Dataset Information

Patient and provider perspectives on the development and resolution of prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Prescribing cascades occur when the side effect of a medication is treated with a second medication. The aim of the study was to understand how prescribing cascades develop and persist and to identify strategies for their identification, prevention and management. METHOD:This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews to explore the existence of prescribing cascades and to gather patients', caregivers' and clinicians' perspectives about how prescribing cascades start, persist and how they might be resolved. Participants were older adults (over age 65) at an outpatient Geriatric Day Hospital (GDH) with possible prescribing cascades (identified by a GDH team member), their caregivers, and healthcare providers. Data were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. RESULTS:Fourteen participants were interviewed (eight patients, one family caregiver, one GDH pharmacist, three GDH physicians and one family physician) providing a total of 22 interviews about patient-specific cases. The complexity and contextually situated nature of prescribing cascades created challenges for all of those involved with their identification. Three themes impacted how prescribing cascades developed and persisted: varying awareness of medications and cascades; varying feelings of accountability for making decisions about medication-related care; and accessibility to an ideal environment and relevant information. Actions to prevent, identify or resolve cascades were suggested. CONCLUSION:Patients and healthcare providers struggled to recognize prescribing cascades and identify when they had occurred; knowledge gaps contributed to this challenge and led to inaction. Strategies that equip patients and clinicians with resources to recognize prescribing cascades and environmental and social supports that would help with their identification are needed. Current conceptualizations of cascades warrant additional refinement by considering the nuances our work raises regarding their appropriateness and directionality.

SUBMITTER: Farrell BJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7519478 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient and provider perspectives on the development and resolution of prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

Farrell Barbara J BJ Jeffs Lianne L Irving Hannah H McCarthy Lisa M LM

BMC geriatrics 20200925 1

<h4>Background</h4>Prescribing cascades occur when the side effect of a medication is treated with a second medication. The aim of the study was to understand how prescribing cascades develop and persist and to identify strategies for their identification, prevention and management.<h4>Method</h4>This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews to explore the existence of prescribing cascades and to gather patients', caregivers' and clinicians' perspectives about how prescribing cascad ...[more]

PMID: 32977743

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPoor medication adherence is an extraordinarily common problem worldwide that contributes to inadequate control of many chronic diseases, including Hypertension (HT). Globally, less than 14% of the estimated 1.4 billion patients with HT achieve optimal control. A myriad of barriers, across patient, healthcare provider, and system levels, contributes to poor medication adherence. Few studies have explored the reasons for poor medication adherence in Tanzania and other African countries.MethodsA qualitative study applying grounded theory principles was conducted in the catchment area of two semi-urban clinics in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to determine the perceived barriers to HT medication adherence. Ten key informant interviews were conducted with healthcare providers who manage HT patients. Patients diagnosed with HT (SBP ≥ 140 and DBP ≥ 90), were randomly selected from patient registers, and nine focus group discussions were conducted with a total 34 patients. Inductive codes were developed separately for the two groups, prior to analyzing key thematic ideas with smaller sub-categories.ResultsAffordability of antihypertensive medication and access to care emerged as the most important barriers. Fee subsidies for treatment and medication, along with health insurance, were mentioned as potential solutions to enhance access and adherence. Patient education and quality of physician counseling were mentioned by both providers and patients as major barriers to medication adherence, as most patients were unaware of their HT and often took medications only when symptomatic. Use of local herbal medicines was mentioned as an alternative to medications, as they were inexpensive, available, and culturally acceptable. Patient recommendations for improving adherence included community-based distribution of refills, SMS text reminders, and family support. Reliance on religious leaders over healthcare providers emerged as a potential means to promote adherence in some discussions.ConclusionsEffective management of hypertensive patients for medication adherence will require several context-specific measures. These include policy measures addressing financial access, with medication subsidies for the poor and accessible distribution systems for medication refill; physician measures to improve health provider counseling for patient centric care; and patient-level strategies with reminders for medication adherence in low resource settings.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent literature describes the limits and pitfalls of using opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic pain and the importance of identifying alternatives. The objective of this study was to identify the practical issues patients and providers face when accessing alternatives to opioids, and how multiple parties view these issues.MethodsQualitative data were gathered to evaluate the outcomes of acupuncture and chiropractic (A/C) services for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) using structured interview guides among patients with CMP (n = 90) and primary care providers (PCPs) (n = 25) purposively sampled from a managed care health care system as well as from contracted community A/C providers (n = 14). Focus groups and interviews were conducted patients with CMP with varying histories of A/C use. Plan PCPs and contracted A/C providers took part in individual interviews. All participants were asked about their experiences managing chronic pain and experience with and/or attitudes about A/C treatment. Audio recordings were transcribed and thematically coded. A summarized version of the focus group/interview guides is included in the Additional file 1.ResultsWe identified four themes around opioid use: (1) attitudes toward use of opioids to manage chronic pain; (2) the limited alternative options for chronic pain management; (3) the potential of A/C care as a tool to help manage pain; and (4) the complex system around chronic pain management. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with opioid medications for pain management, many practical barriers challenged access to other options. Most of the participants' perceived A/C care as helpful for short term pain relief. We identified that problems with timing, expectations, and plan coverage limited A/C care potential for pain relief treatment.ConclusionsThese results suggest that education about realistic expectations for chronic pain management and therapy options, as well as making A/C care more easily accessible, might lead to more satisfaction for patients and providers, and provide important input to policy makers.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01345409 , date of registration 28/4/2011.

