scholarly journals Developing a CKD Registry in Primary Care: Provider Attitudes and Input

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 577-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dannielle McBride ◽  
Daniel Dohan ◽  
Margaret A. Handley ◽  
Neil R. Powe ◽  
Delphine S. Tuot
Medical Care ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 929-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa S. Meredith ◽  
Elizabeth M. Yano ◽  
Scot C. Hickey ◽  
Scott E. Sherman

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 882-882
Author(s):  
Giovanna Potenza ◽  
Meghan Mattos

Abstract The 2011 Annual Wellness Visit (AWV) Medicare benefit includes a cognitive screening component intended to improve screening of older adults. However, available literature only presents physician perspectives on cognitive screening prior to 2011. The purpose of this study was to explore primary care provider (PCP) attitudes and perceptions of cognitive screening in older adults. An Internet-based survey link was sent to Virginia professional organizations and clinics to distribute to PCPs serving older adults. Likert scale, multiple choice, and free response questions were used to understand current attitudes, perceptions, and practices. The sample (N=39) was comprised of 26 nurse practitioners (NPs), 9 physicians, and four who did not disclose role. Most participants were aware of the AWV (n=31, 88.6%) and agreed that early detection “promotes earlier diagnosis and access to resources” (mean ± standard deviation,1.58±0.69). However, less than half of NPs screened annually (n=10/26, 38.5%) and even less conducted screening during an AWV (n=7/26, 26.9%). About half of MDs conducted cognitive screening during an AWV (n=5/9, 55.6%). Although NPs screened less, they more strongly agreed that screening should occur annually (1.92±1.15 vs. 2.67±1.23) and “additional training would improve [screening] ability” (2.04±1.0 vs. 3.22±1.20). Also, few NPs independently managed impairment (n=5/26, 19.2%) compared to MDs (n=5/9, 55.6%). Our findings demonstrate that NPs screen less and feel less prepared to conduct cognitive screenings. It is important to provide additional resources and training for all PCPs, but especially NPs who are rapidly entering primary care to help improve identification and management of cognitive impairment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (8) ◽  
pp. 527-532
Author(s):  
Samantha Schilling ◽  
Ashlee Murray ◽  
Cynthia J. Mollen ◽  
Tara Wedin ◽  
Joel A. Fein ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (9) ◽  
pp. 1691-1692
Author(s):  
Alissa Bernstein ◽  
Kirsten M. Rogers ◽  
Katherine L. Possin ◽  
Natasha Z. R. Steele ◽  
Christine S. Ritchie ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 215013272110002
Author(s):  
Tarika Srinivasan ◽  
Erica J. Sutton ◽  
Annika T. Beck ◽  
Idali Cuellar ◽  
Valentina Hernandez ◽  
...  

Introduction: Minority communities have had limited access to advances in genomic medicine. Mayo Clinic and Mountain Park Health Center, a Federally Qualified Health Center in Phoenix, Arizona, partnered to assess the feasibility of offering genomic screening to Latino patients receiving care at a community-based health center. We examined primary care provider (PCP) experiences reporting genomic screening results and integrating those results into patient care. Methods: We conducted open-ended, semi-structured interviews with PCPs and other members of the health care team charged with supporting patients who received positive genomic screening results. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically. Results: Of the 500 patients who pursued genomic screening, 10 received results indicating a genetic variant that warranted clinical management. PCPs felt genomic screening was valuable to patients and their families, and that genomic research should strive to include underrepresented minorities. Providers identified multiple challenges integrating genomic sequencing into patient care, including difficulties maintaining patient contact over time; arranging follow-up medical care; and managing results in an environment with limited genetics expertise. Providers also reflected on the ethics of offering genomic sequencing to patients who may not be able to pursue diagnostic testing or follow-up care due to financial constraints. Conclusions: Our results highlight the potential benefits and challenges of bringing advances in precision medicine to community-based health centers serving under-resourced populations. By proactively considering patient support needs, and identifying financial assistance programs and patient-referral mechanisms to support patients who may need specialized medical care, PCPs and other health care providers can help to ensure that precision medicine lives up to its full potential as a tool for improving patient care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document