Dataset Information

Engaging primary care providers in managing pediatric eating disorders: a mixed methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The primary care setting offers an attractive opportunity for, not only the identification of pediatric eating disorders, but also the delivery of evidence-based treatment. However, constraints of this setting pose barriers for implementing treatment. For interventions to be successful, they need to take into consideration the perspectives of stakeholders. As such, the purpose of this study was to examine in-depth primary care providers' perspective of challenges to identifying and managing eating disorders in the primary care setting.

Methods

This mixed methods study surveyed 60 Pediatric and Family Medicine providers across 6 primary care practices. Sixteen of these providers were further interviewed using a qualitative, semi-structured interview.

Results

Providers (n = 60, response rate of 45%) acknowledged the potential of primary care as a point of contact for early identification and treatment of pediatric eating disorders. They also expressed that this was an area of need in their practices. They identified numerous barriers to successful implementation of evidence-based treatment in this setting including scarcity of time, knowledge, and resources.

Conclusions

Investigations seeking to build capacities in primary care settings to address eating disorders must address these barriers.

SUBMITTER: Lebow J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7807397 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA high proportion of hypertensive patients remain above the target threshold for blood pressure, increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes. A digital intervention to facilitate healthcare practitioners (hereafter practitioners) to initiate planned medication escalations when patients' home readings were raised was found to be effective in lowering blood pressure over 12 months. This mixed-methods process evaluation aimed to develop a detailed understanding of how the intervention was implemented in Primary Care, possible mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing implementation.MethodsOne hundred twenty-five practitioners took part in a randomised controlled trial, including GPs, practice nurses, nurse-prescribers, and healthcare assistants. Usage data were collected automatically by the digital intervention and antihypertensive medication changes were recorded from the patients' medical notes. A sub-sample of 27 practitioners took part in semi-structured qualitative process interviews. The qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis and the quantitative data using descriptive statistics and correlations to explore factors related to adherence. The two sets of findings were integrated using a triangulation protocol.ResultsMean practitioner adherence to escalating medication was moderate (53%), and the qualitative analysis suggested that low trust in home readings and the decision to wait for more evidence influenced implementation for some practitioners. The logic model was partially supported in that self-efficacy was related to adherence to medication escalation, but qualitative findings provided further insight into additional potential mechanisms, including perceived necessity and concerns. Contextual factors influencing implementation included proximity of average readings to the target threshold. Meanwhile, adherence to delivering remote support was mixed, and practitioners described some uncertainty when they received no response from patients.ConclusionsThis mixed-methods process evaluation provided novel insights into practitioners' decision-making around escalating medication using a digital algorithm. Implementation strategies were proposed which could benefit digital interventions in addressing clinical inertia, including facilitating tracking of patients' readings over time to provide stronger evidence for medication escalation, and allowing more flexibility in decision-making whilst discouraging clinical inertia due to borderline readings. Implementation of one-way notification systems could be facilitated by enabling patients to send a brief acknowledgement response.Trial registration( ISRCTN13790648 ). Registered 14 May 2015.

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain is a prevalent health concern in the United States (US) and a frequent reason for patients to seek primary care. The challenges associated with developing effective pain management strategies can be perceived as a burden on the patient-provider relationship.ObjectiveThis study explored the relationship between patients' overall satisfaction with their primary care providers (PCPs) and their satisfaction with their chronic pain treatment, as well as the provider behaviors that contributed to chronic pain patients' satisfaction with their PCPs.DesignConcurrent nested mixed-methods design PARTICIPANTS: 97 patients with chronic pain who were assigned to the usual care arm of the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) study.ApproachWe analyzed phone interview and survey data (n?=?97). Interviews assessed provider behaviors that led to patient satisfaction. Interview transcripts were analyzed based on a content analysis approach. Survey responses assessed patient satisfaction with primary care and pain services. We calculated a Pearson's correlation coefficient using five response categories.Key resultsInterviews revealed that high satisfaction with primary care was driven by five concrete PCP behaviors: (1) listening, (2) maintaining communication with patients, (3) acting as an access point to comprehensive pain care, (4) providing an honest assessment of the possibilities of pain care, and (5) taking time during consultations with patients. In surveys, participants reported higher satisfaction with their primary care services than with the pain services they received; these variables were only moderately correlated (r?=?0.586).ConclusionsResults suggest that patients with chronic pain can view the relationship with their PCPs as positive, even in the face of low satisfaction with their pain treatment. The expectations that these patients held of PCPs could be met regardless of providers' ability to successfully relieve chronic pain.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveWidespread delivery of high-quality care for acute kidney injury (AKI) survivors after hospital discharge requires a multidisciplinary team. We aimed to compare management approaches between nephrologists and primary care providers (PCPs) and explored strategies to optimize collaboration.Study designExplanatory sequential mixed-methods study using a case-based survey followed by semi-structured interviews.Setting & participantsNephrologists and PCPs providing AKI survivor care at 3 Mayo Clinic sites and the Mayo Clinic Health System were included.OutcomesSurvey questions and interviews elucidated participants' recommendations for post-AKI care.Analytical approachDescriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. Qualitative data analysis used deductive and inductive strategies. A connecting and merging approach was used for mixed-methods data integration.Results148 of 774 (19%) providers submitted survey responses (24/72 nephrologists and 105/705 PCPs). Nephrologists and PCPs recommended laboratory monitoring and follow-up with a PCP shortly after hospital discharge. Both indicated that the need for nephrology referral, and its timing should be dictated by clinical and non-clinical patient-specific factors. There were opportunities for improvement in medication and comorbid condition management in both groups. Incorporation of multidisciplinary specialists (eg, pharmacists) was recommended to expand knowledge, optimize patient-centered care, and alleviate provider workload.LimitationsSurvey findings may have been affected by non-response bias and the unique challenges facing clinicians and health systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were from a single health system, and their views or experiences may differ from those in other health systems or serving different populations.ConclusionsA multidisciplinary team-based model of post-AKI care may facilitate implementation of a patient-centered care plan, improve adherence to best practices, and reduce clinician and patient burden. Individualizing care for AKI survivors based on clinical and non-clinical patient-specific factors is needed to optimize outcomes for patients and health systems.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care patients with obesity seldom receive effective weight management treatment in primary care settings. This study aims to understand PCPs' perspectives on obesity treatment barriers and opportunities to overcome them.Study designThis is an explanatory sequential mixed methods study in which survey data was collected and used to inform subsequent qualitative interviews.Settings and participantsPCPs who provide care to adult patients in an academic medical center in the Midwestern US.MethodologyPCPs (n = 350) were invited by email to participate in an online survey. PCPs were subsequently invited to participate in semi-structured interviews to further explore survey domains.Analytic approachSurvey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Interviews were analyzed using directed content analysis.ResultsAmong 107 survey respondents, less than 10% (n = 8) used evidence-based guidelines to inform obesity treatment decisions. PCPs' identified opportunities to improve obesity treatment including (1) education on local obesity treatment resources (n = 78, 73%), evidence-based dietary counseling strategies (n = 67, 63%), and effective self-help resources (n = 75, 70%) and (2) enhanced team-based care with support from clinic staff (n = 53, 46%), peers trained in obesity medicine (n = 47, 44%), and dietitians (n = 58, 54%). PCPs also desired increased reimbursement for obesity treatment. While 40% (n = 39) of survey respondents expressed interest in obesity medicine training and certification through the American Board of Obesity Medicine, qualitative interviewees felt that pursuing training would require dedicated time (i.e., reduced clinical effort) and financial support.ConclusionsOpportunities to improve obesity treatment in primary care settings include educational initiatives, use of team-based care models, and policy changes to incentivize obesity treatment. Primary care clinics or health systems should be encouraged to identify PCPs with specific interests in obesity medicine and support their training and certification through ABOM by reimbursing training costs and reducing clinical effort to allow for study and board examination.

Project description:BackgroundThe provision of palliative care is increasing, with many people dying in community-based settings. It is essential that communication is effective if and when patients transition from hospice to community palliative care. Past research has indicated that communication issues are prevalent during hospital discharges, but little is known about hospice discharges.MethodsAn explanatory sequential mixed methods study consisting of a retrospective review of hospice discharge letters, followed by hospice focus groups, to explore patterns in communication of palliative care needs of discharged patients and describe why these patients were being discharged. Discharge letters were extracted for key content information using a standardised form. Letters were then examined for language patterns using a linguistic methodology termed corpus linguistics. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the focus group transcripts. Findings were triangulated to develop an explanatory understanding of discharge communication from hospice care.ResultsWe sampled 250 discharge letters from five UK hospices whereby patients had been discharged to primary care. Twenty-five staff took part in focus groups. The main reasons for discharge extracted from the letters were symptoms "managed/resolved" (75.2%), and/or the "patient wishes to die/for care at home" (37.2%). Most patients had some form of physical needs documented on the letters (98.4%) but spiritual needs were rarely documented (2.4%). Psychological/emotional needs and social needs were documented in 46.4 and 35.6% of letters respectively. There was sometimes ambiguity in "who" will be following up "what" in the discharge letters, and whether described patients' needs were resolved or ongoing for managing in the community setting. The extent to which patients received a copy of their discharge letter varied. Focus groups conveyed a lack of consensus on what constitutes "complexity" and "complex pain".ConclusionsThe content and structure of discharge letters varied between hospices, although generally focused on physical needs. Our study provides insights into patterns associated with those discharged from hospice, and how policy and guidance in this area may be improved, such as greater consistency of sharing letters with patients. A patient-centred set of hospice-specific discharge letter principles could help improve future practice.

Project description:BackgroundChildren are scheduled to receive 18-20 immunizations before their 18th birthday in England and Wales; this approximates to 13 million vaccines administered per annum. Each immunization represents a potential opportunity for immunization-related error and effective immunization is imperative to maintain the public health benefit from immunization. Using data from a national reporting system, this study aimed to characterize pediatric immunization-related safety incident reports from primary care in England and Wales between 2002 and 2013.MethodsA cross-sectional mixed methods study was undertaken. This comprised reading the free-text of incident reports and applying codes to describe incident type, potential contributory factors, harm severity, and incident outcomes. A subsequent thematic analysis was undertaken to interpret the most commonly occurring codes, such as those describing the incident, events leading up to it and reported contributory factors, within the contexts they were described.ResultsWe identified 1745 reports and most (n=1077, 61.7%) described harm outcomes including three deaths, 67 reports of moderate harm and 1007 reports of low harm. Failure of timely vaccination was the potential cause of three child deaths from meningitis and pneumonia, and described in a further 113 reports. Vaccine administration incidents included the wrong number of doses (n=476, 27.3%), wrong timing (n=294, 16.8%), and wrong vaccine (n=249, 14.3%). Documentation failures were frequently implicated. Socially and medically vulnerable children were commonly described.ConclusionThis is the largest examination of reported contributory factors for immunization-related patient safety incidents in children. Our findings suggest investments in IT infrastructure to support data linkage and identification of risk predictors, development of consultation models that promote the role of parents in mitigating safety incidents, and improvement efforts to adapt and adopt best practices from elsewhere, are needed to mitigate future immunization-related patient safety incidents. These priorities are particularly pressing for vulnerable patient groups.

Project description:BackgroundDespite effective psychosocial interventions, gaps in access to care persist for youth and families in need. Behavioral intervention technologies (BITs) that apply psychosocial intervention strategies using technological features represent a modality for targeted prevention that is promising for the transformation of primary care behavioral health by empowering parents to take charge of the behavioral health care of their children. To realize the potential of BITs for parents, research is needed to understand the status quo of parental self-help and parent-provider collaboration to address behavioral health challenges and unmet parental needs that could be addressed by BITs.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to conduct foundational research with parents and health care stakeholders (HCS) to discover current practices and unmet needs related to common behavioral health challenges to inform the design, build, and testing of BITs to address these care gaps within a predominantly rural health system.MethodsWe conducted a convergent mixed-parallel study within a large, predominantly rural health system in which the BITs will be developed and implemented. We analyzed data from parent surveys (N=385) on current practices and preferences related to behavioral health topics to be addressed in BITs along with focus group data of 48 HCS in 9 clinics regarding internal and external contextual factors contributing to unmet parental needs and current practices. By comparing and relating the findings, we formed interpretations that will inform subsequent BIT development activities.ResultsParents frequently endorsed several behavioral health topics, and several topics were relatively more or less frequently endorsed based on the child's age. The HCS suggested that BITs may connect families with evidence-based guidance sooner and indicated that a web-based platform aligns with how parents already seek behavioral health guidance. Areas of divergence between parents and HCS were related to internalizing problems and cross-cutting issues such as parenting stress, which may be more difficult for health care HCS to detect or address because of the time constraints of routine medical visits.ConclusionsThese findings provide a rich understanding of the complexity involved in meeting parents' needs for behavioral health guidance in a primary care setting using BITs. User testing studies for BIT prototypes are needed to successfully design, build, and test effective BITs to empower parents to take charge of promoting the behavioral health of their children.

Project description:BackgroundThe effect of internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) on anxiety in adults is well-known. However, patient dropouts and poor adherence to treatment are common. Feelings of belonging and empowerment from the treatment might be key to the completion of iCBT. Peer support workers are people with a personal experience of mental health problems, trained to provide professional support to people who require mental health care.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess patient experiences; the feasibility, safety, and acceptability; and preliminary effectiveness on anxiety and depression, empowerment, and adherence to treatment in an 8-week peer-supported iCBT program for patients with anxiety disorders treated in primary care.MethodsThis was a single-arm mixed methods feasibility study. Participants were patients referred to a central unit for iCBT in primary care. Quantitative data were collected pre-, post-, and 3 months postintervention. Qualitative data were collected through semistructured interviews.ResultsA total of 9 participants completed the quantitative outcome assessment. Statistically significant improvements were observed in perceived empowerment at a 3-month follow-up, and significant decreases in anxiety, depression, and psychological distress at the end of the treatment were maintained at a 3-month follow-up. In total, 8 of the 9 patients showed improvement in the severity of their symptoms of anxiety. Adherence to treatment was good among the participants. No serious adverse events were reported. Eight participants were enrolled in the qualitative analysis. The qualitative results showed 3 main themes: (1) real contact in an online world, (2) empowering experiences, and (3) being behind the wheel. Qualitative results largely emphasized the personal relationship and supported the acceptability of adding peer support to iCBT.ConclusionsPeer support in digital treatment seems to be a safe and acceptable intervention. The preliminary results suggest the effectiveness of peer support on patient empowerment, anxiety, depression, psychological distress, and adherence to treatment. The results indicate the need for future studies to evaluate the effect of adding peer support to iCBT in larger randomized controlled trials.