Dataset Information

Should GPs have direct access to imaging for headache? A qualitative study of patients' views in the UK.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

We aimed to describe patients' views of a new referral pathway of general practitioner (GP) direct access to MRI, versus imaging after referral to a specialist.

Design

This qualitative study involved 20 semistructured interviews. Twenty patients (10 from each pathway) were purposively recruited and interviewed to describe their attitudes.

Setting

A neurology headache clinic and neuroradiology services from the boroughs of Southwark and Lambeth in South London, UK.

Participants

Twenty patients were involved in this study.

Results

Over half of the participants felt relieved once they received their scan results, while some remained uncertain about the underlying cause of their symptoms. Some participants described a long wait to see a specialist. Others described a long wait time to receive scan results, especially from their GP. Spontaneous reduction in headache symptoms occurred for some participants and for others, normal imaging results allowed them to focus more on symptom management.

Conclusion

Relief was reported especially when scan results had been explained clearly and without too much delay. Those with continuing pain focused on how to get relief from symptoms. Patient experience might be improved with clearer information from GPs about how patients can access results, standard reporting procedures and closer liaison between neuroradiology and GPs.

SUBMITTER: McKinlay A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6701632 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Should GPs have direct access to imaging for headache? A qualitative study of patients' views in the UK.

McKinlay Alison A Underwood Raphael R Wojewodka Gabriella G Mazumder Asif A Kilner Rachael R Ridsdale Leone L

BMJ open 20190818 8

<h4>Objective</h4>We aimed to describe patients' views of a new referral pathway of general practitioner (GP) direct access to MRI, versus imaging after referral to a specialist.<h4>Design</h4>This qualitative study involved 20 semistructured interviews. Twenty patients (10 from each pathway) were purposively recruited and interviewed to describe their attitudes.<h4>Setting</h4>A neurology headache clinic and neuroradiology services from the boroughs of Southwark and Lambeth in South London, UK. ...[more]

PMID: 31427332

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to explore GPs' views and experiences of managing patients with personality disorder (PD), and their views on the role of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme as a support service. DESIGN:In-depth interviews, analysed thematically. PARTICIPANTS:Fifteen GPs (7 women and 8 men) of varying age and clinical experience, working in practices that differed in terms of the socio-demographic characteristics of their patient populations. SETTING:Twelve general practices based in the West of England, UK. RESULTS:GPs described patients with PD as being challenging to work with and that this work required dedicated time and care. They described experiencing particular difficulty with monitoring their patient's mental health, as well as having little knowledge about the efficacy or availability of treatments for their attenders with PD. They were aware that this patient population often experienced poor mental health and reported a propensity for them to fall into the gap between primary and secondary mental health services, leaving GPs with little choice but to improvise their own management plans, which occasionally involved funding third-sector treatment options. In terms of IAPT services' role in managing these patients, GPs wanted shorter waiting times, better inter-agency communication, more highly trained therapists and more treatment options for patients with PD. They also wanted the service to be able to 'hold' patients with PD in treatment over a longer period than currently offered. CONCLUSIONS:Findings suggest that, overall, GPs did not consider National Health Service mental health services to offer an effective treatment for patients with PD. While they considered the IAPT programme to be a valuable service for patients with less complex mental health needs, such as depression and anxiety; they felt that the current service provision struggled to meet the needs of patients with more complex mental health needs, as exemplified by people with PD.

Project description:PurposeThe first aim of this qualitative study was to identify general practitioners' (GPs') views on depression screening combined with GP-targeted feedback in primary care. The second aim was to determine the needs and preferences of GPs with respect to GP-targeted feedback to enhance the efficacy of depression screening.MethodsA semistructured qualitative interview was conducted with officially registered GPs in Hamburg (Germany). Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. An inductive approach was used to code the transcripts.ResultsNine GPs (27 to 70 years; 5 male) from Hamburg, Germany, participated. Regarding depression screening combined with GP-targeted feedback, five thematic groups were identified: application of screening; screening and patient-physician relationships; GPs' attitudes towards screening; benefits and concerns related to screening; and GPs' needs and preferences regarding feedback. While the negative aspects of screening can be described in rather general terms (e.g., screening determines the mental health competence, screening threatens the doctor-patient relationship, revealing questions harm the patients), its advantages were very specific (e.g., promoting the identification of undetected cases, relief of the daily workload, wider communication channel to reach more patients). Standardized GP-targeted feedback of the screening results was perceived as helpful and purposeful. GPs preferred feedback materials that eased their clinical workload (e.g., short text with visuals, pictures, or images).ConclusionAddressing GPs' needs is essential when implementing depression screening tools in clinical practice. To overcome prejudices and enhance the efficacy of screening, further education for GPs on the purpose and application on depression screening may be needed. Standardized GP-targeted feedback in combination with depression screening could be the missing link to improve the detection of depression in primary care.

Project description:ObjectivesPrevention and lifestyle support are emerging topics in general practice. Healthcare insurance companies reimburse combined lifestyle interventions (CLIs) in the Netherlands since January 2019. CLIs support people with overweight (body mass index, BMI 25-30) or obesity (BMI >30) to reduce weight in peer groups. General practitioners (GPs) are key in the successful implementation of lifestyle interventions in primary care. This study explored GPs' experiences and views on the implementation of CLIs to identify barriers and facilitators to the successful implementation in primary care.DesignQualitative study using semistructured interviews. Content analysis consisted of thematic coding and mapping a first stage of predefined and second stage of iterative evolving set of themes.SettingGPs were interviewed in a variety of primary care practices between February and April 2019.ParticipantsFifteen GPs were purposively recruited for semi-structured interviews through snowballing.ResultsExperiences with lifestyle support among GPs ranged from referring patients to other healthcare professionals to taking a proactive role in lifestyle support themselves. Whether or not GPs took an active role in lifestyle support was related to their belief in the effect of lifestyle interventions. Overall, GPs had little experience with CLI in every day practice. Perceived barriers were a lack of availability of CLIs in the region and the potential lack of added value of CLIs on top of existing lifestyle support. Perceived facilitators were coordination of care provision by GP cooperatives and monitoring of the CLI implementation and their results. Reimbursement of CLIs without any costs for participants enabled application.ConclusionThe importance of lifestyle interventions in primary care was acknowledged by all GPs, but they differed in their level of experience with providing lifestyle support and awareness of CLIs. Successful integration of CLIs with primary care requires a solid promotion, a well-coordinated implementation strategy and structural evaluation of long-term effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2022, NHS England announced plans to ensure that all adult primary care patients in England would have full online access to new data added to their general practitioner (GP) record. However, this plan has not yet been fully implemented. Since April 2020, the GP contract in England has already committed to offering patients full online record access on a prospective basis and on request. However, there has been limited research into UK GPs' experiences and opinions about this practice innovation.ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the experiences and opinions of GPs in England about patients' access to their full web-based health record, including clinicians' free-text summaries of the consultation (so-called "open notes").MethodsIn March 2022, using a convenience sample, we administered a web-based mixed methods survey of 400 GPs in the United Kingdom to explore their experiences and opinions about the impact on patients and GPs' practices to offer patients full online access to their health records. Participants were recruited using the clinician marketing service Doctors.net.uk from registered GPs currently working in England. We conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of written responses ("comments") to 4 open-ended questions embedded in a web-based questionnaire.ResultsOf 400 GPs, 224 (56%) left comments that were classified into 4 major themes: increased strain on GP practices, the potential to harm patients, changes to documentation, and legal concerns. GPs believed that patient access would lead to extra work for them, reduced efficiency, and increased burnout. The participants also believed that access would increase patient anxiety and incur risks to patient safety. Experienced and perceived documentation changes included reduced candor and changes to record functionality. Anticipated legal concerns encompassed fears about increased litigation risks and lack of legal guidance to GPs about how to manage documentation that would be read by patients and potential third parties.ConclusionsThis study provides timely information on the views of GPs in England regarding patient access to their web-based health records. Overwhelmingly, GPs were skeptical about the benefits of access both for patients and to their practices. These views are similar to those expressed by clinicians in other countries, including Nordic countries and the United States before patient access. The survey was limited by the convenience sample, and it is not possible to infer that our sample was representative of the opinions of GPs in England. More extensive, qualitative research is required to understand the perspectives of patients in England after experiencing access to their web-based records. Finally, further research is needed to explore objective measures of the impact of patient access to their records on health outcomes, clinician workload, and changes to documentation.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To identify factors influencing general practitioners' (GPs') decisions about whether or not to remain in direct patient care in general practice and what might help to retain them in that role. DESIGN:Qualitative, in-depth, individual interviews exploring factors related to GPs leaving, remaining in and returning to direct patient care. SETTING:South West England, UK. PARTICIPANTS:41 GPs: 7 retired; 8 intending to take early retirement; 11 who were on or intending to take a career break; 9 aged under 50 years who had left or were intending to leave direct patient care and 6 who were not intending to leave or to take a career break. Plus 19 stakeholders from a range of primary care-related professional organisations and roles. RESULTS:Reasons for leaving direct patient care were complex and based on a range of job-related and individual factors. Three key themes underpinned the interviewed GPs' thinking and rationale: issues relating to their personal and professional identity and the perceived value of general practice-based care within the healthcare system; concerns regarding fear and risk, for example, in respect of medical litigation and managing administrative challenges within the context of increasingly complex care pathways and environments; and issues around choice and volition in respect of personal social, financial, domestic and professional considerations. These themes provide increased understanding of the lived experiences of working in today's National Health Service for this group of GPs. CONCLUSION:Future policies and strategies aimed at retaining GPs in direct patient care should clarify the role and expectations of general practice and align with GPs' perception of their own roles and identity; demonstrate to GPs that they are valued and listened to in planning delivery of the UK healthcare; target GPs' concerns regarding fear and risk, seeking to reduce these to manageable levels and give GPs viable options to support them to remain in direct patient care.

Dataset Information

Should GPs have direct access to imaging for headache? A qualitative study of patients' views in the UK.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Should GPs have direct access to imaging for headache? A qualitative study of patients' views in the UK.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets