"Only a GP?": is the solution to the general practice crisis intellectual?

How professional identity shapes youth healthcare

PURPOSE

The primary care sector is experiencing considerable change. How change and uncertainty are accommodated by the professional identity of medicine has not been examined. The purpose of this paper is to address the youth healthcare as an exemplar as this field is often a source of uncertainty for general practitioners (GPs).

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Using heterogeneity sampling, 22 GPs participated in focus groups to explore perceptions of youth healthcare, factors that help and hinder it, and training needs. Analysis of the research material was guided by a theoretical model on professional identity.

FINDINGS

GPs described tensions that challenged their professional identity - the challenges of working with young people and their complex issues, the extent to which youth healthcare sits within the purview of general practice, and the scope of training required. These tensions appeared to destabilise professional identity. Some participants had customised their identity by enriching understandings of and approach to general practice. Participants also reported work customisation as a way of managing the complex demands of the general practice role. Deepened insight appeared to bolster perceived capacity to support a complex patient cohort. Research limitations/implications - Participants are not representative of the primary care sector - furthermore, the methodology limits the generalisability of the findings.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

To bolster youth health, mere clinician training is insufficient. Youth health requires explicit support from governments and training providers to be incorporated into the healthcare landscape.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study extends current research on professional identity by examining youth healthcare within the changing context of primary care.

The impact of the quality of communication from nephrologists to primary care practitioners: a literature review

OBJECTIVE

This review of the literature aims to explore two research questions: (1) what is the evidence that patients benefit from sound communication between primary care practitioners (PCPs) and nephrologists; and (2) what information is required in primary care to meet the needs of patients who have attended a renal unit?

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Fifty-seven citations were independently reviewed by four authors. The inclusion criteria were: (1) the article focused on information flow from nephrologists and/or specialists to general practitioners; (2) it includes the involvement of PCPs in nephrology, including registrars and PCPs with special interests or specialists in any medical field; (3) it was published from 1990 onwards (inclusive) and (4) the study was conducted in the United Kingdom, Canada, The Netherlands, Australia, United States or New Zealand. Selected articles were then reviewed by the fifth author as a measure of inter-rater reliability.

RESULTS

Eighteen papers in four categories were identified: six audits or observational studies, one meta-analysis; one randomized controlled trial; six qualitative studies; and four position statements or quality improvement tools. Published audits involving feedback to clinicians using validated tools demonstrate the scope for substantial improvement in the amount of information relayed to PCPs. Specialists may not prioritize the letter to the PCP but there is some evidence of a direct impact from limited or inadequate communication on patient outcomes. Only two studies focused on patients attending nephrology clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that improving the quality of letters from specialists to PCPs may benefit patient care. This review suggests a need for research on communication from nephrologists about patients who have received care at a renal unit regardless of whether or not the patient continues to attend.

The impact of knowledge, attitudes and beliefs on the engagement of primary and community-based healthcare professionals in cancer care: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Primary health services are well placed to reinforce prevention, early intervention, and connected care. Despite this important role, primary care providers (PCPs) have a limited capacity to meet the varied needs of people with cancer and their carers - furthermore, the reasons for this largely remain unexplored.

SCOPE

To identify: (1) the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs held by health professionals and patients that can influence the engagement of PCPs with the early detection of cancer and follow-up care; (2) evidence that attitudes and beliefs can be modified with measureable impact on the engagement of PCPs with cancer care; and (3) potential targets for intervention. This was achieved through a review of English publications from 2000 onwards, sourced from six academic databases and complemented with a search for grey literature.

FINDINGS

A total of 4212 articles were reviewed to identify studies conducted in the UK, Canada, Holland (or The Netherlands), Australia, or New Zealand given the comparable role of PCPs. Several factors hinder PCP participation in cancer care, all of which are related to knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. Patients and specialists are uncertain about the role that primary care could play and whether their primary care team has the necessary expertise. PCPs have varied opinions about the ideal content of follow-up programs. Study limitations include: the absence of well accepted definitions of key terms; the indexing systems used by databases to code publications, which may have obscured all relevant publications; the paucity of robust research; and possible researcher bias which was minimized through independent review by trained reviewers and the implementation of rigorous inter-rater reliability measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs influence PCP engagement in cancer care. It is important to develop shared understandings of these terms because the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of PCPs, specialists, patients, and their families can influence the effectiveness of treatment plans.

Implementing managerial innovations in primary care: can we rank change drivers in complex adaptive organizations?

BACKGROUND

There has been much innovation in primary care in the past few decades. Although external and systemic constraints for health care organizations are relevant for their managerial evolution, there is also evidence that organizations operating under the same external pressures reach different levels of maturity.

PURPOSES

Which of the internal drivers available explain and foster change? Is it possible to rank change drivers by looking at their rate of efficacy in order to define a general change management path in the relationship between managers and physicians? The study is a hypothesis-generating work, designed to discuss a framework, consistent with the complex adaptive systems literature, for more effective internal change management approaches.

METHODS

We employed a qualitative approach to conduct a multiple case study in order to directly observe the evidence and to ask "key change players" for their perceptions. We studied different organizations all subject to the same external constraints in order to focus on the effects of internal change drivers.

FINDINGS

According to key players' opinions, the main drivers for managerial development are characteristics of the actors involved: their motivation, leadership, and commitment; the quality of relationships among the main actors; and how the resources dedicated to manage change are used. Given these criteria, any organizational strategy and goal seems to be achievable. This is consistent with the suggestions coming from the complex adaptive system literature. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS: Managers have to consider the management of the relationship with professionals as the key success factor for implementing change. Managerial leadership has to be diffused in the organization both in the vertical and horizontal dimensions. Innovations need a medium or long-term perspective to become widely applied, and this requires a strong commitment which is related to managerial stability. Resources for innovation are to be considered a critical driver for fostering the relationship between managers and professionals.

Facing the challenges: general practice in 2020

A strong primary medical care system is essential to the equity, efficiency and effectiveness of the health system as a whole. General practice in Australia faces significant challenges to its capacity to fulfil its role and function: in its financing, recognition, capacity to provide comprehensive care, and integration with the rest of the health system. Addressing these challenges requires a better system of remuneration for quality in general practice care, strengthening of the role of the generalist within the health system, involvement of Divisions of General Practice in service development, and establishment of collaborative networks and integrated primary health care services.

Improving health care globally: a critical review of the necessity of family medicine research and recommendations to build research capacity

An invitational conference led by the World Organization of Family Doctors (Wonca) involving selected delegates from 34 countries was held in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, March 8 to 12, 2003. The conference theme was "Improving Health Globally: The Necessity of Family Medicine Research." Guiding conference discussions was the value that to improve health care worldwide, strong, evidence-based primary care is indispensable. Eight papers reviewed before the meeting formed the basic material from which the conference developed 9 recommendations. Wonca, as an international body of family medicine, was regarded as particularly suited to pursue these conference recommendations: 1. Research achievements in family medicine should be displayed to policy makers, health (insurance) authorities, and academic leaders in a systematic way. 2. In all countries, sentinel practice systems should be developed to provide surveillance reports on illness and diseases that have the greatest impact on the population's health and wellness in the community. 3. A clearinghouse should be organized to provide a central repository of knowledge about family medicine research expertise, training, and mentoring.4. National research institutes and university departments of family medicine with a research mission should be developed. 5. Practice-based research networks should be developed around the world.6. Family medicine research journals, conferences, and Web sites should be strengthened to disseminate research findings internationally, and their use coordinated. Improved representation of family medicine research journals in databases, such as Index Medicus, should be pursued.7. Funding of international collaborative research in family medicine should be facilitated.8. International ethical guidelines, with an international ethical review process, should be developed in particular for participatory (action) research, where researchers work in partnership with communities. 9. When implementing these recommendations, the specific needs and implications for developing countries should be addressed.The Wonca executive committee has reviewed these recommendations and the supporting rationale for each. They plan to follow the recommendations, but to do so will require the support and cooperation of many individuals, organizations, and national governments around the world.