Dataset Information

Patient and provider perspectives on the development of personalized medicine: a mixed-methods approach.

ABSTRACT: While genetic testing gains adoption in specialty services such as oncology, neurology, and cardiology, use of genetic and genomic testing has yet to be adopted as widely in primary care. The purpose of this study is to identify and compare patient and primary care provider (PCP) expectations of genetics services in primary care. Patient and PCP perspectives were assessed through a mixed-method approach combining an online survey and semi-structured interviews in a primary care department of a large academic medical institution. A convenience sample of 100 adult primary care patients and 26 PCPs was gathered. The survey and interview questions focused on perceptions of genetic testing, experience with genetic testing, and expectations of genetic services in primary care. Patients felt that their PCP was knowledgeable about genetic testing and expected their PCP to be the first to recognize a need for genetic testing based on family history. Nonetheless, patients reported that PCPs rarely used family history information to discuss genetic risks or order testing. In contrast, PCPs felt uncertain about the clinical utility and scientific value of genetic testing. PCPs were concerned that genetic testing could cause anxiety, frustration, discrimination, and reduced insurability, and that there was unequal access to testing. PCPs described themselves as being "gatekeepers" to genetic testing but did not feel confident or have the desire to become experts in genetic testing. However, PCPs were open to increasing their working knowledge of genetic testing. Within this academic medical center, there is a gap between what patients expect and what primary care providers feel they are adequately prepared to provide in terms of genetic testing services.

SUBMITTER: Puryear L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6002302 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient and provider perspectives on the development of personalized medicine: a mixed-methods approach.

Puryear Lauren L Downs Natalie N Nevedal Andrea A Lewis Eleanor T ET Ormond Kelly E KE Bregendahl Maria M Suarez Carlos J CJ David Sean P SP Charlap Steven S Chu Isabella I Asch Steven M SM Pakdaman Neda N Chang Sang-Ick SI Cullen Mark R MR Palaniappan Latha L

Journal of community genetics 20171227 3

While genetic testing gains adoption in specialty services such as oncology, neurology, and cardiology, use of genetic and genomic testing has yet to be adopted as widely in primary care. The purpose of this study is to identify and compare patient and primary care provider (PCP) expectations of genetics services in primary care. Patient and PCP perspectives were assessed through a mixed-method approach combining an online survey and semi-structured interviews in a primary care department of a l ...[more]

PMID: 29280052

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) predicts risk of progression to kidney failure and is used to guide clinical decisions for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS:The KFRE was implemented to guide access to multidisciplinary care for CKD patients in Alberta, Canada, based on their 2-year risk of kidney failure. We used a mixed methods approach to investigate patients' and providers' perspectives and experiences 1 year following KFRE implementation. We conducted post-implementation interviews with multidisciplinary clinic providers and with low-risk patients who transitioned from multidisciplinary to general nephrology care. We also administered pre- and post-implementation patient care experience surveys, targeting both low-risk patients discharged to general nephrology and high-risk patients who remained in the multidisciplinary clinic, and provider job satisfaction surveys. RESULTS:Twenty-seven interviews were conducted (9 patients, 1 family member, 17 providers). Five categories were identified among patients and providers: targeted care; access to resources outside the multidisciplinary clinics; self-efficacy; patient reassurance and reduced stress; and transition process for low-risk patients Two additional categories were identified among providers only: anticipated concerns and job satisfaction. Patients and providers reported that the risk-based approach allowed the clinic to target care to those most likely to experience kidney failure and most likely to benefit from multidisciplinary care. While some participants indicated the risk-based model enhanced the sustainability of the clinics, others expressed concern that care for low-risk patients discharged from multidisciplinary care, or those now considered ineligible, may be inadequate. Overall, 413 patients completed the care experience survey and 73 providers completed the workplace satisfaction survey. The majority of patients were satisfied with their care in both periods with no overall differences. When considering the responses "Always" and "Often" together versus not, there were statistically significant improvements in domains of access to care, caring staff, and safety of care. There were no differences in healthcare providers' job satisfaction following KFRE implementation. CONCLUSIONS:Patients and healthcare providers reported that the risk-based approach improved the focus of the multidisciplinary CKD clinics by targeting patients at highest risk, with survey results suggesting no difference in patient care experience or healthcare provider job satisfaction.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Since 2011 China's central government has committed to establishing a new 'general practitioner' (GP)-centred primary care system. To this end there have been great efforts to train an additional 300?000 GPs by 2020. This paper examines the perspective of practitioners in Henan, China, regarding general practice. DESIGN:A mixed-methods approach using focus group discussions (FGD), and structured questionnaires. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS:Seven FGDs and responses to 1887 questionnaires included medical students, primary care doctors and GP residents in Henan. RESULTS:The three surveyed medical groups have some awareness of the attributes of general practice (eg, comprehensiveness, first contact and coordination), but often misinterpret what being a GP entails. Five themes were identified through the FGDs and tested quantitatively for their prevalence with structured questionnaires. First, the GPs' role as a comprehensive care provider was (mis)interpreted as an 'all-round doctor'. Second, the GP's responsibility as the first point of care was understood in two conflicting ways: private personal doctors of the rich and the powerful or village doctors for common people. Third, referral was understood as simply guiding patients to appropriate departments within the hospital while the gatekeeping role was interpreted to involve GPs being peoples' health protectors rather than being also gatekeepers of specialty services. Traditional Chinese medicine now further complicates the understanding of GPs. And lastly, the GPs' main responsibility was considered to be public health work. CONCLUSION:The misunderstandings of the roles and responsibilities of GPs render problematic the policy foundation of China's GP-centred primary care system. Pursuing the quantity of GPs on its own is meaningless, since the number needed depends on the delineated role of GPs. Top priority is to establish clarity about the GP role, which requires reforming the health delivery system to address issues with fragmented care, strategically taking into account the development of GPs with work delegation and substitution and providing more clarity on the distinction between general practice and public health.

Project description:AimTo explore how provision of self-management support to chronically-ill patients in resource-limited settings contributes to patient empowerment in chronic care.DesignConcurrent descriptive mixed methods research.MethodsA survey of 140 patients with chronic conditions administered at four time-points in 12 months. We conducted 14 interviews and four focus-group discussions with patients (N = 31); 13 healthcare provider interviews; and observations of four patient-support group meetings. Data were collected between April 2016 - May 2017 in rural Malawi. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic approach and descriptive statistical analysis performed on survey data.ResultsHealthcare professionals facilitated patient empowerment through health education, although literacy levels and environmental factors affected self-management guidance. Information exchanged during patient-provider interactions varied and discussions centred around medical aspects and health promoting behaviour. Less than 40% of survey patients prepared questions prior to clinic consultations. Health education was often unstructured and delegated to non-physician providers, mostly untrained in chronic care. Patients accessed psychosocial support from volunteer-led community home-based care programmes. HIV support-groups regularly interacted with peers and practical skills exchanged in a supportive environment, reinforcing patient's self-mangement competence and proactiveness in health care.ConclusionFor optimal self-management, reforms at inter-personal and organizational level are needed including; mutual patient-provider collaboration, diversifying access to self-management support resources and restructuring patient support-groups to cater to diverse chronic conditions.ImpactOur study provides insights and framing of self-management support and empowerment for patients in long-term care in sub-Saharan Africa. Lessons drawn could feed into designing and delivering responsive chronic care interventions.

Project description:Objective: Contemporary healthcare requires physicians to have well developed ethical judgment skills in addition to excellent clinical skills. However, no consensus has been reached on how to best teach ethical judgment skills during medical training. Previous studies revealed inconclusive results and applied varying theoretical frameworks. To date, the students' perspectives on their development in ethical judgment has received less attention. Better insights in the learners' experiences can help to improve educational interventions in medical ethics. Methods: A vignette featuring a challenging case with opposing views between a patient's parents and a physician followed by a questionnaire was presented to a cohort of medical students at a German medical school at three points in time during their medical training (Year 1, 2 and 5). The questionnaire included closed and open-ended questions addressing the participant's preferred, hypothetical actions, their reasoning as well as the resources informing their reasoning. Content analysis was used for qualitative data; frequencies and percentages were used to describe quantitative findings. Results: The response rate remained stable (28%) over the study period. Participants' responses changed overtime. Accepting parents' autonomy in the decision-making process was the majority standpoint of students in year 1 and 2 and became less often cited in year 5 (Year 1/2/5: 68/67/48%). On the contrary, not readily following the parents' decision for medical reasons was a minority standpoint in year 1 and became more prevalent over time (year 1/2/5: 12/17/42%). Judgments were only partly based on ethics training. Instead, participants drew on experiences from their clinical clerkships and their personal lives. Throughout the study, participants did not feel well-prepared to make a judgment in the case (Average 2.7 on a Likert-Scale; 1=very well prepared, 4=very poor). Conclusions: Over the course of their medical training, the participants seemed to increasingly frame the presented vignette as a medical problem. To optimize the development of ethical judgment teaching of ethics should be more integrated in clinical teaching. In addition to the analysis of rare and extreme cases, teaching ethics should also expand on challenges students and junior doctors commonly encounter themselves to promote ethical sensitivity and confidence in students.

Project description:BackgroundEfforts to reduce opioid overdose fatalities have resulted in tapering (i.e., reducing or discontinuing) opioid prescriptions despite a limited understanding of patients' experiences.ObjectiveTo explore patients' perspectives on opioid taper experiences to ultimately improve taper processes and outcomes.DesignQualitative study.ParticipantsPatients on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain who had undergone a reduction of opioid daily prescribed dosage of ≥50% in the past 2 years in two distinct medical systems and regions.ApproachFrom 2019 to 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed, systematically coded, and analyzed to summarize the content and identify key themes regarding taper experiences overall and with particular attention to patient-provider relationships and provider communication during tapers.Key resultsParticipants (n=41) had lived with chronic pain for an average of 17.4 years (range, 3-36 years) and described generally adverse experiences with opioid tapers, the initiation of which was not always adequately justified or explained to them. Consequences of tapers ranged from minor to substantial and included withdrawal, mobility issues, emotional distress, exacerbated mental health symptoms, and feelings of social stigmatization for which adequate supports were typically unavailable. Narratives highlighted the consequential role of patient-provider relationships throughout taper experiences, with most participants describing significant interpersonal challenges including poor provider communication and limited patient engagement in decision making. A few participants identified qualities of providers, relationships, and communication that fostered more positive taper experiences and outcomes.ConclusionsFrom patients' perspectives, opioid tapers can produce significant physical, emotional, and social consequences, sometimes reducing trust and engagement in healthcare. Patient-provider relationships and communication influence patients' perceptions of the quality and outcomes of opioid tapers. To improve patients' experiences of opioid tapers, tapering plans should be based on individualized risk-benefit assessments and involve patient-centered approaches and improved provider communication.

Dataset Information

Patient and provider perspectives on the development of personalized medicine: a mixed-methods approach.

Publications

Patient and provider perspectives on the development of personalized medicine: a mixed-methods approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets