A qualitative study of socially isolated patients' perceptions of primary care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Although the previous quantitative study revealed that social isolation was negatively associated with patient experience of primary care, the underlying reasons for this phenomenon remain unclear. In the present study, we aimed to explore the reasons underlying the influence of social isolation on patient experience in the primary care setting.Methods
This study was a qualitative study and part of a mixed methods research. Semistructured telephone interviews were performed. We recruited participants among eligible participants in the previous quantitative survey who were classified as being socially isolated. Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically by two independent researchers until saturation was reached.Results
Eight socially isolated patients in the research were interviewed. In the thematic analysis, three major themes emerged as reasons underlying the influence of social isolation on patient experience of primary care: restriction of information about local primary care physicians, finding a usual primary care physician haphazardly, and superficial relationship with a usual primary care physician.Conclusions
This study identified three major themes, which are beneficial to expand our understanding of socially isolated patients' perceptions of primary care. These findings can be used to improve patient experience of primary care in socially isolated patients.
SUBMITTER: Aoki T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6732495 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A qualitative study of socially isolated patients' perceptions of primary care.
Aoki Takuya T Urushibara-Miyachi Yuka Y
Journal of general and family medicine 20190520 5
<h4>Background</h4>Although the previous quantitative study revealed that social isolation was negatively associated with patient experience of primary care, the underlying reasons for this phenomenon remain unclear. In the present study, we aimed to explore the reasons underlying the influence of social isolation on patient experience in the primary care setting.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was a qualitative study and part of a mixed methods research. Semistructured telephone interviews were perf ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVES:General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in heart failure (HF) management. Despite multiple guidelines, the management of patients with HF in primary care is suboptimal. Therefore, all the qualitative evidence concerning GPs' perceptions of managing HF in primary care was synthesised to identify barriers and facilitators for optimal care, and ideas for improvement. DESIGN:Qualitative evidence synthesis. METHODS:Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL databases up to 20/12/2015 were conducted. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme's checklist for qualitative research was used for quality assessment. Thematic analysis was used as method of analysis. RESULTS:Of 5427 articles, 18 qualitative articles were included. Findings were organised in HF-specific factors, patient factors, physician factors and contextual factors. GPs' uncertainty in all areas of HF management was highlighted. HF management started with an uncertain diagnosis, leading to difficulties with communication, treatment and advance care planning. Lack of access to specialised care and lack of knowledge were identified as important contributors to this uncertainty. In an effort to overcome this, strategies bringing evidence into practice should be promoted. GPs expressed the need for a multidisciplinary chronic care approach for HF. However, mixed experiences were noted with regard to interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSIONS:The main challenges identified in this synthesis were how to deal with GPs' uncertainty about clinical practice, how to bring evidence into practice and how to work together as a multiprofessional team. These barriers were situated predominantly on the physician and contextual level. Targets to improve GPs' HF care were identified.
| S-EPMC5168518 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPatient portals are a promising instrument to improve patient-centered care, as they provide patients information and tools that can help them better manage their health. The implementation of portals in both the inpatient and outpatient setting gives health care providers an opportunity to support patients both during hospitalization and after discharge. Thus, there is a need to better understand how inpatient and outpatient portals are used across care contexts.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine patients' perceptions of using inpatient and outpatient portals across the care settings, including how they used the portals and the benefits and concerns associated with portal use.MethodsThis study was conducted in a large Midwestern academic medical center consisting of seven hospitals. We interviewed 120 patients who had used an inpatient portal during their hospitalization, at 15 days and 6 months postdischarge, to determine their perspectives of portal use in both hospital and outpatient settings. Interview transcripts were analyzed inductively and deductively by using team coding processes consistent with a grounded theory approach.ResultsInterviews focused on three main areas of portal use: experience with the portal features, perceived benefits, and concerns. Responses at 15 days (n=60) and 6 months (n=60) postdischarge were consistent with respect to perceptions about portal use. Patients identified viewing their health information, managing their schedule, and communicating with providers as notable activities. Convenience, access to information, and better engagement in care were indicated as benefits. Concerns were related to technology issues and privacy/security risks.ConclusionsImplementation of inpatient portals as a complement to outpatient portals is increasing and can enable patients to better manage aspects of their care. Although care processes vary substantively across settings, the benefits of convenience, improved access to information, and better engagement in care provide opportunities for portal use across care settings to support patient-centered care.
