Wellness

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meegan Lipman ◽  
Jacqueline Calderone ◽  
Joel Yager ◽  
Maryann Waugh
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Stress Reduction ◽  
Lifestyle Behaviors ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Healthy Nutrition ◽  
Lifestyle Choices ◽  
Behavior Modifications ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Primary Care Practices

Lifestyle behaviors that contribute to wellness, specifically those involving physical exercise, healthy nutrition and weight management, healthy sleep patterns, and stress reduction, are of significant concern to clinicians and patients. Attending to these areas is critical, not only to prevent illness but also to reduce the deleterious impacts of existing chronic diseases on morbidity and mortality. Integrated primary care practices can readily establish and employ protocols for systematically addressing these important areas of overall physical and emotional functioning. This chapter discusses ways that primary care practices and team members can emphasize wellness in their integrated care services. The discussion covers assessing patients’ lifestyle choices, providing advice for improving health behaviors, developing agreed-upon interventions, assisting patients with related health behavior modifications and alterations, and arranging for improved patient access to and engagement with resources and programs that promote overall wellness.

scholarly journals Measuring care coordination in German primary care – adaptation and psychometric properties of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleida Ringwald ◽  
Katja Goetz ◽  
Jost Steinhaeuser ◽  
Nina Fleischmann ◽  
Alexandra Schüssler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Home Care ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Medical Home ◽  
Health Care Team ◽  
Healthcare Team ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Primary Care Practices

Abstract Background Continuity of care is associated with many benefits for patients and health care systems. Therefore measuring care coordination - the deliberate organization of patient care activities between two or more participants - is especially needed to identify entries for improvement. The aim of this study was the translation and cultural adaptation of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey (MHCCS) into German, and the examination of the psychometric properties of the resulting German versions of the MHCCS-P (patient version) and MHCCS-H (healthcare team version). Methods We conducted a paper-based, cross-sectional survey in primary care practices in three German federal states (Schleswig-Holstein, Hamburg, Baden-Württemberg) with patients and health care team members from May 2018 to April 2019. Descriptive item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency and convergent, discriminant and predictive validity of the German instrument versions were calculated by using SPSS 25.0 (Inc., IBM). Results Response rates were 43% (n = 350) for patients and 34% (n = 141) for healthcare team members. In total, 300 patient questionnaires and 140 team member questionnaires could be included into further analysis. Exploratory factor analyses resulted in three domains in the MHCCS-D-P and seven domains in the MHCCS-D-H: “link to community resources”, “communication”, “care transitions”, and additionally “self-management”, “accountability”, “information technology for quality assurance”, and “information technology supporting patient care” for the MHCCS-D-H. The domains showed acceptable and good internal consistency (α = 0.838 to α = 0.936 for the MHCCS-D-P and α = 0.680 to α = 0.819 for the MHCCS-D-H). As 77% of patients (n = 232) and 63% of health care team members denied to have or make written care plans, items regarding the “plan of care” of the original MHCCS have been removed from the MHCCS-D. Conclusions The German versions of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey for patients and healthcare team members are reliable instruments in measuring the care coordination in German primary care practices. Practicability is high since the total number of items is low (9 for patients and 27 for team members).

scholarly journals Rural and urban general practice: a comparison in 34 countries

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Groenewegen ◽  
M Bosmans ◽  
W Boerma
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Multilevel Regression ◽  
Rural And Urban Areas ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Rural And Urban ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Primary Care Practices

Abstract Background Rural areas have problems in attracting and retaining primary care workforce. Comparable problems but with a different background occur in deprived urban areas. Here we focus on primary care practices that do work in rural areas and not on the shortage or lack of access for the rural population. We answer the question whether these practices have a different organisation, lack resources and have different service profiles, compared to practices in semi-rural and urban areas. Methods We used data from the QUALICOPC study, conducted among approximately 7,000 GPs in 34 (mainly European) countries, on the organisation of practices, their human resources and equipment and their service profiles. Data were analysed using multilevel regression analysis, with countries and GPs as levels. Results In general the practices in rural areas are more often single-handed and have less other primary care workers available. In most countries they have more equipment and their service profiles are broader, in particular as compared to inner-city urban practices. Conclusions The combination of increasing demand for care and undersupply of health care services can lead to a primary care shortage in rural areas. However, the practices that are currently located in rural area in most countries seem to be able to cope with the situation by providing a broader range of services, compared to service-rich urban areas. Against growing health needs of an ageing and often poorer population, there is a risk of lack of facilities and equipment and ageing staff. Until now this is not manifest in the primary care practices in most countries.

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of individual mental health workers colocated within primary care practices: a systematic literature review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e042052
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Woods ◽  
Geva Greenfield ◽  
Azeem Majeed ◽  
Benedict Hayhoe
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Worker ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mental Health Workers ◽  
Mental Health Worker ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Primary Care Practices

ObjectivesMental health disorders contribute significantly to the global burden of disease and lead to extensive strain on health systems. The integration of mental health workers into primary care has been proposed as one possible solution, but evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness of this approach is unclear. We reviewed the clinical and cost effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices.DesignSystematic literature review.Data sourcesWe searched the Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthcare Management Information Consortium (HMIC) and Global Health databases.Eligibility criteriaAll quantitative studies published before July 2019 were eligible for the review; participants of any age and gender were included. Studies did not need to report a certain outcome measure or comparator in order to be eligible.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted using a standardised table; however, pooled analysis proved unfeasible. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool and the Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.ResultsFifteen studies from four countries were included. Mental health worker integration was associated with mental health benefits to varied populations, including minority groups and those with comorbid chronic diseases. Furthermore, the interventions were correlated with high patient satisfaction and increases in specialist mental health referrals among minority populations. However, there was insufficient evidence to suggest clinical outcomes were significantly different from usual general practitioner care.ConclusionsWhile there appear to be some benefits associated with mental health worker integration in primary care practices, we found insufficient evidence to conclude that an onsite primary care mental health worker is significantly more clinically or cost effective when compared with usual general practitioner care. There should therefore be an increased emphasis on generating new evidence from clinical trials to better understand the benefits and effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices.

scholarly journals Do statins reduce mortality in older people? Findings from a longitudinal study using primary care records

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e000780
Author(s):  
Lisanne Andra Gitsels ◽  
Ilyas Bakbergenuly ◽  
Nicholas Steel ◽  
Elena Kulinskaya
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Older People ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Cardiac Risk ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Network Database ◽  
Statin Prescription ◽  
The Health Improvement Network ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Primary Care Practices

ObjectiveAssess whether statins reduce mortality in the general population aged 60 years and above.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingPrimary care practices contributing to The Health Improvement Network database, England and Wales, 1990–2017.ParticipantsCohort who turned age 60 between 1990 and 2000 with no previous cardiovascular disease or statin prescription and followed up until 2017.ResultsCurrent statin prescription was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality from age 65 years onward, with greater reductions seen at older ages. The adjusted HRs of mortality associated with statin prescription at ages 65, 70, 75, 80 and 85 years were 0.76 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.81), 0.71 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.75), 0.68 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.72), 0.63 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.73) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.92), respectively. The adjusted HRs did not vary by sex or cardiac risk.ConclusionsUsing regularly updated clinical information on sequential treatment decisions in older people, mortality predictions were updated every 6 months until age 85 years in a combined primary and secondary prevention population. The consistent mortality reduction of statins from age 65 years onward supports their use where clinically indicated at age 75 and older, where there has been particular uncertainty of the benefits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document