half of GPs in this survey recognised the current guidance on the use of FIT. Self-reported awareness was not systematically related to demographic of professional characteristics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Madeline Freeman
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, London, UK
| | | | - Brian D Nicholson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jessica Sheringham
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Dorothy Szinay
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, London, UK
| | - Yasemin Hirst
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Dahlhaus A, Semlitsch T, Jeitler K, Horvath K, Siebenhofer A. Relevance to family practice of English-language guidelines on breast, colorectal and prostate cancer: a review. Fam Pract 2015; 32:483-91. [PMID: 26142418 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmv053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND GPs regard cancer guidelines as useful yet criticise their limited applicability to the primary care setting. OBJECTIVES To determine the extent to which English-language breast, colorectal and prostate cancer guidelines contain recommendations that are relevant to GPs and to find out which of the GPs' roles in cancer care the recommendations refer to. METHODS Evidence- and consent-based English-language breast, colorectal and prostate cancer guidelines were searched for in guideline databases and selected guideline providers' web pages, and checked against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant recommendations were identified, extracted and examined. The involvement of GPs in guideline development as well as whether they were named as a target group was further investigated. RESULTS Of the 65 identified guidelines, 35 were eligible and contained recommendations applicable to GPs. GPs were directly involved in the development of the majority of only breast cancer guidelines and were explicitly named as a target group in fewer than 50% of guidelines. The majority of recommendations dealt with patient-physician communication, with a focus on cancer therapy. Rarer procedural recommendations predominantly concentrated on follow-up/survivorship care. Less than one-third of all relevant recommendations concerned diagnosis. Only breast cancer guidelines provided a high number of recommendations on transitions between primary and secondary care. CONCLUSION Greater consideration of GPs would increase their acceptance of guidelines, promote delivery of high-quality cancer care and clarify responsibilities between cancer care providers. The GP's role in cancer diagnosis is not appropriately reflected in cancer guideline recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Dahlhaus
- Institute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany and
| | - Thomas Semlitsch
- Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Klaus Jeitler
- Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria, Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria and
| | - Karl Horvath
- Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Andrea Siebenhofer
- Institute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany and Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria,
| |
Collapse
|