Electronic cigarettes: How confident and effective are allergists, pulmonologists, and primary care physicians in their practice behavior?

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 192-197
Author(s):  
Sherry S. Zhou ◽  
Alan P. Baptist
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Knowledge And Beliefs ◽  
Tobacco Cigarette ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Personal Use

Background: There has been a striking increase in electronic cigarette (EC) use in the United States. The beliefs and practices toward ECs among physicians are unknown. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate EC practice patterns among allergists, pulmonologists, and primary care physicians. Methods: An anonymous survey was sent to physicians. The survey contained 32 questions and addressed issues related to demographics, cessation counseling behaviors, personal use, and knowledge and beliefs about ECs. Statistical analysis was performed by using analysis of variance, the Pearson χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and logistic regression. Results: A total of 291 physicians completed the survey (222 primary care physicians, 33 pulmonologists, and 36 allergists) for a response rate of 46%. The allergists asked about tobacco cigarette use as frequently as did the pulmonologists and more than the primary care physicians (p < 0.001), but they rarely asked about EC use. The pulmonologists scored highest on self-reported knowledge on ECs, although all the groups answered <40% of the questions correctly. The allergists did not feel as comfortable about providing EC cessation counseling as did the pulmonologists and primary care physicians (p < 0.001). All three groups were equally unlikely to recommend ECs as a cessation tool for tobacco cigarette users. Conclusion: Allergists lacked knowledge and confidence in providing education and cessation counseling for EC users. As the number of patients who use these products continues to increase, there is an urgent need for all physicians to be comfortable and knowledgeable with counseling about ECs.

scholarly journals Medical Cannabis for the Primary Care Physician

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 215013271988483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepika Slawek ◽  
Senthil Raj Meenrajan ◽  
Marika Rose Alois ◽  
Paige Comstock Barker ◽  
Irene Mison Estores ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physician ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Chronic Health Conditions ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Medical Cannabis ◽  
Number Of Patients

Medical cannabis use is common in the United States and increasingly more socially acceptable. As more patients seek out and acquire medical cannabis, primary care physicians will be faced with a growing number of patients seeking information on the indications, efficacy, and safety of medical cannabis. We present a case of a patient with several chronic health conditions who asks her primary care provider whether she should try medical cannabis. We provide a review of the pharmacology of medical cannabis, the state of evidence regarding the efficacy of medical cannabis, variations in the types of medical cannabis, and safety monitoring considerations for the primary care physician.

scholarly journals Cancer Care and Cancer Survivorship Care in the United States: Will We Be Able to Care for These Patients in the Future?

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 119-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence N. Shulman ◽  
Linda A. Jacobs ◽  
Sheldon Greenfield ◽  
Barbara Jones ◽  
Mary S. McCabe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
The United States ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Number Of Patients

The combination of a shortfall in oncologists and primary care physicians and an increased number of patients using more health care resources raises concerns about our health care system's ability to accommodate future patients with cancer and cancer survivors.

The Role of Primary Care Physicians in Providing End-of-Life Care

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Tse Liu ◽  
Iris Kovar-Gough ◽  
Nabila Farabi ◽  
Frank Animikwam ◽  
Sarah Beth Weers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
End Of Life Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
The United States ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Life Care ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Wide Range

Background: Primary care physicians (PCPs) frequently have long-term relationships with patients as well as their families. As such they are well positioned to care for their patients at the end of their lives. As the number of patients in need of end-of-life care continues to grow, it is critical to understand how PCPs can fulfill that need. The purpose of our study is to perform a narrative review of the literature and develop a theoretical model delineating the overarching roles played by PCPs in caring for patients at the end of life. Methods: For this narrative review, the authors searched Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus up to March 22, 2017. Articles were not limited by geography. Results: Review of existing literature generally supports 4 broad categories as the primary roles for PCP involvement in end of life: pain and symptom management; information management, including transmitting and clarifying information, setting care priorities, and assisting patients with treatment decisions; coordinating care and collaborating with other providers; and addressing patients’ social, emotional, and spiritual needs. Conclusions: Based on the results of this review, PCPs provide a wide range of services to patients at the end of life. Promoting the provision of the full scope of services by PCPs will help ensure improved continuity of care while providing the highest quality of care for patients, both in the United States and around the world.

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Psychotropic Medications ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

Characteristics of Physician Relocation Following Hurricane Katrina

2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-12
Author(s):  
Kusuma Madamala ◽  
Claudia R. Campbell ◽  
Edbert B. Hsu ◽  
Yu-Hsiang Hsieh ◽  
James James
Keyword(s):  
Hurricane Katrina ◽  
Gulf Coast ◽  
General Medicine ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Bivariate Analysis ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Introduction: On Aug. 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina made landfall along the Gulf Coast of the United States, resulting in the evacuation of more than 1.5 million people, including nearly 6000 physicians. This article examines the relocation patterns of physicians following the storm, determines the impact that the disaster had on their lives and practices, and identifies lessons learned. Methods: An Internet-based survey was conducted among licensed physicians reporting addresses within Federal Emergency Management Agency-designated disaster zones in Louisiana and Mississippi. Descriptive data analysis was used to describe respondent characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the factors associated with physician nonreturn to original practice. For those remaining relocated out of state, bivariate analysis with x2 or Fisher exact test was used to determine factors associated with plans to return to original practice. Results: A total of 312 eligible responses were collected. Among disaster zone respondents, 85.6 percent lived in Louisiana and 14.4 percent resided in Mississippi before the hurricane struck. By spring 2006, 75.6 percent (n = 236) of the respondents had returned to their original homes, whereas 24.4 percent (n = 76) remained displaced. Factors associated with nonreturn to original employment included family or general medicine practice (OR 0.42, 95 percent CI 0.17–1.04; P = .059) and severe or complete damage to the workplace (OR 0.24, 95 percent CI 0.13–0.42; P &lt; .001). Conclusions: A sizeable proportion of physicians remain displaced after Hurricane Katrina, along with a lasting decrease in the number of physicians serving in the areas affected by the disaster. Programs designed to address identified physician needs in the aftermath of the storm may give confidence to displaced physicians to return.

Stimulant Medication Use by Primary Care Physicians in the Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
Mark L. Wolraich ◽  
Scott Lindgren ◽  
Ann Stromquist ◽  
Richard Milich ◽  
Charles Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ◽  
Attention Deficit ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Stimulant Medication ◽  
Medication Use ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hyperactivity Disorder ◽  
Family Practitioners ◽  
Behavioral Treatments

Treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), one of the most common behavioral disorders in children in the United States, remains controversial because of concern about stimulant medication use. Extending a previous study of pediatricians, the present study surveyed a random national sample of family practitioners and then directly screened 457 patients of 10 pediatricians and family practitioners in two small midwestern cities. Responses to the national survey indicated that stimulant medication remains the main treatment prescribed by primary care physicians for children with ADHD. In the direct patient screening, the prevalence of ADHD diagnoses was 5.3% (pediatricians) and 4.2% (family practitioners) of all elementary-schoolaged children screened. Eighty-eight percent of these children were treated with methyiphenidate. Although medication was considered an effective treatment by the parents of 85% of the children given the medication, efficacy was unrelated to the accuracy of diagnosis. When explicit DSM-III-R criteria were used, only 72% of those assigned a diagnosis of ADHD by the physicians would have received that diagnosis based on a structured psychiatric interview with the parents and only 53% received that diagnosis based on teacher report of symptoms, even when the child was not receiving medication. Although the majority of physicians (in both the surveys and the direct screenings) reported using at least some behavioral treatments with their patients, parents reported infrequent use of nonpharmacologic forms of therapy, such as behavior modification. These data thus indicate a relatively modest rate of stimulant medication use for ADHD, but a serious underuse of systematic behavioral treatments in primary care.

Parasitology Screening of Latin American Children in a Primary Care Clinic

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-283
Author(s):  
Joel L. Bass ◽  
Kishor A. Mehta ◽  
Bonnie Eppes
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Primary Care Clinic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Finding ◽  
Parasitic Infections ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Care Clinic

A screening program based in a Massachusetts community hospital primary care clinic, which included 124 children from 12 different Latin American countries, demonstrated that nearly 35% were carriers of pathogenic parasites. The large majority (83.7%) of these children were asymptomatic at the time of the examination. Although there may be considerable variation based on country of origin, the present results, as well as a review of the literature, suggest this is likely to be a common finding among children born in most regions of Latin America. Compliance with the screening process was significantly higher in groups with higher infection rates and the successive yield in those patients who submitted two or more stool samples revealed that most pathogens were identified in the first sample. Schoolage children were found to have the highest risk for both roundworm infections and multiple parasitic infections. For those children with identified pathogens, nearly 90% received treatment. Current trends in immigration, international adoptions, and special circumstances including day care, family shelters, and increasing numbers of human immunodeficiency virus-infected children have made an appreciation of the extent of parasitosis, and awareness of possible management approaches, an important consideration for primary care physicians in the United States.

Corporal Punishment

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 96 (4) ◽  
pp. 792-793
Author(s):  
Den A. Trumbull ◽  
DuBose Ravenel ◽  
David Larson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Violence Prevention ◽  
Corporal Punishment ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The United States

The supplement to Pediatrics entitled "The Role of the Pediatrician in Violence Prevention" is timely, given the increasingly serious violence problem in the United States.1 Many of the supplement's recommendations are well-conceived and developed. However, the recommendation to "work toward the ultimate goal of ending corporal punishment in homes" (page 580)2 is unwarranted and counterproductive. Before one advises against a practice approved by 88% of American parents3 and supported by 67% of primary care physicians,4 there should be sufficient scientific evidence to support the proposed change in social policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document