Dataset Information

COVI-Prim survey: Challenges for Austrian and German general practitioners during initial phase of COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a significant challenge to health care systems around the world. A well-functioning primary care system is crucial in epidemic situations as it plays an important role in the development of a system-wide response.

Methods

2,187 Austrian and German GPs answered an internet survey on preparedness, testing, staff protection, perception of risk, self-confidence, a decrease in the number of patient contacts, and efforts to control the spread of the virus in the practice during the early phase of the COVID-pandemic (3rd to 30th April).

Results

The completion rate of the questionnaire was high (90.9%). GPs gave low ratings to their preparedness for a pandemic, testing of suspected cases and efforts to protect staff. The provision of information to GPs and the perception of risk were rated as moderate. On the other hand, the participants rated their self-confidence, a decrease in patient contacts and their efforts to control the spread of the disease highly.

Conclusion

Primary care is an important resource for dealing with a pandemic like COVID-19. The workforce is confident and willing to take an active role, but needs to be provided with the appropriate surrounding conditions. This will require that certain conditions are met.

Registration

Trial registration at the German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00021231.

SUBMITTER: Siebenhofer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8191874 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The prevalence of chronic stress among German general practitioners (GPs) was shown to be twice as high as in the general population. Because chronic stress negatively influences well-being and poor physician well-being is associated with poor patient outcomes, targeted strategies are needed. This analysis focuses on work-related factors associated with high chronic stress in GPs. METHODS:This cross-sectional study measured chronic stress among German GPs using the validated and standardized Trier Inventory for the Assessment of Chronic Stress (TICS-SSCS). Based on the TICS, GPs were categorized as either having low strain (≤ 25th percentile) or high strain (≥ 75th percentile) due to chronic stress. Questions on work-related challenges assessed the frequency and the subjectively perceived strain of single challenges. For exploratory analyses, these items were combined to dichotomous variables reflecting challenges that are common and that cause high strain. Variables significant in bivariate analyses were included in a multivariate logistic regression model analyzing their association with high chronic stress. RESULTS:Data of 109 GPs categorized as having low strain (n = 53) or high strain (n = 56) due to chronic stress were analyzed. Based on bivariate analyses, challenges regarding personnel matters, practice software, complexity of patients, difficult patients, care facilities, scheduling of appointments, keeping medical records up-to-date, fee structures, and expectations versus reality of care were included in the regression model. Keeping medical records up-to-date had the strongest association with high chronic stress (odds ratio 4.95, 95% confidence interval 1.29-19.06). A non-significant trend showed that medicolegal investigations were more common among GPs with high chronic stress. CONCLUSIONS:This exploratory research shows that chronic stress is predominantly associated with administrative challenges. Treatment documentation, which represents a legal safeguard and is closely linked to existential concerns, has the strongest influence.

Project description:Well-being is a major issue among health care professionals, especially physicians. Less job satisfaction and impaired health can have an impact on health care quality. Our aim was to examine the association of stressors (illegitimate tasks) and health related resources (work-related sense of coherence; recovery experience) with life satisfaction, happiness, job satisfaction and burnout among German general practitioners (GPs). We conducted a cross-sectional survey among general medical practices in Germany. Main outcome measures were life satisfaction, happiness (Subjective Happiness Scale), job satisfaction (Work Satisfaction Scale) and burnout (Copenhagen Burnout Inventory). 548 GPs from across Germany participated (53.6% males, 45.6% females; mostly representative of German GPs). One third (35.2%) of the participants reported a high prevalence of personal, and one quarter (26.5%) indicated a high prevalence of work-related burnout symptoms. Illegitimate tasks are negatively associated with life and job satisfaction and are positively associated with personal, work-related and patient-related burnout among GPs. Work-SoC and recovery experience are positively associated with life satisfaction, happiness, and job satisfaction and are negatively associated with personal, work-related and patient-related burnout. Female physicians have a higher job satisfaction than male physicians. Being female and working as an employed physician is associated with a higher prevalence of personal burnout symptoms. GPs working in a group practice are happier and more satisfied with their job than GPs in single practices. Personal, work-related and patient-related burnout symptoms are stronger in GPs working in a single practice than in GPs in group practices. Our results highlight that Work-SoC, recovery experience and illegitimate tasks are important for creating work-related well-being among GPs. Introducing health promotion activities which aim to strengthen recovery experience and Work-SoC, as well as interventions to restructure tasks, may increase life satisfaction, happiness, and job satisfaction and reduce burnout symptoms in this health care profession.

Project description:Background General practitioners are considered to be well suited when it comes to addressing the information and care needs of family caregivers. The aim of the present study is to examine how general practitioners assess their possibilities to support caregivers, what priorities they set and to what extent they experience challenges.Methods and participants In the course of an online survey with a postal cover letter, a total of 3,556 GPs in in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate were interviewed between February and June 2021. Due to the exploratory approach of the study, only a descriptive data analysis was carried out.Results 68 % of the GPs surveyed often deal with family caregivers in everyday practice; 77 % consider the GP's office to be well suited as the primary point of contact for family caregivers and care coordination. Often it is caregiving relatives who ask the GP about the issue of care (89 %). Frequent contents concern a deterioration in the care situation (75 %) and a change in the need for care (84 %); consultations in the initial phase of care are less common (40 %). There are differences between urban and rural doctors in the perception of the needs of caregivers and the setting of priorities. Rural doctors give more weight to proactive and psychosocial care, whereas doctors in urban regions rely on the specialist and support network. GPs experience various challenges while supporting caregivers, including the timely organization of suitable relief offers (87 %), the referral to suitable offers of help (79 %) or the early identification of informal caregivers (59 %).Discussion GPs can play a central role in supporting family caregivers. A crucial prerequisite for this is that family caregivers are recognized and involved at an early stage. Consistent references to offers of help make it easier for family caregivers to organize care and to receive (psychosocial) support. In addition, it is important that GPs take into account the needs, desires and stresses of both caregivers and those being cared for.

Project description:Background: Particularly during the early and middle stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, a population's compliance with precautionary measures (e.g., hygiene rules, smart working, travel restrictions, and quarantine) is paramount in preventing the virus from spreading. Objective: The investigation and documentation of different socio-demographic and personality-specific factors in regards to preventative measures and consequent specific health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the Health Belief Model. Method: An online survey was conducted on N = 3,006 individuals living in Germany and Austria during the early stages of lockdown. The questionnaire consisted of a self-administered section, exploring the dimensions posited in the Health Belief Model: perceived severity, perceived susceptibility, perceived barriers, perceived benefits of health-promoting measures, and engagement in health-promoting behaviors. Additionally, the following standardized scales were used to record personality determinants: the Stress Coping Style Questionnaire SVF 78 to evaluate coping and processing strategies in stressful circumstances, the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) to assess the emotional state induced by the coronavirus crisis, the UI-18 scale to diagnose the intolerance of uncertainty, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) to assess anxiety. Results: In line with the Health Belief model, four groups were created based on perceived susceptibility and engagement in health-promoting behaviors, and consequently studied in relation to personality determinants. Those four groups differed significantly in regards to almost all personality dimensions (p ≤ 0.005). Group 1 (n = 450) shows a reduced engagement with protective measures and displays underestimation of the COVID-19-pandemic. Group 2 (n = 984) displays many positive personality variables and high compliance with protective measures. Group 3 (n = 468) perceives the subjective risk of disease as high, but high emotional discomfort and stress caused by the protective measures leads to the activation of a complex fear defense. Group 4 (n = 1,004) is highly anxious and therefore compliant. Conclusion: This typification has implications for establishing the appropriate support systems. This is particularly important to encourage compliance with preventive regulations within the groups, which showed poor abidance for several reasons. For Group 1, further education on the realistic threat and efficient protective measures is as central as the fostering of empathy for others; with its resource-conscious exemplary behavior Group 2 could be used as a positive social role model. Group 3 would benefit from promoting self-care, while Group 4 requires information on psychosocial assistance availability in order to mitigate the high stress to which the group members are subjected.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic imposed an acute, sharp rise in the use of video consultations (VCs) by general practitioners (GPs) in Norway.ObjectiveThis study aims to document GPs' experiences with the large-scale uptake of VCs in the natural experiment context of the pandemic.MethodsA nationwide, cross-sectional online survey was conducted among Norwegian GPs during the pandemic lockdown (April 14-May 3, 2020). Each respondent was asked to evaluate up to 10 VCs. Basic demographic characteristics of the GPs and their practices were collected. The associations between GPs' perceived suitability of the VCs, the nature of the patients' main problems, prior knowledge of the patients (relational continuity), and follow-up of previously presented problems (episodic continuity) were explored using descriptive statistics, diagrams, and chi-square tests.ResultsIn total, 1237 GPs (26% of the target group) responded to the survey. Among these, 1000 GPs offered VCs, and 855 GPs evaluated a total of 3484 VCs. Most GPs who offered VCs (1000/1237; 81%) had no experience with VCs before the pandemic. Overall, 51% (1766/3476) of the evaluated VCs were considered to have similar or even better suitability to assess the main reason for contact, compared to face-to-face consultations. In the presence of relational continuity, VCs were considered equal to or better than face-to-face consultations in 57% (1011/1785) of cases, as opposed to 32% (87/274) when the patient was unknown. The suitability rate for follow-up consultations (episodic continuity) was 61% (1165/1919), compared to 35% (544/1556) for new patient problems. Suitability varied considerably across clinical contact reasons. VCs were found most suitable for anxiety and life stress, depression, and administrative purposes, as well as for longstanding or complex problems that normally require multiple follow-up consultations. The GPs estimate that they will conduct about 20% of their consultations by video in a future, nonpandemic setting.ConclusionsOur study of VCs performed in general practice during the pandemic lockdown indicates a clear future role for VCs in nonpandemic settings. The strong and consistent association between continuity of care and GPs' perceptions of the suitability of VCs is a new and important finding with considerable relevance for future primary health care planning.

Project description:BackgroundDespite considerable efforts to promote and support guideline use, adherence is often suboptimal. Barriers to adherence vary not only across guidelines but also across recommendations within guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess the perceived barriers to guideline adherence among GPs by focusing on key recommendations within guidelines.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey among 703 GPs in the Netherlands. Sixteen key recommendations were derived from four national guidelines. Six statements were included to address the attitudes towards guidelines in general. In addition, GPs were asked to rate their perceived adherence (one statement) and the perceived barriers (fourteen statements) for each of the key recommendations, based on an existing framework.Results264 GPs (38%) completed the questionnaire. Although 35% of the GPs reported difficulties in changing routines and habits to follow guidelines, 89% believed that following guidelines leads to improved patient care. Perceived adherence varied between 52 and 95% across recommendations (mean: 77%). The most perceived barriers were related to external factors, in particular patient ability and behaviour (mean: 30%) and patient preferences (mean: 23%). Lack of applicability of recommendations in general (mean: 22%) and more specifically to individual patients (mean: 25%) were also frequently perceived as barriers. The scores on perceived barriers differed largely between recommendations [minimum range 14%; maximum range 67%].ConclusionsDutch GPs have a positive attitude towards the NHG guidelines, report high adherence rates and low levels of perceived barriers. However, the perceived adherence and perceived barriers varied largely across recommendations. The most perceived barriers across recommendations are patient related, suggesting that current guidelines do not always adequately incorporate patient preferences, needs and abilities. It may be useful to provide tools such as decision aids, supporting the flexible use of guidelines to individual patients in practice.