scholarly journals Practice nurse chlamydia testing in Australian general practice: a qualitative study of benefits, barriers and facilitators

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Lorch ◽  
◽  
Jane Hocking ◽  
Rebecca Guy ◽  
Alaina Vaisey ◽  
...  
2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J Halcomb ◽  
Patricia M Davidson ◽  
Julie Yallop ◽  
Rhonda Griffiths ◽  
John Daly

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Yeung ◽  
Meredith Temple-Smith ◽  
Christopher Fairley ◽  
Jane Hocking

As the cornerstone of Australian primary health care, general practice is a setting well suited for regular chlamydia testing but testing rates remain low. This review examines the barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice. Six databases – Medline, PubMed, Meditext, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science – were used to identify peer-reviewed publications that addressed barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice using the following terms: ‘chlamydia test*’, ‘STI test*’’general practice’, ‘primary care’, ‘family medicine’, ‘barriers’, ‘facilitators’ and ‘enablers’ from 1997 until November 2013. Data about the study design and key findings were extracted from the publications. A framework method was used to manage the data and organise publications into three categories –patient, general practitioner, and general practice. Key findings were then classified as a barrier or facilitator. Sixty-nine publications were included, with 41 quantitative studies, 17 qualitative studies, and 11 using mixed methods. Common barriers identified in all three groups included a lack of knowledge, awareness or training, demands on time and workload, and the social context of testing. Facilitators included the normalisation of testing, the use of nurses and other practice staff, education and incentives. Numerous barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice have been identified. While the barriers are well studied, many of the facilitators are not as well researched, and highlight areas for further study.


Author(s):  
Johannes William Vergouw ◽  
Hanneke Smits-Pelser ◽  
Marijke C. Kars ◽  
Thijs van Houwelingen ◽  
Harmieke van Os-Medendorp ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The strain on health care services is increasing due to an ageing population and the increasing prevalence of chronic health conditions. eHealth could contribute to optimise effective and efficient care to older adults with one or more chronic health conditions in the general practice. Aim: The aim of this study was to identify the needs, barriers and facilitators amongst community-dwelling older adults (60+) suffering from one or more chronic health conditions, in using online eHealth applications to support general practice services. Methods: A qualitative study, using semi-structured followed by think-aloud interviews, was conducted in the Netherlands. The semi-structured interviews, supported by an interview guide were conducted and analysed thematically. The think-aloud method was used to collect data about the cognitive process while the participant was completing a task within online eHealth applications. Verbal analysis according to the Chi approach was conducted to analyse the think-aloud interviews. Findings: A total of n = 19 older adults with a mean age of 73 years participated. The ability to have immediate contact with the GP on important health issues was identified as an important need. Identified barriers were non-familiarity with the online eHealth applications and a mismatch of user health needs. The low computer experience resulted in non-familiarity with the online eHealth applications. Faltering applications resulted in participants refusing to participate in the use of online eHealth applications. Convenience, efficiency and the instant availability of eHealth via applications were identified as important facilitators. Conclusion: To improve the use and acceptability of eHealth applications amongst older adults in the general practice, the applications should be tailored to meet individual needs. More attention should be given to improving the user-friendliness of these applications and to the promotion of the benefits such as facilitating older adults independent living for longer.


10.2196/17447 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e17447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oyungerel Byambasuren ◽  
Elaine Beller ◽  
Tammy Hoffmann ◽  
Paul Glasziou

Background The ubiquity of smartphones and health apps make them a potential self-management tool for patients that could be prescribed by medical professionals. However, little is known about how Australian general practitioners and their patients view the possibility of prescribing mobile health (mHealth) apps as a nondrug intervention. Objective This study aimed to determine barriers and facilitators to prescribing mHealth apps in Australian general practice from the perspective of general practitioners and their patients. Methods We conducted semistructured interviews in Australian general practice settings with purposively sampled general practitioners and patients. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed by two researchers. Results Interview participants included 20 general practitioners and 15 adult patients. General practitioners’ perceived barriers to prescribing apps included a generational difference in the digital propensity for providers and patients; lack of knowledge of prescribable apps and trustworthy sources to access them; the time commitment required of providers and patients to learn and use the apps; and concerns about privacy, safety, and trustworthiness of health apps. General practitioners perceived facilitators as trustworthy sources to access prescribable apps and information, and younger generation and widespread smartphone ownership. For patients, the main barriers were older age and usability of mHealth apps. Patients were not concerned about privacy and data safety issues regarding health app use. Facilitators for patients included the ubiquity of smartphones and apps, especially for the younger generation and recommendation of apps by doctors. We identified evidence of effectiveness as an independent theme from both the provider and patient perspectives. Conclusions mHealth app prescription appears to be feasible in general practice. The barriers and facilitators identified by the providers and patients overlapped, though privacy was of less concern to patients. The involvement of health professionals and patients is vital for the successful integration of effective, evidence-based mHealth apps with clinical practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document