Dataset Information

General practitioners' attitudes towards early diagnosis of dementia: a cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dementia is often underdiagnosed in general practice, which may be based on general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge and emotional factors as well as external problems. This study aimed to describe GPs' attitudes toward early diagnosis of dementia.

Methods

Cross-sectional postal survey in Switzerland in 2017. Members of the Swiss Association of General Practitioners (N =?4460) were asked to participate in the survey. The questionnaire assessed attitudes, enablers and barriers to early dementia diagnosis and post-diagnostic intervention strategies. Exploratory factor analysis and linear regression were used.

Results

The survey response rate was 21%. 85% of GPs agreed with enablers of early dementia recognition (e.g. "Plan for the future, organize support and care", "Minimize the strain and insecurity of patients and their informal family caregivers"). On the other hand, 15% of respondents perceived barriers towards early dementia recognition (e.g. "Time constraints in carrying out the necessary procedures to diagnose dementia"). GPs who were more likely to agree with barriers would less often counsel family members (??=?-?0.05, 95% CI?=?-?0.09 - -0.02) or test fitness to drive (??=?-?0.05, 95% CI?=?-?0.09 - -0.02), and more often choose a watchful waiting strategy (??=?0.05, 95% CI?=?0.02-0.09).

Conclusions

The attitude of the majority of GPs is not characterized by diagnostic and therapeutic nihilism. However, negative attitudes were associated with sub-optimal management after the diagnosis. Thus, health systems are required to critically examine the use of available resources allowing GPs to look after patients and their relatives in a holistic way.

SUBMITTER: Giezendanner S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6528190 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

General practitioners' attitudes towards early diagnosis of dementia: a cross-sectional survey.

Giezendanner Stéphanie S Monsch Andreas U AU Kressig Reto W RW Mueller Yolanda Y Streit Sven S Essig Stefan S Zeller Andreas A Bally Klaus K

BMC family practice 20190520 1

<h4>Background</h4>Dementia is often underdiagnosed in general practice, which may be based on general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge and emotional factors as well as external problems. This study aimed to describe GPs' attitudes toward early diagnosis of dementia.<h4>Methods</h4>Cross-sectional postal survey in Switzerland in 2017. Members of the Swiss Association of General Practitioners (N = 4460) were asked to participate in the survey. The questionnaire assessed attitudes, enablers and bar ...[more]

PMID: 31109304

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited United Kingdom (UK) literature on general practice-based pharmacists' (PBPs') role evolution and few studies have explored general practitioners' (GPs') experiences on pharmacist integration into general practice. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate GPs' experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards PBPs in Northern Ireland (NI).MethodsA paper-based self-administered questionnaire comprising four sections was mailed in 2019 to 329 general practices across NI and was completed by one GP in every practice who had most contact with the PBP. Descriptive analyses were used and responses to open-ended questions were analysed thematically.ResultsThe response rate was 61.7% (203/329). There was at least one PBP per general practice. All GPs had face-to-face meetings with PBPs, with three-quarters (78.7%, n = 159) meeting with the PBP more than once a week. Approximately two-thirds of GPs (62.4%, n = 126) reported that PBPs were qualified as independent prescribers, and 76.2% of these (n = 96/126) indicated that prescribers were currently prescribing for patients. The majority of GPs reported that PBPs always/very often had the required clinical skills (83.6%, n = 162) and knowledge (87.0%, n = 167) to provide safe and effective care for patients. However, 31.1% (n = 61) stated that PBPs only sometimes had the confidence to make clinical decisions. The majority of GPs (> 85%) displayed largely positive attitudes towards collaboration with PBPs. Most GPs agreed/strongly agreed that PBPs will have a positive impact on patient outcomes (95.0%, n = 192) and can provide a better link between general practices and community pharmacists (96.1%, n = 194). However, 24.8% of GPs (n = 50) were unclear if the PBP role moved community pharmacists to the periphery of the primary care team. An evaluation of the free-text comments indicated that GPs were in favour of more PBP sessions and full-time posts.ConclusionMost GPs had positive views of, and attitudes towards, PBPs. The findings may have implications for future developments in order to extend integration of PBPs within general practice, including the enhancement of training in clinical skills and decision-making. Exploring PBPs', community pharmacists' and patients' views of this role in general practice is required to corroborate study findings.

