Dataset Information

Professionals' perspectives on factors affecting GP trainees' patient mix: results from an interview and focus group study among professionals working in Dutch general practice.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Seeing and treating patients in daily practice forms the basis of general practitioner (GP) training. However, the types of patients seen by GP trainees do not always match trainees' educational needs. Knowledge about factors that shape the mix of patient types is limited, especially with regard to the role of the professionals who work in the GP practice. AIM:We investigated factors affecting the mix of patients seen by GP trainees from the perspective of professionals. DESIGN AND SETTING:This qualitative study involved GP trainees, GP supervisors, medical receptionists and nurse practitioners affiliated with a GP Specialty Training Institute in the Netherlands. METHODS:Twelve focus groups and seven interviews with 73 participants were held. Data collection and analysis were iterative, using thematic analysis with a constant comparison methodology. RESULTS:The characteristics of patients' health problems and the bond between the doctor and patient are important determinants of GP trainees' patient mix. Because trainees have not yet developed bonds with patients, they are less likely to see patients with complex health problems. However, trainees can deliberately influence their patient mix by paying purposeful attention to bonding with patients and by gaining professional trust through focused engagement with their colleagues. CONCLUSION:Trainees' patient mix is affected by various factors. Trainees and team members can take steps to ensure that this mix matches trainees' educational needs, but their success depends on the interaction between trainees' behaviour, the attitudes of team members and the context. The findings show how the mix of patients seen by trainees can be influenced to become more trainee centred and learning oriented.

SUBMITTER: de Bever S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6924856 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Professionals' perspectives on factors affecting GP trainees' patient mix: results from an interview and focus group study among professionals working in Dutch general practice.

de Bever Sarah S van Rhijn Suzanne C SC van Dijk Nynke N Kramer Anneke A Visser Mechteld R M MRM

BMJ open 20191215 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>Seeing and treating patients in daily practice forms the basis of general practitioner (GP) training. However, the types of patients seen by GP trainees do not always match trainees' educational needs. Knowledge about factors that shape the mix of patient types is limited, especially with regard to the role of the professionals who work in the GP practice.<h4>Aim</h4>We investigated factors affecting the mix of patients seen by GP trainees from the perspective of professiona ...[more]

PMID: 31843835

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the determinants of deprescribing among health professionals in nursing homes, focusing on knowledge, practice and attitude.DesignThis was a qualitative study comprising semi-structured face-to-face interviews guided by 10 open-ended questions. Interviews were conducted until data saturation was achieved and no new ideas were formed. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed for themes. To derive themes, we employed directed content analysis of transcript data. Coding was completed using a combination of open, axial and selective coding.SettingFour nursing homes in Singapore.ParticipantsThe study involved 17 participants (comprising 4 doctors, 4 pharmacists and 9 nurses).ResultsTwo key themes were identified, enablers and challenges. These were enablers and challenges faced by doctors, pharmacists and nurses towards deprescribing. The identified subthemes for enablers of deprescribing were: (1) awareness of medications that are unnecessary or could be targeted for deprescribing; (2) improving quality of life for patients with limited life expectancy; (3) improving communication between doctors, pharmacists and nurses; (4) systematic deprescribing practice and educational tools and (5) acknowledgement of possible benefits of deprescribing. The identified subthemes for challenges of deprescribing were: (1) symptoms not acknowledged as possibly drug-related; (2) lack of knowledge in patient's and family members' preferences; (3) lack of coordination between health professionals in hospitals and nursing homes and (4) limited tools for deprescribing. The development of a local guideline, mentoring nurses, case discussions, better shared decision-making and improving multidisciplinary communication, may help to support the process of deprescribing.ConclusionIn conclusion, this study highlighted that deprescribing in the nursing homes is perceived by health professionals to be challenging and future research could assess how routine case studies, mentoring and better multidisciplinary communication could improve deprescribing knowledge and process in the nursing homes.

Project description:The digital era has seen rapid changes in how information is consumed. Traditional dissemination of scholarly work through biomedical journals may not be optimally tailored to the preferences of younger clinicians and researchers. We aimed to describe the perspectives of young clinicians and researchers in kidney disease on consuming scientific information. Three focus groups were conducted during the 2017 American Society of Nephrology Kidney Week with a total of 29 nephrologists and researchers (ages 40 years old and younger) purposively sampled through our networks and the American Society of Nephrology registration database. Data were analyzed thematically. Of the 72 participants invited, 29 participated from 28 centers across 13 countries. Five themes were identified: capturing and retaining attention (with subthemes of triggering interest, optimizing readability, and navigation to sustain motivation); having discernible relevance (resonating with clinical and research interests, supporting professional development, action-oriented and readily applicable, able to disseminate, contextualizing the study, and filtering out informational noise); immediacy and efficiency in processing information (requiring instantaneous and easy access, enabling rapid understanding, and facilitating comprehension of complex concepts); trusting legitimate and credible sources (authoritative indicator of importance and quality, reputable experts broadening perspective, certainty and confidence with collegial input, accurate framing and translation of the message, ascertaining methodologic detail and nuances, and integrating the patient perspective); and social dialoguing and debate. Immediate and digitally optimized access motivated young kidney professionals to consume scientific information. Mechanisms that enable them to distil relevant and new evidence, appraise and apply information to clinical practice and research, disseminate studies to colleagues, and engage in discussion and debate may enhance their comprehension, confidence, interpretation, and use of scientific literature.

Project description:BackgroundPromoting patient and occupational safety are two key challenges for hospitals. When aiming to improve these two outcomes synergistically, psychosocial working conditions, leadership by hospital management and supervisors, and perceptions of patient and occupational safety climate have to be considered. Recent studies have shown that these key topics are interrelated and form a critical foundation for promoting patient and occupational safety in hospitals. So far, these topics have mainly been studied independently from each other. The present study investigated hospital staffs' perceptions of four different topics: (1) psychosocial working conditions, (2) leadership, (3) patient safety climate, and (4) occupational safety climate. We present results from a survey in two German university hospitals aiming to detect differences between nurses and physicians.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study using a standardized paper-based questionnaire. The survey was conducted with nurses and physicians to assess the four topics. The instruments mainly consisted of scales of the German version of the COPSOQ (Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire), one scale of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), scales to assess leadership and transformational leadership, scales to assess patient safety climate using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSPSC), and analogous items to assess occupational safety climate.ResultsA total of 995 completed questionnaires out of 2512 distributed questionnaires were returned anonymously. The overall response rate was 39.6%. The sample consisted of 381 physicians and 567 nurses. We found various differences with regard to the four topics. In most of the COPSOQ and the HSPSC-scales, physicians rated psychosocial working conditions and patient safety climate more positively than nurses. With regard to occupational safety, nurses indicated higher occupational risks than physicians.ConclusionsThe WorkSafeMed study combined the assessment of the four topics psychosocial working conditions, leadership, patient safety climate, and occupational safety climate in hospitals. Looking at the four topics provides an overview of where improvements in hospitals may be needed for nurses and physicians. Based on these results, improvements in working conditions, patient safety climate, and occupational safety climate are required for health care professionals in German university hospitals - especially for nurses.

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore the effects of the UK Working Time Regulations (WTR) on trainee doctors' experience of fatigue.DesignQualitative study involving focus groups and telephone interviews, conducted in Spring 2012 with doctors purposively selected from Foundation and specialty training. Final compliance with a 48 h/week limit had been required for trainee doctors since August 2009. Framework analysis of data.Setting9 deaneries in all four UK nations; secondary care.Participants82 doctors: 53 Foundation trainees and 29 specialty trainees. 36 participants were male and 46 female. Specialty trainees were from a wide range of medical and surgical specialties, and psychiatry.ResultsImplementation of the WTR, while acknowledged as an improvement to the earlier situation of prolonged excessive hours, has not wholly overcome experience of long working hours and fatigue. Fatigue did not only arise from the hours that were scheduled, but also from an unpredictable mixture of shifts, work intensity (which often resulted in educational tasks being taken home) and inadequate rest. Fatigue was also caused by trainees working beyond their scheduled hours, for reasons such as task completion, accessing additional educational opportunities beyond scheduled hours and staffing shortages. There were also organisational, professional and cultural drivers, such as a sense of responsibility to patients and colleagues and the expectations of seniors. Fatigue was perceived to affect efficiency of skills and judgement, mood and learning capacity.ConclusionsLong-term risks of continued stress and fatigue, for doctors and for the effective delivery of a healthcare service, should not be ignored. Current monitoring processes do not reflect doctors' true working patterns. The effectiveness of the WTR cannot be considered in isolation from the culture and context of the workplace. On-going attention needs to be paid to broader cultural issues, including the relationship between trainees and seniors.

Project description:BackgroundInadequate volume control may be a main contributor to poor survival and high mortality in hemodialysis patients. Bioimpedance measurement has the potential to improve fluid management, but several dialysis centers lack an agreed fluid management policy, and the method has not yet been implemented. Our aim was to identify renal care professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators for use of bioimpedance in clinical practice.MethodsQualitative data were collected through four focus group interviews with 24 renal care professionals: dieticians, nephrologists and nurses, recruited voluntarily from a nation-wide selection of hemodialysis centers, having access to a bioimpedance-device. The participants were connected to each other and a moderator via equipment for telemedicine and the sessions were recorded. The interviews were semi-structured, focusing on the participants' perceptions of use of bioimpedance in clinical practice. Thematic content analysis was performed in consecutive steps, and data were extracted by employing an inductive, interactive, comparative process.ResultsSeveral barriers and facilitators to the use of bioimpedance in clinical practice were identified, and a multilevel approach to examining barriers and incentives for change was found to be applicable to the ideas and categories that arose from the data. The determinants were categorized on five levels, and the different themes of the levels illustrated with quotations from the focus groups participants.ConclusionsDeterminants for use of bioimpedance were identified on five levels: 1) the innovation itself, 2) the individual professional, 3) the patient, 4) the social context and 5) the organizational context. Barriers were identified in the areas of credibility, awareness, knowledge, self-efficacy, care processes, organizational structures and regulations. Facilitators were identified in the areas of the innovation's attractiveness, advantages in practice, and collaboration. Motivation, team processes and organizational capacities appeared as both barriers and facilitators.

Project description:BACKGROUND:While interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral collaboration promotes the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes for persons with low back pain, challenges remain for this process. Few studies have explored challenges to cross-sectoral care as experienced by all the involved professionals across sectors during a course of treatment. The aim of this study was to explore challenges to cross-sectoral care as experienced by professionals involved in the course of treatment for patients with low back pain. METHOD:This semi-structured, qualitative interview study included 28 health care professionals and 8 social workers who interacted with patients with low back pain. A systematic text condensation method was used to analyse data. Nvivo was used to structure and thematise the interview data. RESULTS:Professionals expressed challenges in relation to a lack of collaboration, knowledge sharing and acknowledgement of one other and they appeared to differ in their approach to patients with pain or patients with limited function. Additional challenges included time constraints, availability and subjective approaches to managing guidelines for low back pain. A lack of a common information technology (IT) registration system and limited knowledge of the work of other professions disrupted knowledge sharing among sectors. DISCUSSION:The different approach to patients with pain or patients with limited function challenged mutual understanding and collaboration among professionals. The lack of mutual understanding and knowledge of each other's work appeared to create an environment of disrespect and distrust among professionals that generated feelings of a lack of acknowledgement from other health care professionals. CONCLUSION:To provide cross-sectoral care, we must ensure that professionals work together towards transparent and informed transitions from one sector to the next. This study contributes to the existing literature by presenting challenges to cross-sectoral care that are experienced by the diverse groups of professionals involved in a course of treatment for patients with low back pain.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Switzerland, like many other countries, has a shortage of General Practitioners (GPs). Optional GP training modules in GP practices were offered during the at least 5-year GP training program to increase student and trainee interest in becoming a GP. The training modules had not yet been evaluated. We determined how many Swiss GP trainees became practicing GPs after they completed optional training modules, and if longer modules were associated with higher rates of GP specialization. METHODS:In this population-based cohort study, we included GP trainees who chose an optional GP training module in GP practice, provided by the Foundation to Promote Training in General Practice (WHM) between 2006 and 2015. GP trainees were invited to complete an online survey to assess the primary outcome (becoming a practicing GP by 2016). Data on non-responders was collected via an internet search. We calculated univariate time-to-event curves to become a practicing GP, stratified by trainee's gender, length, part-time training, and number of years after graduation until training modules were completed. We used a multivariate model to adjust for characteristics of participants, training, and satisfaction with training modules. RESULTS:We assessed primary outcome for 351 (92.1%) of 381 former GP trainees who participated in a WHM program between 2006 and 2015. Of these 218 (57%) were practicing GPs by 2016. When focusing on the trainees who had completed training between 2006 and 2010, the rate of practicing GPs was even 73%. Longer (p = 0.018) and part-time training modules (p = 0.003) were associated with higher rates of being a practicing GP. Most (81%) practicing GPs thought their optional GP training module was (very) important in their choice of specialty. CONCLUSION:GP trainees who spent more time training in a GP practice, or who trained part-time were more likely to become practicing GPs. Most (80%) rated their training module as (very) important in their choice of career, highlighting that these modules effectively encourage the interests of those already inclined towards the GP specialty. Longer GP training modules and more opportunities for part-time training may attract and retain more interested trainees, and possibly increase the number of practicing GPs.

Dataset Information

Professionals' perspectives on factors affecting GP trainees' patient mix: results from an interview and focus group study among professionals working in Dutch general practice.

Publications

Professionals' perspectives on factors affecting GP trainees' patient mix: results from an interview and focus group study among professionals working in Dutch general practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets