Do Telephones Overcome Geographical Barriers to General Practice Out-Of-Hours Services? Mixed-Methods Study of Parents with Young Children

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Turnbull ◽  
Catherine Pope ◽  
David Martin ◽  
Valerie Lattimer
2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (694) ◽  
pp. e322-e329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah C Hillman ◽  
Carol Bryce ◽  
Rachel Caleychetty ◽  
Jeremy Dale

BackgroundPolycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common lifelong metabolic condition with serious associated comorbidities. Evidence points to a delay in diagnosis and inconsistency in the information provided to women with PCOS.AimTo capture women’s experiences of how PCOS is diagnosed and managed in UK general practice.Design and settingThis was a mixed-methods study with an online questionnaire survey and semi-structured telephone interviews with a subset of responders.MethodAn online survey to elicit women’s experiences of general practice PCOS care was promoted by charities and BBC Radio Leicester. The survey was accessible online between January 2018 and November 2018. A subset of responders undertook a semi-structured telephone interview to provide more in-depth data.ResultsA total of 323 women completed the survey (average age 35.4 years) and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 women. There were five key themes identified through the survey responses. Participants described a variable lag time from presentation to PCOS diagnosis, with a median of 6–12 months. Many had experienced mental health problems associated with their PCOS symptoms, but had not discussed these with the GP. Many were unable to recall any discussion about associated comorbidities with the GP. Some differences were identified between the experiences of women from white British backgrounds and those from other ethnic backgrounds.ConclusionFrom the experiences of the women in this study, it appears that PCOS in general practice is not viewed as a long-term condition with an increased risk of comorbidities including mental health problems. Further research should explore GPs’ awareness of comorbidities and the differences in PCOS care experienced by women from different ethnic backgrounds.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (15) ◽  
pp. 1-256
Author(s):  
Alicia O’Cathain ◽  
Emma Knowles ◽  
Jaqui Long ◽  
Janice Connell ◽  
Lindsey Bishop-Edwards ◽  
...  

Background There is widespread concern about the pressure on emergency and urgent services in the UK, particularly emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments. A mismatch between supply and demand has led to interest in what can be termed ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of services. This is defined by the research team in this study as ‘patients attending services with problems that are classified as suitable for treatment by a lower urgency service or self-care’. This is a challenging issue to consider because patients may face difficulties when deciding the best action to take, and different staff may make different judgements about what constitutes a legitimate reason for service use. Objectives To identify the drivers of ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments from patient and population perspectives. Design This was a sequential mixed-methods study with three components: a realist review; qualitative interviews (n = 48) and focus groups (n = 3) with patients considered ‘clinically unnecessary’ users of these services, focusing on parents of young children, young adults and people in areas of social deprivation; and a population survey (n = 2906) to explore attitudes towards seeking care for unexpected, non-life-threatening health problems and to identify the characteristics of someone with a tendency for ‘clinically unnecessary’ help-seeking. Results From the results of the three study components, we found that multiple, interacting drivers influenced individuals’ decision-making. Drivers could be grouped into symptom related, patient related and health service related. Symptom-related drivers were anxiety or need for reassurance, which were caused by uncertainty about the meaning or seriousness of symptoms; concern about the impact of symptoms on daily activities/functioning; and a need for immediate relief of intolerable symptoms, particularly pain. Patient-related drivers were reduced coping capacity as a result of illness, stress or limited resources; fear of consequences when responsible for another person’s health, particularly a child; and the influence of social networks. Health service-related drivers were perceptions or previous experiences of services, particularly the attractions of emergency departments; a lack of timely access to an appropriate general practitioner appointment; and compliance with health service staff’s advice. Limitations Difficulty recruiting patients who had used the ambulance service to the interviews and focus groups meant that we were not able to add as much as we had anticipated to the limited evidence base regarding this service. Conclusions Patients use emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments when they may not need the level of clinical care provided by these services for a multitude of inter-related reasons that sometimes differ by population subgroup. Some of these reasons relate to health services, in terms of difficulty accessing general practice leading to use of emergency departments, and to population-learnt behaviour concerning the positive attributes of emergency departments, rather than to patient characteristics. Social circumstances, such as complex and stressful lives, influence help-seeking for all three services. Demand may be ‘clinically unnecessary’ but completely understandable when service accessibility and patients’ social circumstances are considered. Future work There is a need to evaluate interventions, including changing service configuration, strengthening general practice and addressing the stressors that have an impact on people’s coping capacity. Different subgroups may require different interventions. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017056273. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
John L Campbell ◽  
Emily Fletcher ◽  
Gary Abel ◽  
Rob Anderson ◽  
Rupatharshini Chilvers ◽  
...  

BackgroundUK general practice faces a workforce crisis, with general practitioner (GP) shortages, organisational change, substantial pressures across the whole health-care system and an ageing population with increasingly complex health needs. GPs require lengthy training, so retaining the existing workforce is urgent and important.Objectives(1) To identify the key policies and strategies that might (i) facilitate the retention of experienced GPs in direct patient care or (ii) support the return of GPs following a career break. (2) To consider the feasibility of potentially implementing those policies and strategies.DesignThis was a comprehensive, mixed-methods study.SettingThis study took place in primary care in England.ParticipantsGeneral practitioners registered in south-west England were surveyed. Interviews were with purposively selected GPs and primary care stakeholders. A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) panel comprised GP partners and GPs working in national stakeholder organisations. Stakeholder consultations included representatives from regional and national groups.Main outcome measuresSystematic review – factors affecting GPs’ decisions to quit and to take career breaks. Survey – proportion of GPs likely to quit, to take career breaks or to reduce hours spent in patient care within 5 years of being surveyed. Interviews – themes relating to GPs’ decision-making. RAM – a set of policies and strategies to support retention, assessed as ‘appropriate’ and ‘feasible’. Predictive risk modelling – predictive model to identify practices in south-west England at risk of workforce undersupply within 5 years. Stakeholder consultation – comments and key actions regarding implementing emergent policies and strategies from the research.ResultsPast research identified four job-related ‘push’ factors associated with leaving general practice: (1) workload, (2) job dissatisfaction, (3) work-related stress and (4) work–life balance. The survey, returned by 2248 out of 3370 GPs (67%) in the south-west of England, identified a high likelihood of quitting (37%), taking a career break (36%) or reducing hours (57%) within 5 years. Interviews highlighted three drivers of leaving general practice: (1) professional identity and value of the GP role, (2) fear and risk associated with service delivery and (3) career choices. The RAM panel deemed 24 out of 54 retention policies and strategies to be ‘appropriate’, with most also considered ‘feasible’, including identification of and targeted support for practices ‘at risk’ of workforce undersupply and the provision of formal career options for GPs wishing to undertake portfolio roles. Practices at highest risk of workforce undersupply within 5 years are those that have larger patient list sizes, employ more nurses, serve more deprived and younger populations, or have poor patient experience ratings. Actions for national organisations with an interest in workforce planning were identified. These included collection of data on the current scope of GPs’ portfolio roles, and the need for formal career pathways for key primary care professionals, such as practice managers.LimitationsThe survey, qualitative research and modelling were conducted in one UK region. The research took place within a rapidly changing policy environment, providing a challenge in informing emergent policy and practice.ConclusionsThis research identifies the basis for current concerns regarding UK GP workforce capacity, drawing on experiences in south-west England. Policies and strategies identified by expert stakeholders after considering these findings are likely to be of relevance in addressing GP retention in the UK. Collaborative, multidisciplinary research partnerships should investigate the effects of rolling out some of the policies and strategies described in this report.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016033876 and UKCRN ID number 20700.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Richard S. Mayne ◽  
Nigel D. Hart ◽  
Neil Heron

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Many general practitioners (GPs) are sedentary for most of their working day. Levels of sedentary behaviour may have been exacerbated by increased use of telemedicine in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as this is traditionally performed while sitting down. Excessive sedentary behaviour is associated with many adverse health outcomes and increased all-cause mortality. This study will gain quantitative data on levels of sedentary behaviour among GPs and general practice specialty trainees (GPSTs), to identify to what extent general practice is a sedentary occupation, as well as qualitative data regarding the barriers and facilitators to reducing sedentary behaviour in the general practice setting.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The study follows a sequential, mixed-methods model. The first stage will involve the dissemination of a questionnaire survey, where participants self-estimate their sedentary behaviour on a working day and on a non-working day. The second stage will use thigh-worn accelerometers and a sleep/work log to obtain objective data regarding sedentary behaviour among a purposive subset of participants who responded to the questionnaire. The third stage will involve semi-structured interviews with a purposive subset of accelerometer study participants, analysed with the application of a theoretical framework regarding the acceptability of healthcare interventions.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper outlines a protocol for a sequential, mixed-methods study exploring sedentary behaviour among GPs and GPSTs. Findings of this study will shed light on the new ways of working as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will be relevant to clinicians working in similar primary care settings throughout the world.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Trial Registration:</strong> ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04556695. Date of registration: 21<sup>st</sup> September 2020.</p><p class="abstract"> </p>


Antibiotics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthe Sunde ◽  
Marthe Marie Nygaard ◽  
Sigurd Høye

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions directed at general practitioners (GPs) contribute to an improved antibiotic prescribing. However, it is challenging to implement and maintain such interventions at a national level. Involving the municipalities’ Chief Medical Officer (MCMO) in quality improvement activities may simplify the implementation and maintenance, but may also be perceived challenging for the GPs. In the ENORM (Educational intervention in NORwegian Municipalities for antibiotic treatment in line with guidelines) study, MCMOs acted as facilitators of an AMS intervention for GPs. We explored GPs’ views on their own antibiotic prescribing, and their views on MCMO involvement in improving antibiotic prescribing in general practice. This is a mixed-methods study combining quantitative and qualitative data from two data sources: e-mail interviews with 15 GPs prior to the ENORM intervention, and online-form answers to closed and open-ended questions from 132 GPs participating in the ENORM intervention. The interviews and open-ended responses were analyzed using systematic text condensation. Many GPs admitted to occasionally prescribing antibiotics without medical indication, mainly due to pressure from patients. Too liberal treatment guidelines were also seen as a reason for overtreatment. The MCMO was considered a suitable and acceptable facilitator of quality improvement activities in general practice, and their involvement was regarded as unproblematic (scale 0 (very problematic) to 10 (not problematic at all): mean 8.2, median 10). GPs acknowledge the need and possibility to improve their own antibiotic prescribing, and in doing so, they welcome engagement from the municipality. MCMOs should be involved in quality improvement and AMS in general practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (697) ◽  
pp. e573-e580
Author(s):  
Joanna Fleming ◽  
Carol Bryce ◽  
Joanne Parsons ◽  
Chrissie Wellington ◽  
Jeremy Dale

BackgroundThe parkrun practice initiative, a joint collaboration between parkrun and the Royal College of General Practitioners, was launched to encourage general practices to improve the health and wellbeing of patients and staff through participating in local 5 km parkrun events. Why and how practices engage with the initiative is unknown.AimTo investigate engagement with and delivery of the parkrun practice initiative in general practice.Design and settingMixed methods study conducted from April–July 2019 comprising an online survey of all registered parkrun practices, and interviews and a focus group with practice staff in the West Midlands.MethodThe designated contacts at 780 registered parkrun practices were invited to complete an online survey. A purposive sample of parkrun practice staff and non-registered practice staff took part either in semi-structured interviews or a focus group, with transcripts analysed thematically.ResultsOf the total number of parkrun practices, 306 (39.2%) completed the survey. Sixteen practice staff (from nine parkrun practices and four non-registered practices) took part in either semi-structured interviews (n = 12) or a focus group (n = 4). Key motivators for becoming a parkrun practice were: to improve patient and staff health and wellbeing, and to become more engaged with the community and enhance practice image. Practices most commonly encouraged patients, carers, and staff to take part in parkrun and displayed parkrun flyers and posters. Challenges in implementing activities included lack of time (both personal and during consultations) and getting staff involved. Where staff did engage there were positive effects on morale and participation. Non-registered practices were receptive to the initiative, but had apprehensions about the commitment involved.ConclusionPractices were keen to improve patient and staff health. Addressing time constraints and staff support needs to be considered when implementing the initiative.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 366.1-366
Author(s):  
Anne M Finucane ◽  
Deborah Davydaitis ◽  
Emma Carduff ◽  
Zoe Horseman ◽  
Paul Baughan ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe percentage of people with a key information summary (KIS) or an anticipatory care plan (ACP) at the time of death can act as an indicator of access to palliative care. Key information summaries (KIS) introduced throughout Scotland in 2013, are shared electronic patient records which contain essential information relevant to a patient’s care including palliative care. There is now a need to examine current levels of KIS generation and ACP documentation in the last months of life to assess progress and review barriers and facilitators to sharing patient information across settings and to inform out-of-hours care.AimsTo estimate the extent and timing of KIS and ACP generation for people who die with an advanced progressive condition and to compare with our previous study (Tapsfield et al. 2016).To explore GP experiences of commencing and updating a KIS; and their perspectives on what works well and what can be improved in supporting this process.MethodsA mixed methods study consisting of a retrospective review of the electronic records of all patients who died in 16 Scottish general practices in 2017 and semi-structured interviews with 16 GPs.ResultsQuantitative and qualitative data collection is in progress.ConclusionFindings will describe current levels of KIS and ACP documentation for people who die in Scotland. We will synthesize GP experiences of KIS use and describe the essential components of an ACP that need to be documented to enable good palliative care across settings including emergency and out-of-hours care.Reference. Tapsfield J, Hall C, Lunan C, McCutheon H, McLoughlin P, Rhee J, Rus A, Spiller J, Finucane AM, Murray SA. Many people in Scotland now benefit from anticipatory care before they die: An after death analysis and interviews with general practitioners. BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care2016. doi:10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-001014


BMJ Open ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. e009079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Carson-Stevens ◽  
Peter Hibbert ◽  
Anthony Avery ◽  
Amy Butlin ◽  
Ben Carter ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document