Dataset Information

WestREN: a description of an Irish academic general practice research network.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Primary care research networks have been established internationally since the 1960s to enable diverse practitioners to engage in and develop research and education and implement research evidence.The newly established Western Research and Education Network (WestREN) is one such network consisting of a collaboration between the Discipline of General Practice at NUI Galway and 71 West of Ireland general practices. In September 2009 all member practices were issued with a questionnaire with two objectives: to describe the structure and characteristics of the member practices and to compare the results to the national profile of Irish general practice.

Methods

A postal survey was used followed by one written and one email reminder.

Results

A response rate of 73% (52/71) was achieved after two reminders.Half of practices were in a rural location, one quarter located in an urban setting and another quarter in a mixed location.Ninety-four per cent of general practitioners practice from purpose-built or adapted premises with under 6% of practices being attached to the general practitioner's residence. Over 96% of general practitioners use appointment systems with 58% using appointment only.All practices surveyed were computerised, with 80% describing their practices as 'fully computerised'. Almost 60% of general practitioners are coding chronic diagnoses with 20% coding individual consultations. Twenty-five per cent of general practitioners were single-handed with the majority of practices having at least two general practitioners, and a mean number of general practitioners of 2.4. Ninety-two per cent of practices employed a practice nurse with 30% employing more than one nurse.Compared to the national profile, WestREN practices appear somewhat larger, and more likely to be purpose-built and in rural areas. National trends apparent between 1982 and 1992, such as increasing computerisation and practice nurse availability, appear to be continuing.

Conclusions

WestREN is a new university-affiliated general practice research network in Ireland. Survey of its initial membership confirms WestREN practices to be broadly representative of the national profile and has provided us with valuable information on the current and changing structure of Irish general practice.

SUBMITTER: Kavanagh KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2958962 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite general practitioners' (GPs') key role in Germany`s primary health care, clinical research in general practice is scarce. Clinical research is mainly conducted at inpatient facilities, although their results are rarely transferable. German GPs have no extra time or funding for research, as well as limited research training. To support clinical research in German primary health care, practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are developed. As they will be based on an active involvement of GPs, we need more information on GPs` participation-readiness. The aim of this study was to explore facilitators and barriers to participation in the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet) from the GPs`perspective before clinical trials will be performed.MethodsWe have performed semi-structured qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of 20 Bavarian GPs in 2022 under the application of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR). Transcriptions were analysed according to Kuckartz` qualitative content analysis. The five domains of the CFIR framework served as initial deductive codes.ResultsN = 14 interviewees already agreed to participate in BayFoNet, whereas n = 6 interviewees opted not to participate in BayFoNet at the time of data collection. Main facilitators to conduct clinical research within BayFoNet were the motivation to contribute to evidence strength and quality in general practice, professional development and training of practice staff, as well as networking. Barriers for an active participation were bad experiences with previous clinical studies and lack of resources.ConclusionsPBRNS in Germany have to be promoted and the entire practice team has to be involved at an early stage of development. Professional training of general practice staff and a living network might enhance engagement. Participatory approaches could help to develop acceptable and feasible study designs. Furthermore, PBRNs should support patient recruitment and data collection in general practices and disseminate the results of their research projects regularly to maintain GPs` engagement.Trial registrationDRKS00028805, NCT05667207.

Project description:IntroductionThe Irish Medical Council has regulated mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) for doctors since 2011 to enhance the quality and safety of Irish healthcare. The Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP), as the professional body for general practitioners (GPs) in Ireland, operates a Professional Competence Scheme (PCS) for doctors working in general practice. As PCS evolves over time, it is important to measure the impact of mandatory CPD on patient care. The ICGP undertook this study to answer the research question: Does CPD enhance patient care? Research has been conducted on the impact of CPD on the medical profession, both in Ireland and abroad, on GP engagement with existing CPD supports and on the impact of CPD for GPs in other countries. To date, no study has been carried out in Ireland on GP views on the impact of mandatory CPD on patient care or on which type of CPD activity is perceived to be the most effective in this regard.MethodsAll PCS enrollees on the 2018/2019 year who had provided an email address (n = 4,415) were asked to complete an anonymous online survey available in April and May 2019. The survey aimed to obtain feedback on existing CPD supports, enhancement of CPD supports, CPD impact on general practice and on patient care. The survey questions which related specifically to patient care were used to inform this paper.ResultsA total of 1,233 (27.9%) PCS enrolees participated in the survey. Overall, 73.9% (n = 836) of respondents agreed that CPD assisted them in improving the quality of patient care with females significantly more likely to consider that CPD improved patient care. A total of 74.9% (n = 848) reported changes to patient management as a result of CPD activity and over half (56.4%; n = 464) of these believed that external CPD activity (courses/conferences) had the most potential to benefit their patient care, however, differences were observed across gender and age group.ConclusionThe majority of GPs who completed the survey found CPD engagement beneficial to their patient care. The majority of respondents agree that peer engagement activities are most likely to impact patient care thus demonstrating that mandatory CPD has been successfully implemented in this respect in Irish general practice. However, there is a difference in response to the various CPD formats across different demographic cohorts and this should be considered when designing the format of educational activities.

Project description:Improving the ability to risk-stratify patients is critical for efficiently allocating resources within healthcare systems.The purpose of this study was to evaluate a physician-defined complexity prediction model against outpatient Charlson score (OCS) and a commercial risk predictor (CRP).Using a cohort in which primary care physicians reviewed 4302 of their adult patients, we developed a predictive model for estimated physician-defined complexity (ePDC) and categorized our population using ePDC, OCS and CRP.143,372 primary care patients in a practice-based research network participated in the study.For all patients categorized as complex in 2007 by one or more risk-stratification method, we calculated the percentage of total person time from 2008-2011 for which eligible cancer screening was incomplete, HbA1c was ? 9 %, and LDL was ? 130 mg/dl (in patients with cardiovascular disease). We also calculated the number of emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions per person year (ppy).There was modest agreement among individuals classified as complex using ePDC compared with OCS (36.7 %) and CRP (39.6 %). Over 4 follow-up years, eligible ePDC-complex patients had higher proportions (p?<?0.001) of time with: incomplete cervical (17.8 % vs. 13.3 % for OCS; 19.4 % vs. 11.2 % for CRP), breast (21.4 % vs. 14.9 % for OCS; 22.7 % vs. 15.0 % for CRP), and colon (25.9 % vs. 18.7 % for OCS; 27.0 % vs. 18.2 % for CRP) cancer screening; HbA1c???9 % (15.6 % vs. 8.1 % for OCS; 15.9 % vs. 6.9 % for CRP); and LDL???130 mg/dl (12.4 % vs. 7.9 % for OCS; 11.8 % vs 9.0 % for CRP). ePDC-complex patients had higher rates (p?<?0.003) of: ED visits (0.21 vs. 0.11 ppy for OCS; 0.17 vs. 0.15 ppy for CRP), and admissions in patients 45-64 and ? 65 years old (0.11 vs. 0.10 ppy AND 0.24 vs. 0.21 ppy for OCS).Our measure for estimated physician-defined complexity compared favorably to commonly used risk-prediction approaches in identifying future suboptimal quality and utilization outcomes.