Primary care research - trade-off between representativeness and response rate of GP teachers for undergraduates

[Non-dialysis chronic kidney disease in primary care - a questionnaire study among general practitioners]

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease are cared for by general practitioners. Especially for Germany, the evidence of this topic is still very low. The aim of the survey was to estimate the perceived frequency of non-dialysis chronic kidney disease in general practice, the use of diagnostics and therapy, used tools considering the professional background and experience of the responding general practitioners.

METHODS

A questionnaire was self-designed in the cooperation of several disciplines. 1130 general practitioners from Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt were randomly selected and the questionnaire was sent by post. Data were collected from June 2019 to July 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 1,130 questionnaires sent, 372 returned analysable (response rate: 32.9 %). The prevalence of non-dialysis chronic kidney disease was estimated to be 6-15 %. 97 % of the general practitioners rated the adjustment of high blood pressure and diabetes mellitus as a high to very high priority. Concerning the diagnosis of proteinuria, the use of a urine dipstick test was stated by 60.8 % of the respondents and the requirement for an albumin/creatinine-ratio was stated by 22.6 %. Only a few differences could be revealed in the response behavior of the participating groups of doctors. Working experience is an important factor in choosing tools, especially guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that the doctors interviewed followed international recommendations for the care of patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease. However, improvements in progression diagnostics are necessary and important. General practitioners and internal medicines working as general practitioners have a comparable level of competence in the primary medical care of the non-dialysis chronic kidney disease. Significant differences were created by the professional experience of the doctors.

KEY POINTS

· General practitioners estimate the prevalence of non-dialysis chronic kidney disease in their practice at 6-15 %.. · Using the albumin/creatinine-ratio for proteinuria diagnostics is requested too rarely compared to the urine dipstick test.. · General practitioners, specialists in general medicine and internists working in general medicine have a comparable level of competence to treat patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease.. · Working experience is an important factor in choosing tools, especially guidelines..

Receptiveness Of GPs In The South Of Saxony-Anhalt, Germany To Obtaining Training On Technical Assistance Systems For Caregiving: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Challenges to general practitioners (GPs) as family doctors in Germany are growing because of the demographic situation. Technical assistance systems can improve the care for patients provided by GPs and care personnel to preserve autonomy. GPs are key persons in the health care team to recommend and facilitate access to technical solutions to influence their implementation into their patients’ homes.

Aim

Explore the general receptiveness of GPs in Germany regarding state-of-the-art and modern assistive technology, as well as their experiences, attitudes and expectations and their training demands.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among GPs in Germany with a self-developed questionnaire sent by mail.

Results

Response rate was 34% (n=194). As expected computers and smartphones are widely used. Data glasses, digital pens and virtual reality and others are often “unknown”. Experience with assistive technology was gained with emergency call systems, smart calendars and tablet dispensers. Self-reported receptiveness to use innovative technology is high but knowledge is low. The majority reported lack of access to training and support. The receptiveness for advanced education about technical solutions is high. In free-text response, some communicated their worries about the replacement of human interaction with technology.

Conclusion

The survey showed an overall high receptiveness about assistance technology to GPs and strong demands for education and support. Education for GPs need greater efforts to master the process transforming the digital health care provision.

Assessing the representativeness of physician and patient respondents to a primary care survey using administrative data

BACKGROUND

QUALICOPC is an international survey of primary care performance. QUALICOPC data have been used in several studies, yet the representativeness of the Canadian QUALICOPC survey is unknown, potentially limiting the generalizability of findings. This study examined the representativeness of QUALICOPC physician and patient respondents in Ontario using health administrative data.

METHODS

This representativeness study linked QUALICOPC physician and patient respondents in Ontario to health administrative databases at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. Physician respondents were compared to other physicians in their practice group and all Ontario primary care physicians on demographic and practice characteristics. Patient respondents were compared to other patients rostered to their primary care physicians, patients rostered to their physicians' practice groups, and a random sample of Ontario residents on sociodemographic characteristics, morbidity, and health care utilization. Standardized differences were calculated to compare the distribution of characteristics across cohorts.

RESULTS

QUALICOPC physician respondents included a higher proportion of younger, female physicians and Canadian medical graduates compared to other Ontario primary care physicians. A higher proportion of physician respondents practiced in Family Health Team models, compared to the provincial proportion for primary care physicians. QUALICOPC patient respondents were more likely to be older and female, with significantly higher levels of morbidity and health care utilization, compared with the other patient groups examined. However, when looking at the QUALICOPC physicians' whole rosters, rather than just the patient survey respondents, the practice profiles were similar to those of the other physicians in their practice groups and Ontario patients in general.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparisons revealed some differences in responding physicians' demographic and practice characteristics, as well as differences in responding patients' characteristics compared to the other patient groups tested, which may have resulted from the visit-based sampling strategy. Ontario QUALICOPC physicians had similar practice profiles as compared to non-participating physicians, providing some evidence that the participating practices are representative of other non-participating practices, and patients selected by visit-based sampling may also be representative of visiting patients in other practices. Those using QUALICOPC data should understand this limited representativeness when generalizing results, and consider the potential for bias in their analyses.

Results of a survey among GP practices on how they manage patient safety aspects related to point-of-care testing in every day practice

Background

Point-of-care (POC) tests are devices or test strips that can be used near or at the site where care is delivered to patients, enabling a relatively fast diagnosis. Although many general practitioners (GPs) in the Netherlands are using POC tests in their practice, little is known on how they manage the corresponding patient safety aspects.

Methods

To obtain information on this aspect, an invitation to participate in a web-based questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 750 GP practices. Of this sample 111 GP practices returned a complete questionnaire. Data was analysed by using descriptive statistics.

Results

Results show that there is not always attention for quality control measures such as checking storage conditions, executing calibration, and maintenance. In addition, universal hygienic measures, such as washing hands before taking a blood sample, are not always followed. Refresher courses on the use of POC tests are hardly organized. Only a few of the GPs contact the manufacturer of the device when a device failure occurs. Well-controlled aspects include patient identification and actions taken when ambiguous test results are obtained.

Conclusions

We observed a number of risks for errors with POC tests in GP practices that may be reduced by proper training of personnel, introduction of standard operating procedures and measures for quality control and improved hygiene. To encourage proper use of POCT in general practices, a national POCT guideline, dedicated to primary care and in line with ISO standards, should be introduced.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-014-0217-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gaining information about home visits in primary care: methodological issues from a feasibility study

Background

Home visits are part of general practice work in Germany. Within the context of an expanding elderly population and a decreasing number of general practitioner (GPs), open questions regarding the organisation and adequacy of GPs’ care in immobile patients remain. To answer these questions, we will conduct a representative primary data collection concerning contents and organisation of GPs’ home visits in 2014. Because this study will require considerable efforts for documentation and thus substantial involvement by participating GPs, we conducted a pilot study to see whether such a study design was feasible.

Methods

We used a mixed methods design with two study arms in a sample of teaching GPs of the University Halle. The quantitative arm evaluates participating GPs and documentation of home visits. The qualitative arm focuses on reasons for non-participation for GPs who declined to take part in the pilot study.

Results

Our study confirms previously observed reasons for non-response of GPs in the particular setting of home visits including lack of time and/or interest. In contrast to previous findings, monetary incentives were not crucial for GPs participation. Several factors influenced the documentation rate of home visits and resulted in a discrepancy between the numbers of home visits documented versus those actually conducted. The most frequently reported problem was related to obtaining patient consent, especially when patients were unable to provide informed consent due to cognitive deficits.

Conclusions

The results of our feasibility study provide evidence for improvement of the study design and study instruments to effectively conduct a documentation-intensive study of GPs doing home visits. Improvement of instructions and questionnaire regarding time variables and assessment of the need for home visits will be carried out to increase the reliability of future data. One particularly important methodological issue yet to be resolved is how to increase the representativeness of home visit care by including the homebound patient population that is unable to provide informed consent.

General practitioners' views on polypharmacy and its consequences for patient health care

Background

Multimorbidity is defined as suffering from coexistent chronic conditions. Multimorbid patients demand highly complex patient-centered care which often includes polypharmacy, taking an average of six different drugs per day. Adverse drug reactions, adverse drug events and medication errors are all potential consequences of polypharmacy. Our study aims to detect the status quo of the health care situation in Saxony’s general practices for multimorbid patients receiving multiple medications. We will identify the most common clinical profiles as well as documented adverse drug events and reactions that occur during the treatment of patients receiving multiple medications. We will focus on exploring the motives of general practitioners for the prescription of selected drugs in individual cases where there is evidence of potential drug-drug-interactions and potentially inappropriate medications in elderly patients. Furthermore, the study will explore general practitioners’ opinions on delegation of skills to other health professions to support medical care and monitoring of patients receiving multiple medications.

Methods/design

This is a retrospective cross sectional study using mixed methods. Socio-demographic data as well as diagnoses, medication regimens and clinically important events will be analyzed retrospectively using general practitioners documentation in patients’ records. Based on these data, short vignettes will be generated and discussed by general practitioners in qualitative telephone interviews.

Discussion

To be able to improve outpatient health care management for patients receiving multiple medications, the current status quo of care, risk factors for deficient treatment and characteristics of concerned patients must be investigated. Furthermore, it is necessary to understand the physicians’ decision making process regarding treatment.

Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study

The study was designed to evaluate the acceptance of the self-rated version of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in primary care in Europe (STEP) by patients and general practitioners, as well as the feasibility, comprehensibility, and usefulness in gaining new information. In all, 1007 of 1540 patients aged 65 and above, from 28 different Saxon general practices took part. We recognized that 96% of the patients were able to fill in the questionnaire by themselves. It took them an average of approximately 20 minutes to do so. Further analysis of 257 randomly selected patients identified 281 previously unknown problems (1.1 per patient). In the practitioners' opinion, 16% of these problems, particularly physiological and mental ones, could lead to immediate consequences. Remarkably, newly identified psychosocial problems were not followed by any consequences. Fourteen of the 75 questionnaire items were not answered by more than 9% of the participants. Eight of the 14 frequently unanswered items were marked as difficult to understand by the patients. Altogether the self-rating version of the STEP was found to be feasible and useful. It was well accepted among patients; however, some questions need further review to improve their comprehensibility. Furthermore, it should be investigated why some identified problems do not have consequences and whether there is a need to record these issues at all.