Influence of Environmental Design on Team Interactions Across Three Family Medicine Clinics: Perceptions of Communication, Efficiency, and Privacy

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaher Karp ◽  
Sandra Kamnetz ◽  
Natalie Wietfeldt ◽  
Christine Sinsky ◽  
Todd Molfenter ◽  
...  

Objective: In this study, we explored how two different primary care clinic physical layouts (onstage/offstage and pod-based [PB] designs) influenced pre- and postvisit team experiences and perceptions. Background: Protocols encourage healthcare team communication before and after primary care visits to support better patient care. Physical clinic environments may influence these behaviors, but limited research has been performed. Method: We conducted observations, three interviews with clinic managers, and six focus groups with 21 providers and staff at three family medicine teaching clinics. Observational data were captured through field notes and spaghetti diagrams. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a grounded theory-based approach to understand how aspects of the clinic environment affected communication, efficiency, and privacy. Results: Variations in communication styles and trade-offs between patient contact and privacy emerged as differences. In the onstage/offstage design, colocated teams had increased verbal communication but perceived being isolated from other clinic teams. In contrast, teams in PB clinics communicated with other clinic teams but had more informal patient contact within care-team stations that imposed privacy risk. Conclusions: Primary care clinic design appears to alter provider–team and patient–provider communication and flow. Organizations should consider aligning environmental design with desired interaction patterns when building new primary care clinics.

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-127
Author(s):  
Chooi Peng Ong ◽  
Cindy Shiqi Zhu ◽  
Desmond SL Ong ◽  
Ying Pin Toh

Family medicine training encompasses the need to develop a diverse skillset and the ability to practice in different settings. During three years of training, family medicine residents from National University Health System (NUHS) rapidly transit through many hospital rotations with varying specialty-specific competency requirements. Throughout this period, each resident is rostered to run a half-day primary care clinic on the same day each week and is assigned a dedicated faculty member to supervise him during the session. Each faculty member is assigned up to four to six residents for the half-day sessions every week. There is a need to contextualise what is learnt in hospital to primary care, and to effectively integrate knowledge across disciplines. We describe here a tool that the NUHS family medicine residency has used to bring together faculty and residents of varying seniorities and locations for discussion, reflection, and growth.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 434-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeany K. Jun

Objectives: To describe the process and cost of establishing clinical pharmacy services with prescribing privileges in a federally qualified health center (FQHC) primary care clinic. Setting: The primary care clinic was located in a low-income area of Southern California and served patients with Medicaid and Medicare. The primary care clinic had preventive medicine and family medicine physicians, a family medicine residency program, behavioral health services, and a registered dietician. Practice Innovation: New clinical pharmacy services were established at this FQHC primary care clinic. The medication assistance program was a stepping stone to establish rapport with the physicians. Credentialing and privileging was implemented for clinical pharmacists. An open protocol collaborative practice agreement was developed to allow clinical pharmacists to manage ambulatory patients. Results: From August 2014 to June 2015, the clinical pharmacist interacted with 392 patients and spent 336 hours educating patients and providing disease state management. The pharmacist also provided consults to residents and providers. Diabetic patients made up 76% of all clinical pharmacy encounters. There were 86 face-to-face clinical pharmacy appointments with the pharmacist. The average time for clinical pharmacy appointments was 77 minutes. Conclusion: By describing ways to develop rapport with providers, how to credential and privilege pharmacists, and explain resources and costs of setting up a service, the hope is that more clinical pharmacists will be able to incorporate into independent or FQHC primary care clinics for improved management of ambulatory patients.


2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Kunin ◽  
Mark Timlin ◽  
Chris Lemoh ◽  
David A. Sheffield ◽  
Alana Russo ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In Australia, demand for specialist infectious diseases services exceeds capacity to provide timely management of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in areas of high refugee and asylum seeker settlement. A model for treating LTBI patients in primary care has been developed and piloted in a refugee-focused primary health service (Monash Health Refugee Health and Wellbeing [MHRHW]) and a universal primary care clinic. This study reports on the development and evaluation of the model, focusing on the model feasibility, and barriers and enablers to its success. Methods A convergent mix-methods design was used to evaluate the model for treating LTBI patients in primary care, where a prospective cohort study of patients commencing treatment either at MHRHW or the universal primary care clinic determined the model feasibility, while focus groups with clinicians directly involved in treating these patients explored barriers and enablers to sustainability and success of the model. Results From January 2017 to April 2018, 65 patients with confirmed LTBI presented at participating clinics. Treatment was accepted by 31 (48%) patients, of whom 15(48%) were treated at MHRHW and 16 (52%) at the universal primary care clinic. The 6-months’ treatment completion rate was higher at MHRHW compared to the universal primary care clinic (14 (93%) compared to 9 (56%) respectively, p = 0.0373). Reasons for non-completion included adverse reaction, opting out and relocation. At the completion of the pilot, 15 clinicians participated in two focus groups. Clinicians identified barriers and enablers for successful LTBI management at patient, provider, organisational and clinical levels. While barriers for treatment completion and adherence were consistent across the two pilot sites, enablers, such as resources to facilitate patient education and follow-up, were available only at MHRHW. Conclusion Screening and management of LTBI patients can be achieved within the primary care setting, considerate of barriers and enablers at patient, provider, organisational and clinical levels. Upscaling of a primary care response to the management of LTBI will require supporting primary care clinics with resources to employ dedicated clinical staff for patient education, follow-up communication and monitoring medication adherence.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 137 (Supplement 3) ◽  
pp. 93A-93A
Author(s):  
Lwbba Chait ◽  
Angeliki Makri ◽  
Rawan Nahas ◽  
Gwen Raphan

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 215013272110350
Author(s):  
Pasitpon Vatcharavongvan ◽  
Viwat Puttawanchai

Background Most older adults with comorbidities in primary care clinics use multiple medications and are at risk of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescription. Objective This study examined the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIMs using Thai criteria for PIMs. Methods This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study. Data were collected from electronic medical records in a primary care clinic in 2018. Samples were patients aged ≥65 years old with at least 1 prescription. Variables included age, gender, comorbidities, and medications. The list of risk drugs for Thai elderly version 2 was the criteria for PIMs. The prevalence of polypharmacy and PIMs were calculated, and multiple logistic regression was conducted to examine associations between variables and PIMs. Results Of 2806 patients, 27.5% and 43.7% used ≥5 medications and PIMs, respectively. Of 10 290 prescriptions, 47% had at least 1 PIM. The top 3 PIMs were anticholinergics, proton-pump inhibitors, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Polypharmacy and dyspepsia were associated with PIM prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio 2.48 [95% confident interval or 95% CI 2.07-2.96] and 3.88 [95% CI 2.65-5.68], respectively). Conclusion Prescriptions with PIMs were high in the primary care clinic. Describing unnecessary medications is crucial to prevent negative health outcomes from PIMs. Computer-based clinical decision support, pharmacy-led interventions, and patient-specific drug recommendations are promising interventions to reduce PIMs in a primary care setting.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S200-S200
Author(s):  
Michael Hansen ◽  
Barbara Trautner ◽  
Roger Zoorob ◽  
George Germanos ◽  
Osvaldo Alquicira ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Use of antibiotics without a prescription (non-prescription use) contributes to antimicrobial resistance. Non-prescription use includes obtaining and taking antibiotics without a prescription, taking another person’s antibiotics, or taking one’s own stored antibiotics. We conducted a quantitative survey focusing on the factors that impact patients’ decisions to use non-prescription antibiotics. Methods We surveyed patients visiting public safety net primary care clinics and private emergency departments in a racially/ethnically diverse urban area. Surveys were read aloud to patients in Spanish and English. Survey domains included patients’ perspectives on which syndromes require antibiotic treatment, their perceptions of health care, and their access to antibiotics without a prescription. Results We interviewed 190 patients, 122 from emergency departments (64%), and 68 from primary care clinics (36%). Overall, 44% reported non-prescription antibiotic use within the past 12 months. Non-prescription use was higher among primary care clinic patients (63%) than the emergency department patients (39%, p = 0.002). The majority felt that antibiotics would be needed for bronchitis (78%) while few felt antibiotics would be needed for diarrhea (30%) (Figure 1). The most common situation identified “in which respondents would consider taking antibiotics without contacting a healthcare provider was “got better by taking this antibiotic before” (Figure 2). Primary care patients were more likely to obtain antibiotics without prescription from another country than emergency department patients (27% vs. 13%, P=0.03). Also, primary care patients were more likely to report obstacles to seeking a doctor’s care, such as the inability to take time off from work or transportation difficulties, but these comparisons were not statistically significant. Figure 1. Patients’ agreement that antibiotics would be needed varied by symptom/syndrome. Figure 2. Situations that lead to non-prescription antibiotic use impacted the two clinical populations differently Conclusion Non-prescription antibiotic use is a widespread problem in the two very different healthcare systems we included in this study, although factors underlying this practice differ by patient population. Better understanding of the factors driving non-prescription antibiotic use is essential to designing patient-focused interventions to decrease this unsafe practice. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document