Project description:BackgroundIdentifying essential competencies in end-of-life care, as well as general practitioners' (GPs) confidence in these competencies, is essential to guide training and quality improvement efforts in this domain.AimTo determine which competencies in end-of-life care are considered important by GPs, to assess GPs' confidence in these competencies in a European context and their reasons to refer terminally ill patients to a specialist.Design and settingCross-sectional postal survey involving a stratified random sample of 2000 GPs in Switzerland in 2014.MethodSurvey development was informed by a previous qualitative exploration of relevant end-of-life GP competencies. Main outcome measures were GPs' assessment of the importance of and confidence in 18 attributes of end-of-life care competencies, and reasons for transferring care of terminally-ill patients to a specialist. GP characteristics associated with main outcome measures were tested using multivariate regression models.ResultsThe response rate was 31%. Ninety-nine percent of GPs considered the recognition and treatment of pain as important, 86% felt confident about it. Few GPs felt confident in cultural (16%), spiritual (38%) and legal end-of-life competencies such as responding to patients seeking assisted suicide (35%) although more than half of the respondents regarded these competencies as important. Most frequent reasons to refer terminally ill patients to a specialist were lack of time (30%), better training of specialists (23%) and end-of-life care being incompatible with other duties (19%). In multiple regression analyses, confidence in end-of-life care was positively associated with GPs' age, practice size, home visits and palliative training.ConclusionsGPs considered non-somatic competencies (such as spiritual, cultural, ethical and legal aspects) nearly as important as pain and symptom control. Yet, few GPs felt confident in these non-somatic competencies. These findings should inform training and quality improvement efforts in this domain, in particular for younger, less experienced GPs.

Project description:BackgroundBuilding interprofessional working relationships between general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists is essential to ensure high-quality patient care. However, there is limited Chinese literature on GP-pharmacist collaboration, and few studies have explored GPs' experiences with pharmacist integration into general practices. This study aimed to investigate GPs' attitudes towards and frequency of collaboration with pharmacists in China.MethodsThis cross-sectional study used an online self-administered questionnaire integrating two scales, ATCI-GP and FICI-GP, which had been translated and validated to investigate 3,248 GPs from February 15 to March 15, 2023 across Zhejiang Province, China. Descriptive analyses were used, and the factors associated with GPs' frequency of collaboration with pharmacists were explored using logistic regression analysis.ResultsA total of 2,487 GPs (76.6%) responded and consented to participate in the survey; 52.3% were male and the mean age was 35.4 years. Most GPs agreed that they shared common goals and objectives with pharmacists when caring for patients (90.0%), and pharmacists were open to working with them on patients' medication management (80.8%). However, half of the GPs did not change or seldom changed the patient's medication on the pharmacist's advice (51.4%). Logistic regression analysis showed that GPs who were older and had more years of practice were more likely to agree that pharmacists were willing to collaborate, had common goals for treatment and that they would change the patient's medication on the advice of the pharmacist. GPs who had regular communication protocols (adjusted odds ratio1 [aOR1] = 1.88, 95% CI 1.45-2.45; aOR2 = 3.33, 95% CI 2.76-4.02), participated in joint continuing education (aOR1 = 1.87, 95% CI 1.44-2.43; aOR2 = 2.27, 95% CI 1.91-2.70), provided recommendations for medication review (aOR1 = 3.01, 95% CI 2.07-4.38; aOR2 = 3.50, 95% CI 2.51-4.86), and communicated with pharmacists during resident training (aOR1 = 2.15, 95% CI 1.78-2.60; aOR2 = 1.38, 95% CI 1.18-1.62) were associated with a more positive attitude towards and higher frequency of cooperation.ConclusionsGPs in China displayed a positive attitude towards cooperating with pharmacists, but they did not demonstrate a similar level of practice. As environmental determinants impact interdisciplinary collaboration, healthcare managers and policy-makers need to implement measures that foster a supportive environment conducive to interdisciplinary collaboration.

Project description:BackgroundPositive health beliefs and attitudes towards dementia and dementia risk reduction may encourage adopting a healthy behaviour. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the knowledge, health beliefs and attitudes towards dementia and dementia risk reduction among the Dutch general population and its association with the intention to change health behaviours.MethodsA random sample of Dutch residents (30 to 80 years) was invited to complete an online survey. We collected data on knowledge, health beliefs and attitudes towards dementia (risk reduction) and the intention to change health behaviours. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to obtain effect estimates.ResultsSix hundred fifty-five participants completed the survey. In general, participants had insufficient knowledge about dementia and dementia risk reduction. Participants had relatively high scores on general health motivation and perceived benefits, but low scores on perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived barriers, cues to action and self-efficacy. Individuals with higher scores on perceived benefits and cues to action had more often the intention to change their behaviour with regard to physical activity (OR = 1.33, 95%-CI:1.11-1.58; OR = 1.13, 95%-CI:1.03-1.24, respectively) and alcohol consumption (OR = 1.30, 95%-CI:1.00-1.69; OR = 1.17, 95%-CI:1.02-1.35, respectively). Younger excessive alcohol consumers with higher perceived severity scores had more often the intention to change their alcohol consumption behaviour (OR = 2.70, 95%-CI:1.04-6.97) compared to older excessive alcohol consumers. Opposite results were found for middle-aged excessive alcohol consumers (OR = 0.81, 95%-CI:0.67-0.99). Individuals who perceived more barriers had more often the intention to change their diet (OR = 1.10, 95%-CI:1.01-1.21), but less often the intention to change their smoking behaviour (OR = 0.78, 95%-CI:0.63-0.98). Moreover, less educated individuals with higher perceived benefits scores had less often the intention to change their diet (OR = 0.78, 95%-CI:0.60-0.99), while highly educated individuals with higher perceived benefits scores had more often the intention to change their diet (OR = 1.41, 95%-CI:1.12-1.78).ConclusionsThe knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards dementia and dementia risk reduction among the Dutch general population is insufficient to support dementia risk reduction. More education about dementia and dementia risk reduction is needed to improve health beliefs and attitudes towards dementia and dementia risk reduction in order to change health behaviour.

Project description:BackgroundOsteopathy is a type of complementary medicine based on specific manual techniques. In many countries, including Germany, the profession is not officially regulated, and evidence for the effectiveness of osteopathy is insufficient for most diseases. Nevertheless, many health insurances in Germany offer reimbursement for therapy costs, if osteopathy is recommended by a physician. This cross-sectional survey of German general practitioners (GPs) explored beliefs and attitudes towards osteopathic medicine and described their daily interactions with it.MethodsA random sample of 1000 GPs from all federal states was surveyed by mail using a self-designed questionnaire. We collected data on sociodemographics, personal experiences with osteopathy, and attitudes and expectations towards osteopathy. In particular, participants were asked about indications for osteopathic treatment and their beliefs about its effectiveness for different patient groups and diagnoses. A self-designed score was used to estimate general attitudes towards osteopathy and identify factors correlated with greater openness. Additionally, we performed logistic regression to reveal factors associated with the frequency of recommending osteopathy to patients.ResultsResponse rate was 34.4%. 46.5% of participants were women, and the median age was 56.0 years. 91.3% of GPs had referred patients to an osteopath, and 88.0% had recommended osteopathy to their patients. However, 57.5% acknowledged having little or no knowledge about osteopathy. Most frequent reasons for a recommendation were spinal column disorders (46.2%), other complaints of the musculoskeletal system (18.2%) and headaches (9.8%). GPs estimated the highest benefit for chronically ill and middle-aged adults. Female gender (OR 2.09; 95%CI 1.29-3.38) and personal treatment experiences (OR 5.14; 95%CI 2.72-9.72) were independently positively associated with more frequent treatment recommendation.ConclusionGPs in Germany have frequent contact with osteopathy, and the vast majority have recommended osteopathic treatment to some extent in their practice, with foci and opinions comparable to other Western countries. The discrepancy between GPs making frequent referrals for osteopathic treatment while self-assessing to have little knowledge about it demonstrates need for intensified research on the collaboration with osteopaths and how to best integrate osteopathic treatments. Our results may help to focus future effectiveness studies on most relevant clinical conditions in general practice.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal application of spinal motion restriction (SMR) in the prehospital setting continues to be debated. Few studies have examined how changing guidelines have been received and interpreted by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. This study surveys paramedics' attitudes, observations, and self-reported practices around the treatment of potential spine injuries in the prehospital setting.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional survey of a North American EMS agency. After development and piloting, the final version of the survey contained four sections covering attitudes towards 1) general practice, 2) specific techniques, 3) assessment protocols, and 4) mechanisms of injury (MOI). Questions used Likert-scale, multiple-choice, yes/no, and free-text responses. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to identify latent constructs within responses, and factor scores were analyzed by ordinal logistic regression for associations with demographic characteristics (including qualification level, gender, and years of experience). MOI evaluations were assessed for inter-rater reliability (Fleiss' kappa). Inductive qualitative content analysis, following Elo & Kyngäs (2008), was used to examine free-text responses.ResultsTwo hundred twenty responses were received (36% of staff). Raw results indicated that respondents felt that SMR was seen as less important than in the past, that they were treating fewer patients than previously, and that they follow protocol in most situations. The EFA identified two factors: one (Judging MOIs) captured paramedics' estimation that the presented MOI could potentially cause a spine injury, and another (Treatment Value) reflected respondents' composite view of the effectiveness, importance, and applicability of SMR. Respondents with advanced life support (ALS) qualification were more likely to be skeptical of the value of SMR compared to those at the basic life support (BLS) level (OR: 2.40, 95%CI: 1.21-4.76, p = 0.01). Overall, respondents showed fair agreement in the evaluation of MOIs (k = 0.31, 95%CI: 0.09-0.49). Content analysis identified tension expressed by respondents between SMR-as-directed and SMR-as-applied.ConclusionResults of this survey show that EMS personnel are skeptical of many elements of SMR but use various strategies to balance protocol adherence with optimizing patient care. While identifying several areas for future research, these findings argue for incorporating provider feedback and judgement into future guideline revision.

Dataset Information

General practitioners' attitudes towards early diagnosis of dementia: a cross-sectional survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

General practitioners' attitudes towards early diagnosis of dementia: a cross-sectional survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets