Dataset Information

Primary-Care Weight-Management Strategies: Parental Priorities and Preferences.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To examine parental perspectives/rankings of the most important weight-management clinical practices and to determine whether preferences/rankings differ when parents disagree that their child is overweight. METHODS:We performed mixed-methods analysis of a 32-question survey of parents of 2- to 18-year-old overweight children assessing parental agreement that their child is overweight, the single most important thing providers can do to improve weight status, ranking American Academy of Pediatrics-recommended clinical practices, and preferred follow-up interval. Four independent reviewers analyzed open-response data to identify qualitative themes/subthemes. Multivariable analyses examined parental rankings, preferred follow-up interval, and differences by agreement with their child's overweight assessment. RESULTS:Thirty-six percent of 219 children were overweight, 42% obese, and 22% severely obese; 16% of parents disagreed with their child's overweight assessment. Qualitative analysis of the most important practice to help overweight children yielded 10 themes; unique to parents disagreeing with their children's overweight assessments was "change weight-status assessments." After adjustment, the 3 highest-ranked clinical practices included, "check for weight-related problems," "review growth chart," and "recommend general dietary changes" (all P < .01); parents disagreeing with their children's overweight assessments ranked "review growth chart" as less important and ranked "reducing screen time" and "general activity changes" as more important. The mean preferred weight-management follow-up interval (10-12 weeks) did not differ by agreement with children's overweight assessments. CONCLUSIONS:Parents prefer weight-management strategies that prioritize evaluating weight-related problems, growth-chart review, and regular follow-up. Parents who disagree that their child is overweight want changes in how overweight is assessed. Using parent-preferred weight-management strategies may prove useful in improving child weight status.

SUBMITTER: Turer CB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4808480 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Primary-Care Weight-Management Strategies: Parental Priorities and Preferences.

Turer Christy Boling CB Upperman Carla C Merchant Zahra Z Montaño Sergio S Flores Glenn G

Academic pediatrics 20150926 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To examine parental perspectives/rankings of the most important weight-management clinical practices and to determine whether preferences/rankings differ when parents disagree that their child is overweight.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed mixed-methods analysis of a 32-question survey of parents of 2- to 18-year-old overweight children assessing parental agreement that their child is overweight, the single most important thing providers can do to improve weight status, ranking Ame ...[more]

PMID: 26514648

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: Much has been written about the patients' perspective concerning weight management in health care. The purpose of this survey study was to assess perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs) and nurses toward patient weight management and identify possible areas of growth. Patients and Methods: We emailed a weight management-focused survey to 674 eligible participants (437 [64.8%] nurses and 237 [35.2%] PCPs) located in 5 outpatient primary care clinics. The survey focused on opportunities, practices, knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and beliefs. A total of 219 surveys were returned (137 [62.6%] from nurses and 82 [34.4%] from PCPs). Results: Among 219 responders, 85.8% were female and 93.6% were white non-Hispanic. In this study, PCPs and nurses believed obesity to be a major health problem. While PCPs felt more equipped than nurses to address weight management (P < .001) and reported receiving more training than nurses (50.0% vs 17.6%, respectively), both felt the need for more training on obesity (73.8% and 79.4%, respectively). Although, PCPs also spent more patient contact time providing weight management services versus nurses (P < .001), the opportunity/practices score was lower for PCPs than nurses (-0.35 ± 0.44 vs -0.17 ± 0.41, P < .001) with PCPs more likely to say they lacked the time to discuss weight and they worried it would cause a poor patient-PCP relationship. The knowledge/confidence score also differed significantly between the groups, with nurses feeling less equipped to deal with weight management issues than PCPs (-0.42 ± 0.43 vs -0.03 ± 0.55, P < .001). Neither group seemed very confident, with those in the PCP group only answering with an average score of neutral. Conclusion: By asking nurses and PCP general questions about experiences, attitudes, knowledge, and opinions concerning weight management in clinical care, this survey has identified areas for growth in obesity management. Both PCPs and nurses would benefit from additional educational training on weight management.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the recommended guidelines on addressing diet for the management and prevention of obesity in primary care, the literature highlights that their implementation has been suboptimal. In this paper, we provide an in-depth understanding of current nutrition-related weight management practices of primary care providers (PCPs) working in relatively new multidisciplinary health care settings in Ontario. METHODS:Three types of multidisciplinary primary care settings were included (2 Family Health Teams, 3 Community Health Centres and 1 Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinic). Participants (n =?20) included in this study were nurse practitioners (n =?13) and family physicians (n =?7) supporting care for adult patients (18 years or older). In-depth interviews were transcribed, coded and the content was analyzed using an integrated approach. RESULTS:Our analysis showed that most PCPs used anthropometric measures such as weight for screening patients who would benefit from nutrition counselling with a dietitian. The topic of nutrition was generally brought up either during physical examinations, when patients were diagnosed with a chronic disease, or when blood markers were out of normal range. Participants also mentioned that physical examinations are no longer occurring annually, with most PCPs offering episodic care. All participants reported utilizing dietetic referrals, noting the enablers for providing the referral, which included access to an on-site dietitian. Nonetheless, dietetic referrals were mostly used when patients had an obesity-related co-morbidity. Participants mentioned that healthy eating advice was reinforced during follow-up visits with patients only when there was enough time to do so. Electronic Health Records (EHRs) were utilized to facilitate message reinforcement by PCPs, who perceived EHRs to be helpful for viewing what was discussed in the session with the dietitian. CONCLUSIONS:PCPs mostly used objective measures to screen for patients who would benefit from nutrition counselling rather than diet assessment, which undermines the importance of dietary intake and overemphasizes weight. With physical examinations occurring less frequently, there will be additional missed opportunities for addressing nutrition-related concerns. The presence of a dietitian on site allowed for PCPs to refer patients to nutrition counselling. Having sufficient time during medical visits and EHRs seemed to facilitate message reinforcement by PCPs in follow-up visits with patients.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To identify priorities for improving healthcare organization management of patient access to primary care based on prior evidence and a stakeholder panel. BACKGROUND:Studies on healthcare access show its importance for ensuring population health. Few studies show how healthcare organizations can improve access. METHODS:We conducted a modified Delphi stakeholder panel anchored by a systematic review. Panelists (N = 20) represented diverse stakeholder groups including patients, providers, policy makers, purchasers, and payers of healthcare services, predominantly from the Veterans Health Administration. A pre-panel survey addressed over 80 aspects of healthcare organization management of access, including defining access management. Panelists discussed survey-based ratings during a 2-day in-person meeting and re-voted afterward. A second panel process focused on each final priority and developed recommendations and suggestions for implementation. RESULTS:The panel achieved consensus on definitions of optimal access and access management on eight urgent and important priorities for guiding access management improvement, and on 1-3 recommendations per priority. Each recommendation is supported by referenced, panel-approved suggestions for implementation. Priorities address two organizational structure targets (interdisciplinary primary care site leadership; clearly identified group practice management structure); four process improvements (patient telephone access management; contingency staffing; nurse management of demand through care coordination; proactive demand management by optimizing provider visit schedules), and two outcomes (quality of patients' experiences of access; provider and staff morale). Recommendations and suggestions for implementation, including literature references, are summarized in a panelist-approved, ready-to-use tool. CONCLUSIONS:A stakeholder panel informed by a pre-panel systematic review identified eight action-oriented priorities for improving access and recommendations for implementing each priority. The resulting tool is suitable for guiding the VA and other integrated healthcare delivery organizations in assessing and initiating improvements in access management, and for supporting continued research.

Dataset Information

Primary-Care Weight-Management Strategies: Parental Priorities and Preferences.

Publications

Primary-Care Weight-Management Strategies: Parental Priorities and Preferences.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure