Rejecting and accepting international migrant patients into primary care practices: a mixed method study

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena Mota ◽  
Maureen Mayhew ◽  
Karen J. Grant ◽  
Ricardo Batista ◽  
Kevin Pottie

Purpose – International migrants frequently struggle to obtain access to local primary care practices. The purpose of this paper is to explore factors associated with rejecting and accepting migrant patients into Canadian primary care practices. Design/methodology/approach – Mixed methods study. Using a modified Delphi consensus approach among a network of experts on migrant health, the authors identified and prioritized factors related to rejecting and accepting migrants into primary care practices. From ten semi-structured interviews with the less-migrant-care experienced practitioners, the authors used qualitative description to further examine nuances of these factors. Findings – Consensus was reached on practitioner-level factors associated with a reluctance of practitioners to accept migrants − communication challenges, high-hassle factor, limited availability of clinicians, fear of financial loss, lack of awareness of migrant groups, and limited migrant health knowledge – and on factors associated with accepting migrants − feeling useful, migrant health education, third party support, learning about other cultures, experience working overseas, and enjoying the challenge of treating diseases from around the world. Interviews supported use of interpreters, community resources, alternative payment methods, and migrant health education as strategies to overcome the identified challenges. Research limitations/implications – This Delphi network represented the views of practitioners who had substantive experience in providing care for migrants. Interviews with less-experienced practitioners were used to mitigate this bias. Originality/value – This study identifies the facilitators and challenges of migrants’ access to primary care from the perspective of primary care practitioners, work that complements research from patients’ perspectives. Strategies to address these findings are discussed.

JAMIA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-428
Author(s):  
Faraz S Ahmad ◽  
Luke V Rasmussen ◽  
Stephen D Persell ◽  
Joshua E Richardson ◽  
David T Liss ◽  
...  

Abstract Third-party platforms have emerged to support small primary care practices for calculating and reporting electronic clinical quality measures (eCQM) for federal programs like The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) and Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). Yet little is known about the capabilities and limitations of electronic health record systems (EHRs) to enable data access for these programs. We connected 116 small- to medium-sized practices with seven different EHRs to popHealth, an open-source eCQM platform. We identified the prevalence of following problems with eCQM data for data extraction in seven different EHRs: (1) Lack of coded data in five of seven; (2) Incorrectly categorized data in four of seven; (3) Isosemantic data (data within the incorrect context) in four of seven; (4) Coding that could not be directly evaluated in six of seven; (5) Errors in date assignment and labeled as historical values in five of seven; and (6) Inadequate data to assign the correct code in two of seven. We recommend specific enhancements to EHR systems that can promote effective eCQM implementation and reporting to MACRA and MIPS.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e042052
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Woods ◽  
Geva Greenfield ◽  
Azeem Majeed ◽  
Benedict Hayhoe

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e000780
Author(s):  
Lisanne Andra Gitsels ◽  
Ilyas Bakbergenuly ◽  
Nicholas Steel ◽  
Elena Kulinskaya

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