Project description:BackgroundHealth systems are increasingly implementing interventions to reduce older patients' use of low-value medications. However, prescribers' perspectives on medication value and the acceptability of interventions to reduce low-value prescribing are poorly understood.ObjectiveTo identify the characteristics that affect the value of a medication and those factors influencing low-value prescribing from the perspective of primary care physicians.DesignQualitative study using semi-structured interviews.SettingAcademic and community primary care practices within University of Pittsburgh Medical Center health system.ParticipantsSixteen primary care physicians.MeasurementsWe elicited 16 prescribers' perspectives on definitions and examples of low-value prescribing in older adults, the factors that incentivize them to engage in such prescribing, and the characteristics of interventions that would make them less likely to engage in low-value prescribing.ResultsWe identified three key themes. First, prescribers viewed low-value prescribing among older adults as common, characterized both by features of the medications themselves and of the particular patients to whom they were prescribed. Second, prescribers described the causes of low-value prescribing as multifactorial, with factors related to patients, prescribers, and the health system as a whole, making low-value prescribing a default practice pattern. Third, interventions addressing low-value prescribing must minimize the cognitive load and time pressures that make low-value prescribing common. Interventions increasing time pressure or cognitive load, such as increased documentation, were considered less acceptable.ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate that low-value prescribing is a well-recognized phenomenon, and that interventions to reduce low-value prescribing must consider physicians' perspectives and address the specific patient, prescriber and health system factors that make low-value prescribing a default practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mistrust and conflicts in patient-provider relationships (PPR) have become prevalent in China. The frequency of verbal and physical violence against healthcare workers has been increasing, but few interventions seem to be effective. Limited prior research has focused on the perspectives of healthcare professionals in training. This paper aimed to understand their viewpoints and conceptualize potentially actionable areas for future policy interventions. METHODS:We analyzed de-identified training registration data of a convenience sample of 151 healthcare students and 38 junior professionals from 20 provinces in China. One open-ended question in the registration form asked the participant to comment on PPRs in China. We used qualitative thematic coding to analyze the narrative data. All answers were categorized into three overarching frames: patients, providers, and external agencies/regulations. Frequently mentioned themes in each frame were evaluated to generate an overall theoretical framework. FINDINGS:Although fewer than 25% indicated that current PPRs are "good" or acceptable, 98% of respondents were optimistic about the future improvement of these relationships. The leading factors of PPRs mentioned as patient-relevant were eroding trust in the physician, unrealistic expectations, and ineffective communication. The provider-relevant themes highlighted were poor service quality, ineffective communication, and heavy workload. Leading themes relevant to external agencies or regulations were dysfunctional administration system, negative media reports, and disparity in healthcare resource distribution. INTERPRETATION:Healthcare professionals in training had a negative view of the current situation but had confidence in future improvement. Patient, provider, and societal factors all contributed to the tension between patients and providers. All aspects of the healthcare sector should be carefully considered when contemplating policy or social interventions to improve the patient-provider relationship.

Project description:BackgroundU.S. professional organizations have provided conflicting recommendations on annual vs. biennial mammography screening. Potential harms of more frequent screening include increased anxiety and costs of false positive results, including unnecessary breast biopsies and overdiagnosis.ObjectiveTo characterize current practices and beliefs surrounding mammography screening frequency and perspectives on using risk-based screening to inform screening intervals.DesignSemi-structured interviews informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ParticipantsPatients, primary care providers (PCPs), third-party stakeholders (breast radiologists, radiology administrators, patient advocates).Main measuresQualitative data, with a codebook developed based upon prespecified implementation science constructs.Key resultsWe interviewed 25 patients, 11 PCPs, and eight key stakeholders, including three radiologists, two radiology administrators, and three patient advocates. Most patients reported having annual mammograms, however, half believed having mammograms every two years was acceptable. Some women were worried early breast cancer would be missed if undergoing biennial screening. PCPs were equally split between recommending annual and biennial mammograms. Although PCPs were interested in using breast cancer risk models to inform screening decisions, concerns raised include time burden and lack of familiarity with breast cancer risk assessment tools. All breast radiologists believed patients should receive annual mammograms, while patient advocates and radiology administrators were split between annual vs. biennial. Radiologists were worried about missing breast cancer diagnoses when mammograms are not performed yearly. Patient advocates and radiology administrators were more open to biennial mammograms and utilizing risk-based screening.ConclusionsUncertainty remains across stakeholder groups regarding appropriate mammogram screening intervals. Radiologists recommend annual mammography, whereas patients and PCPs were evenly split between annual vs. biennial screening, although both favored annual screening among higher-risk women. Breast cancer risk assessment tools may help facilitate decisions about screening intervals, but face barriers to widespread implementation in the primary care setting. These results will inform future implementation strategies to adopt risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The federal government and other organizations have recommended that healthcare institutions collect and document patient sexual orientation and gender identity (SO/GI) information in order to advance the understanding of the health of sexual and gender minority populations and to combat existing health disparities. Little is known, however, about provider perception of the clinical relevance of, or how they might use, patient SO/GI information in individual care. OBJECTIVE:To explore providers' perspectives on and experiences with collection of patient SO/GI information and how the knowledge of this information may impact clinical care. DESIGN:Qualitative study using in-depth individual interviews of healthcare providers. PARTICIPANTS:Twenty-five healthcare providers, including physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners, from the fields of family medicine, internal medicine, gynecology, and urology within a single healthcare system in an east coast city. APPROACH:Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using principles of grounded theory and thematic analysis to identify themes emerging from the data. KEY RESULTS:Providers recognized the importance of collecting patient SO/GI information for understanding population-level public health concerns and disparities, as well as understanding and respecting the context of patients' lives. However, providers also emphasized the importance of knowing patients' sexual behaviors and physical anatomy for addressing health risk and preventive care needs-and noted the distinction between these characteristics and patient SO/GI. Providers cautioned that assumptions based on knowledge of patient SO/GI may unintentionally obscure accurate profiles of patient behavior and anatomy. CONCLUSIONS:Along with the potential benefits of routine collection of patient SO/GI, it is important that providers continue to inquire about patient behaviors and anatomy to inform individual risk and needs assessments. Findings from this study can inform the development of guidelines, trainings, and practices for incorporation of patient SO/GI along with existing assessment practices to improve individual and population health.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Benzodiazepines and opioids are prescribed simultaneously (i.e., "coprescribed") in many clinical settings, despite guidelines advising against this practice and mounting evidence that concomitant use of both medications increases overdose risk. This study sought to characterize the contexts in which benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs and providers' reasons for coprescribing. METHODS:We conducted focus groups with emergency department (ED) providers (resident and attending physicians, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists) from three hospitals using semistructured interviews to elicit perspectives on benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed. We performed qualitative content analysis of the resulting transcripts using a consensual qualitative research approach, aiming to identify priority categories that describe the phenomenon of benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. RESULTS:Participants acknowledged coprescribing rarely and reluctantly and often provided specific discharge instructions when coprescribing. The decision to coprescribe is multifactorial, often isolated to specific clinical and situational contexts (e.g., low back pain, failed solitary opioid therapy) and strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs about the efficacy of combination therapy. The decision to coprescribe is further influenced by a self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid hospital admission. When considering potential interventions to reduce the incidence of coprescribing, participants opposed computerized alerts but were supportive of a pharmacist-assisted intervention. Many providers found the process of participating in peer discussions on prescribing habits to be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS:In this qualitative study of ED providers, we found that benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs in specific clinical and situational contexts, such as the treatment of low back pain or failed solitary opioid therapy. The decision to coprescribe is strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs and by self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid admission.

Project description:Background. A culture of stringent drug policy, one-size-fits-all treatment approaches, and drug-related stigma has clouded clinical HIV practice in the United States. The result is a series of missed opportunities in the HIV care environment. An approach which may address the broken relationship between patient and provider is harm reduction-which removes judgment and operates at the patient's stage of readiness. Harm reduction is not a routine part of care; rather, it exists outside clinic walls, exacerbating the divide between compassionate, stigma-free services and the medical system. Methods. Qualitative, phenomenological, semi-structured, individual interviews with patients and providers were conducted in three publicly-funded clinics in Chicago, located in areas of high HIV prevalence and drug use and serving African-American patients (N = 38). A deductive thematic analysis guided the process, including: the creation of an index code list, transcription and verification of interviews, manual coding, notation of emerging themes and refinement of code definitions, two more rounds of coding within AtlasTi, calculation of Cohen's Kappa for interrater reliability, queries of major codes and analysis of additional common themes. Results. Thematic analysis of findings indicated that the majority of patients felt receptive to harm reduction interventions (safer injection counseling, safer stimulant use counseling, overdose prevention information, supply provision) from their provider, and expressed anticipated gratitude for harm reduction information and/or supplies within the HIV care visit, although some were reluctant to talk openly about their drug use. Provider results were mixed, with more receptivity reported by advanced practice nurses, and more barriers cited by physicians. Notable barriers included: role-perceptions, limited time, inadequate training, and the patients themselves. Discussion. Patients are willing to receive harm reduction interventions from their HIV care providers, while provider receptiveness is mixed. The findings reveal critical implications for diffusion of harm reduction into HIV care, including the need to address cited barriers for both patients and providers to ensure feasibility of implementation. Strategies to address these barriers are discussed, and recommendations for further research are also shared.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Care coordination has been a common tool for practices seeking to manage complex patients, yet there remains confusion about the most effective and sustainable model. Research exists on opinions of providers of care coordination but there is limited information on perspectives of those in the insurance industry about key elements. We sought to gather opinions from primary care providers and administrators in Minnesota who were involved in a CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) transformational grant implementing COMPASS (Care Of Mental, Physical And Substance-use Syndromes), an evidence-based model of care coordination for depressed patients comorbid with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease. We then sought to compare these views with those of private insurance representatives in Minnesota. METHODS:We used qualitative methods to conducted forty-two key informant interviews with primary care providers (n?=?15); administrators (n?=?15); and insurers (n?=?12). We analyzed the recorded and transcribed data, once de-identified, using a frameworks analysis approach. RESULTS:We identified six primary themes: 1) a defined scope, rationale, and key partnerships for building comprehensive care coordination programs, 2) effective information exchange, 3) a trained and available workforce, 4) the need for a business model and a financially justifiable program, 5) a need for evaluation and ongoing improvement of care coordination, and 6) the importance of patient and family engagement. Overall consensus across stakeholder groups was high including a call for payment reform to support a valued service. Despite their role in paying for care, insurance representatives did not stress reduced utilization as more important than other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:Primary care providers and administrators from different organizations and backgrounds, all with experience in COMPASS, in large part agreed with insurance representatives on the main elements of a sustainable model and the need for health reform to sustain this service.

Dataset Information

Patient and provider perspectives on the development and resolution of prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

Publications

Patient and provider perspectives on the development and resolution of prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure