Dataset Information

The use of pure and impure placebo interventions in primary care - a qualitative approach.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Placebos play an important role in clinical trials and several surveys have shown that they are also common in daily practice. Previous research focused primarily on the frequency of placebo use in outpatient care. Our aim was to explore physicians' views on the use of placebos in daily practice, whereby distinction was made between pure placebos (substances with no pharmacological effect, e.g. sugar pills) and impure placebos (substances with pharmacological effect but not on the condition being treated, e.g. antibiotics in viral infections or vitamins).

Methods

We performed semi-structured interviews with a sample of twelve primary care physicians (PCPs). The interview addressed individual definitions of a placebo, attitudes towards placebos and the participants' reasons for prescribing them. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

The definition of a placebo given by the majority of the PCPs in our study was one which actually only describes pure placebos. This definition, combined with the fact that most impure placebos were not regarded as placebos at all, means that most of the participating PCPs were not aware of the extent to which placebos are used in daily practice. The PCPs stated that they use placebos (both pure and impure) mainly in the case of non-severe diseases for which there was often no satisfactory somatic explanation. According to the PCPs, cases like this are often treated by complementary and alternative therapies and these, too, are associated with placebo effects. However, all PCPs felt that the ethical aspects of such treatment were unclear and they were unsure as to how to communicate the use of placebos to their patients. Most of them would appreciate ethical guidelines on how to deal with this issue.

Conclusions

Many PCPs seem to be unaware that some of the drugs they prescribe are classified as impure placebos. Perceptions of effectiveness and doubts about the legal and ethical aspects of the use of placebos by PCPs may discourage their application. Dissemination of guidelines and consensus papers may be one approach, but it has to be acknowledged that the topic itself is in conflict with the PCPs' perception of themselves as professional and reliable physicians.

SUBMITTER: Fent R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3068943 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe emergence of antimicrobial resistance has led to increasing efforts to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics in primary care, but potential hazards from bacterial infection continue to cause concern. This study investigated how primary care prescribers perceive risk and safety concerns associated with reduced antibiotic prescribing.MethodsQualitative study using semistructured interviews conducted with primary care prescribers from 10 general practices in an urban area and a shire town in England. A thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsThirty participants were recruited, including twenty-three general practitioners, five nurses and two pharmacists. Three main themes were identified: risk assessment, balancing treatment risks and negotiating decisions and risks. Respondents indicated that their decisions were grounded in clinical risk assessment, but this was informed by different approaches to antibiotic use, with most leaning towards reduced prescribing. Prescribers' perceptions of risk included the consequences of both inappropriate prescribing and inappropriate withholding of antibiotics. Sepsis was viewed as the most concerning potential outcome of non-prescribing, leading to possible patient harm and potential litigation. Risks of antibiotic prescribing included antibiotic resistant and Clostridium difficile infections, as well as side effects, such as rashes, that might lead to possible mislabelling as antibiotic allergy. Prescribers elicited patient preferences for use or avoidance of antibiotics to inform management strategies, which included educational advice, advice on self-management including warning signs, use of delayed prescriptions and safety netting.ConclusionsAttitudes towards antibiotic prescribing are evolving, with reduced antibiotic prescribing now being approached more systematically. The safety trade-offs associated with either use or non-use of antibiotics present difficulties especially when prescribing decisions are inconsistent with patients' expectations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mobile apps are emerging as tools with the potential to revolutionize the treatment of mental health conditions such as depression. At the forefront of the community health sector, general practitioners are in a unique position to guide the integration of technology and depression management; however, little is currently known about how primary care patients with depressive symptoms are currently using apps. OBJECTIVE:The objective of our study was to explore the natural patterns of mobile app use among patients with depressive symptoms to facilitate the understanding of the potential role for mobile apps in managing depressive symptoms in the community. METHODS:Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with primary care patients in Victoria, Australia, who reported symptoms of depression and were enrolled in a larger randomized controlled trial of depression care. Interviews explored current depression management strategies and the use of mobile apps (if any). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive thematic analysis was iteratively conducted using QSR NVivo 11 Pro to identify emergent themes. RESULTS:A total of 16 participants, aged between 20 to 58 years, took part in the interviews with 11 reporting the use of at least one mobile app to manage depressive symptoms and 5 reporting no app use. A variety of apps were described including relaxation, mindfulness, cognitive, exercise, gaming, social media, and well-being apps to aid with depressive symptoms. Among users, there were the following 4 main patterns of app use: skill acquisition, social connectedness, inquisitive trial, and safety netting. Factors that influenced app use included accessibility, perceptions of technology, and personal compatibility. Health care providers also had a role in initiating app use. CONCLUSIONS:Mobile apps are being utilized for self-management of depressive symptoms by primary care patients. This study provided insight into the natural patterns and perspectives of app use, which enhanced the understanding of how this technology may be integrated into the toolbox for the management of depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000537459; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=367152 (Archived at WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71Vf06X2T).

Project description:ObjectiveWhile various interventions have helped reduce antibiotic prescribing, further gains can be made. This study aimed to identify ways to optimise antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions by assessing the extent to which important influences on antibiotic prescribing are addressed (or not) by behavioural content of AMS interventions.SettingsEnglish primary care.InterventionsAMS interventions targeting healthcare professionals' antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections.MethodsWe conducted two rapid reviews. The first included qualitative studies with healthcare professionals on self-reported influences on antibiotic prescribing. The influences were inductively coded and categorised using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Prespecified criteria were used to identify key TDF domains. The second review included studies of AMS interventions. Data on effectiveness were extracted. Components of effective interventions were extracted and coded using the TDF, Behaviour Change Wheel and Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) taxonomy. Using prespecified matrices, we assessed the extent to which BCTs and intervention functions addressed the key TDF domains of influences on prescribing.ResultsWe identified 13 qualitative studies, 41 types of influences on antibiotic prescribing and 6 key TDF domains of influences: 'beliefs about consequences', 'social influences', 'skills', 'environmental context and resources', 'intentions' and 'emotions'. We identified 17 research-tested AMS interventions; nine of them effective and four nationally implemented. Interventions addressed all six key TDF domains of influences. Four of these six key TDF domains were addressed by 50%-67% BCTs that were theoretically congruent with these domains, whereas TDF domain 'skills' was addressed by 24% of congruent BCTs and 'emotions' by none.ConclusionsFurther improvement of antibiotic prescribing could be facilitated by: (1) national implementation of effective research-tested AMS interventions (eg, electronic decision support tools, training in interactive use of leaflets, point-of-care testing); (2) targeting important, less-addressed TDF domains (eg, 'skills', 'emotions'); (3) using relevant, under-used BCTs to target key TDF domains (eg, 'forming/reversing habits', 'reducing negative emotions', 'social support'). These could be incorporated into existing, or developed as new, AMS interventions.

Project description:BackgroundThe implementation of multiple health behaviour change interventions for cardiovascular risk reduction in primary care is suboptimal. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing multiple health behaviour change interventions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction in primary care.MethodsQualitative study using semi-structured interviews informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of healthcare professionals working in the implementation of the NHS Health Check programme in London. Data were analysed using the Framework method.ResultsThirty participants were recruited including ten general practitioners, ten practice nurses, seven healthcare assistants and three practice managers from 23 practices. Qualitative analysis identified three main themes: healthcare professionals' conceptualising health behaviour change; delivering multiple health behaviour change interventions in primary care; and delivering the health check programme. Healthcare professionals generally recognised the importance of health behaviour change for CVD risk reduction but were more sceptical about the potential for successful intervention through primary care. Participants identified the difficulty of sustained behaviour change for patients, the lack of evidence for effective interventions and limited access to appropriate resources in primary care as barriers. Discussing changing multiple health behaviours was perceived to be overwhelming for patients and difficult to implement for healthcare professionals with current primary care resources. The health check programme consists of several components that are difficult to fully complete in limited time.ConclusionsAdvancing the prevention agenda will require strategies to support the delivery of behaviour change interventions in primary care. Greater emphasis needs to be given to promoting behaviour change through supportive environmental context. Further research is needed to evaluate current external lifestyle services to improve the intervention outcomes.