| S-EPMC6592494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess patient and caregiver perceptions of what constitutes quality care in home-based primary care (HBPC).Cross-sectional qualitative design; semistructured interview study.Academic home-based primary care program.Homebound patients (n = 13) and 10 caregivers (n = 10) receiving HBPC.Semistructured interviews explored experiences with a HBPC program and perceptions of quality care. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Qualitative content analysis was performed to identify major themes.Five major themes emerged related to participant perceptions of quality care: access, affordability, competency, care coordination, goal attainment. Participants felt that reliable, consistent access provided "peace of mind" and reduced hospital and emergency department use. Insurance coverage of program costs and coordinated care provided by an interdisciplinary team were positively regarded. Interpersonal skills and technical abilities of providers influenced patient perception of provider competency. Assessing and helping patients attain care goals contributed to a perception of quality care.Patients and caregivers associate high-quality HBPC with around-the-clock access to affordable interdisciplinary providers with strong interpersonal skills and technical competency. These results expand on prior research and are concordant with HBPC goals of around-the-clock access to multidisciplinary teams with the goals of reduced emergency department and hospital use. HBPC programs should be structured to optimize access, affordability, coordinated care, and goal ascertainment and alignment. Quality indicators should be created and validated with these patient and caregiver views of care quality in mind.
| S-EPMC4988902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background In-hospital medication reviews are regularly performed. However, discontinuity in care could occur because secondary care providers lack insight into the outpatient history. Furthermore, for the implementation or follow-up of some medication review-based interventions, the help of primary care providers is essential. This requires interprofessional collaboration between secondary and primary care. Therefore, the aim of this qualitative study was to gain insight into the perceptions of primary and secondary care providers on interprofessional collaboration on medication reviews in hospitalised patients. Methods Ten face-to-face semi-structured interviews and three focus group discussions were conducted with 20 healthcare providers from three hospitals and community health services. The interviews were aimed at exploring general practitioners’, community pharmacists’, geriatricians’, and hospital pharmacists’ experiences, attitudes, and views of interprofessional collaboration. Focus groups consisted of representatives of all professional groups. Through group discussion, interprofessional collaboration was explored by addressing three main questions: 1) What are the benefits of in-hospital medication reviews? 2) What are the barriers to in-hospital medication reviews from an interprofessional collaboration perspective? 3) Given the barriers mentioned, how should this interprofessional collaboration between primary and secondary care be designed? Data were analysed using a thematic-content approach. Results The need for in-hospital medication reviews was underlined due to their many benefits, such as reducing potentially preventable re-admissions. Barriers regarding interprofessional collaboration between primary and secondary care can be subdivided into three main themes: 1) defining in-hospital medication reviews (e.g., lack of clear goals), 2) execution of medication reviews (e.g., hospital setting is dynamic), and 3) follow-up after discharge (e.g., unclear instructions). Care providers suggested solutions for each of the barriers mentioned, for example, by using supportive staff in order to overcome the gap between primary and secondary care providers and making clear agreements on proper means of communication. Conclusion Primary and secondary care providers recognise the importance of in-hospital medication reviews and the need for interprofessional collaboration. To create satisfying interprofessional collaboration, conditions should be met on defining in-hospital medication reviews across settings and involving both primary and secondary care providers in implementing medication reviews and organising their follow-up.
| S-EPMC7526422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Safety-net health systems across the country are implementing electronic consult (eConsult) systems in which primary care practitioners (PCPs) submit all requests for specialty assistance electronically to be reviewed and discussed with specialists. Evidence suggests that eConsult systems can make significant improvements in specialty access, but the outcomes of these systems for frontline PCPs is poorly understood. Objective:To understand PCP perceptions of the results of eConsult initiation on PCP workflow, specialist access, and patient care. Design, Setting, and Participants:Qualitative interviews were conducted from December 1, 2016, to April 15, 2017, with 40 safety-net PCPs in Los Angeles County who use the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (DHS) eConsult system. Interviewees were recruited to include diversity in PCP type, practice setting, and employer (DHS employed vs DHS affiliated). Participants were interviewed about their perceptions of clinical workflow, access to specialists, relationships with specialists, and referral decision making. Main Outcomes and Measures:Perceptions of the results of eConsult, including positive and negative themes and remaining perceived gaps in specialty care. Results:Of the 40 participants, 27 (68%) were women; 24 (60%) PCPs performed 5 or more eConsults per week. Primary care practitioners' perceptions of eConsult clustered around 4 main themes: access and timeliness of specialty care, shift of work to PCPs, relationships with specialists, and eConsult interface issues. Many PCPs praised the improved timeliness of specialist input with eConsult, as well as the added clinical and educational value of dialogue with specialists, particularly compared with the limitations of the prior referral process. However, PCPs also consistently perceived that eConsult shifted some of the work of specialty care to them. Many PCPs believed that this extra burden was worth the effort given the benefits of eConsult, such as improved timeliness of care and ability to manage specialty conditions. In contrast, others were frustrated by the increased administrative burden, broadened clinical responsibility, and restructuring of specialty care delivery. Conclusions and Relevance:While associated with improved specialty care access, eConsult systems simultaneously created new challenges for PCPs, such as an increased burden of work in providing specialty care. Primary care practitioners varied in their enthusiasm for these workflow changes with diverging perceptions of the same processes. Our findings provide insights on challenges future primary care transformation efforts may face.
| S-EPMC6145753 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UK general practice is experiencing a workload crisis. Pharmacists are the third largest healthcare profession in the UK; however, their skills are a currently underutilised and potentially highly valuable resource for primary health care. This study forms part of the evaluation of an innovative training programme for pharmacists who are interested in extended roles in primary care, advocated by a UK collaborative '10-point GP workforce action plan'.To explore pharmacists' perceptions of primary care roles including the potential for greater integration of their profession into general practice.A qualitative interview study in UK primary care carried out between October 2015 and July 2016.Pharmacists were purposively sampled by level of experience, geographical location, and type of workplace. Two confidential semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted - one before and one after the training programme. A constant comparative, inductive approach to thematic analysis was used.Sixteen participants were interviewed. The themes related to: initial expectations of the general practice role, varying by participants' experience of primary care; the influence of the training course with respect to managing uncertainty, critical appraisal skills, and confidence for the role; and predictions for the future of this role.There is enthusiasm and willingness among pharmacists for new, extended roles in primary care, which could effectively relieve GP workload pressures. A definition of the role, with examples of the knowledge, skills, and attributes required, should be made available to pharmacists, primary care teams, and the public. Training should include clinical skills teaching, set in context through exposure to general practice, and delivered motivationally by primary care practitioners.
| S-EPMC5569745 | biostudies-other
Project description:Interpersonal trust plays an important role in the clinic visit. Clinician trust in the patient may be especially important when prescribing opioid analgesics because of concerns about misuse. Previous studies have found that non-white patients are perceived negatively by clinicians.To examine whether clinicians' trust in patients differed by patients' race/ethnicity in a socially marginalized cohort.Cross-sectional study of patient-clinician dyads.169 HIV infected indigent patients recruited from the community and their 61 primary care providers (PCPs.)The Physician Trust in Patients Scale (PTPS), a validated scale that measures PCPs' trust in patients.The mean PTPS score was 43.2 (SD 10.8) out of a possible 60. Reported current illicit drug use and prescription opioid misuse were similar across patients' race or ethnicity. However, both patient illicit drug use and patient non-white race/ethnicity were associated with lower PTPS scores. In a multivariate model, non-white race/ethnicity was independently associated with PTPS scores 6.3 points lower than whites (95% CI: -9.9, -2.7). Current illicit drug use was associated with PTSP scores 5.5 lower than no drug use (95% CI -8.5, -2.5).In a socially marginalized cohort, non-white patients were trusted less than white patients by their PCPs, despite similar rates of illicit drug use and opioid analgesic misuse. The effect was independent of illicit drug use. This finding may reflect unconscious stereotypes by PCPs and may underlie disparities in chronic pain management.
| S-EPMC3138986 | biostudies-other
Project description:To explore and understand participants' perceptions and attitudes towards the reporting of medication errors (MEs).A qualitative study using in-depth interviews of 31 healthcare practitioners from nine publicly funded, primary care clinics in three states in peninsular Malaysia was conducted for this study. The participants included family medicine specialists, doctors, pharmacists, pharmacist assistants, nurses and assistant medical officers. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Analysis of the data was guided by the framework approach.Six themes and 28 codes were identified. Despite the availability of a reporting system, most of the participants agreed that MEs were underreported. The nature of the error plays an important role in determining the reporting. The reporting system, organisational factors, provider factors, reporter's burden and benefit of reporting also were identified.Healthcare practitioners in primary care clinics understood the importance of reporting MEs to improve patient safety. Their perceptions and attitudes towards reporting of MEs were influenced by many factors which affect the decision-making process of whether or not to report. Although the process is complex, it primarily is determined by the severity of the outcome of the errors. The participants voluntarily report the errors if they are familiar with the reporting system, what error to report, when to report and what form to use.
| S-EPMC5132213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo elucidate the experiences and perceptions of people living with primary frozen shoulder and their priorities for treatment.DesignQualitative study design using semistructured interviews.SettingGeneral practitioner (GP) and musculoskeletal clinics in primary and secondary care in one National Health Service Trust in England.Participants12 patients diagnosed with primary frozen shoulder were purposively recruited from a GP's surgery, community clinics and hospital clinics. Recruitment targeted the phases of frozen shoulder: pain predominant (n=5), stiffness predominant (n=4) and residual stiffness predominant following hospital treatment (n=2). One participant dropped out.Inclusion criteriaadult, male and female patients of any age, attending the clinics, who had been diagnosed with primary frozen shoulder.ResultsThe most important experiential themes identified by participants were: pain which was severe as well as inexplicable; inconvenience/disability arising from increasing restriction of movement (due to pain initially, gradually giving way to stiffness); confusion/anxiety associated with delay in diagnosis and uncertainty about the implications for the future; and treatment-related aspects. Participants not directly referred to a specialist (whether physiotherapist, physician or surgeon) wanted a faster, better-defined care pathway. Specialist consultation brought more definitive diagnosis, relief from anxiety and usually self-rated improvement. The main treatment priority was improved function, though there was recognition that this might be facilitated by relief of pain or stiffness. There was a general lack of information from clinicians about the condition with over-reliance on verbal communication and very little written information.ConclusionsAwareness of frozen shoulder should be increased among non-specialists and the best available information made accessible for patients. Our results also highlight the importance of patient participation in frozen shoulder research.
| S-EPMC3787409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSix percent of patients are allergic to penicillin according to their medical records. While this designation protects a small number of truly allergic patients from serious reactions, those who are incorrectly labelled may be denied access to recommended first line treatment for many infections. Removal of incorrect penicillin allergy may have positive health consequences for the individual and the general population. We aimed to explore primary care physicians' (PCPs) and patients' views and understanding of penicillin allergy with a focus on clinical management of infections in the face of a penicillin allergy record.MethodsWe conducted an interview study with 31 patients with a penicillin allergy record, and 19 PCPs in the North of England. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsPatients made sense of their allergy status by considering the timing and severity of symptoms. Diagnosis of penicillin allergy was reported to be 'imperfect' with PCPs relying on patient reports and incomplete medical records. PCPs and patients often suspected that an allergy record was incorrect, but PCPs were reluctant to change records. PCPs had limited knowledge of allergy services. PCPs often prescribed alternative antibiotics which were easy to identify. Both patients and PCPs differed in the extent to which they were aware of the negative consequences of incorrect penicillin allergy records, their relevance and importance to their lives, and management of penicillin allergy.ConclusionsPCPs and patients appear insufficiently aware of potential harms associated with incorrect penicillin allergy records. Some of the problems experienced by PCPs could be reduced by ensuring the details of newly diagnosed reactions to antibiotics are clearly documented. In order for PCPs to overturn more incorrect penicillin records through appropriate use of allergy services, more information and training about these services will be needed.
| S-EPMC8194168 | biostudies-literature