Dataset Information

Management of penicillin allergy in primary care: a qualitative study with patients and primary care physicians.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Six 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.

Methods

We conducted an interview study with 31 patients with a penicillin allergy record, and 19 PCPs in the North of England. Data were analysed thematically.

Results

Patients 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.

Conclusions

PCPs 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.

SUBMITTER: Wanat M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8194168 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo elicit perspectives of family physicians and patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) on KOA, its treatment/management and the use of a mobile health application (app) to help patients self-manage their KOA.DesignA qualitative study using Cognitive Task Analysis for physician interviews and peer-to-peer semistructured interviews for patients according to the Patient and Community Engagement Research (PaCER) method.SettingPrimary care practices and patient researchers at an academic centre in Southern Alberta.ParticipantsIntentional sampling of family physicians (n=4; 75% women) and patients with KOA who had taken part in previous PaCER studies and had experienced knee pain on most days of the month at any time in the past (n=5; 60% women).ResultsPhysician and patient views about KOA were starkly contrasting. Patient participants expressed that KOA seriously impacted their lives and lifestyles, and they wanted their knee pain to be considered as important as other health problems. In contrast, physicians uniformly conceptualised KOA as a relatively minor health problem, although they still recognised it as a painful condition that often limits patients' activities. Consequently, physicians did not regard KOA as a condition to be proactively and aggressively managed. The gap between physicians' and patients' conceptualisation of KOA and its treatment extended to the use of an app for self-management. While patients were supportive of the app, physicians were sceptical of its use and focused more on accountability and patient resources.ConclusionsThe clear discord between physicians' mental models and patients' lived experience and perceived needs around KOA emphasised a gap in understanding and communication about treatment and management of KOA. As such, this preliminary and formative research will inform a codesign approach to develop an app that will act as a communications tool between patients and physicians, enabling patient-physician discussions regarding modifiable self-management options based on a patient's perspectives and needs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide. In Canada, more than half of all health care spending is used for managing chronic diseases. Although studies have shown that the use of advanced features of electronic medical record (EMR) systems improves the quality of chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM), a 2012 international survey found that Canadian physicians were the least likely to use 2 or more EMR system functions. Some studies show that maturity vis-à-vis clinicians' EMR use is an important factor when evaluating the use of advanced features of health information systems. The Clinical Adoption Framework (CAF), a common evaluation framework used to assess the success of EMR adoption, does not incorporate the process of maturing. Nevertheless, the CAF and studies that discuss the barriers to and facilitators of the adoption of EMR systems can be the basis for exploring the use of advanced EMR features. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to explore the factors that primary care physicians in Ontario identified as influencing their use of advanced EMR features to support CDPM and to extend the CAF to include primary care physicians' perceptions of how their use of EMRs for performing clinical tasks has matured. METHODS:Guided by the CAF, directed content analysis was used to explore the barriers and facilitating factors encountered by primary care physicians when using EMR features. Participants were primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada, who use EMRs. Data were coded using categories from the CAF. RESULTS:A total of 9 face-to-face interviews were conducted from January 2017 to July 2017. Dimensions from the CAF emerged from the data, and one new dimension was derived: physicians' perception of their maturity of EMR use. Primary care physicians identified the following key factors that impacted their use of advanced EMR features: performance of EMR features, information quality of EMR features, training and technical support, user satisfaction, provider's productivity, personal characteristics and roles, cost benefits of EMR features, EMR systems infrastructure, funding, and government leadership. CONCLUSIONS:The CAF was extended to include physicians' perceptions of how their use of EMR systems had matured. Most participants agreed that their use of EMR systems for performing clinical tasks had evolved since their adoption of the system and that certain system features facilitated their care for patients with chronic diseases. However, several barriers were identified and should be addressed to further enhance primary care physicians' use of advanced EMR features to support CDPM.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary care providers (PCPs) often take the lead role in caring for patients with overweight and obesity; however, few PCPs counsel patients about weight loss. Online weight management programs that are integrated within primary care may help address this gap in care. OBJECTIVE:To identify perceptions of and experience with online weight management programs in general and with a proposed online program, to identify barriers to use, and to improve the design and content of our intervention, which included an online program plus population health management (PHM) support from primary care practices. DESIGN:A mixed qualitative methods study including three patient focus groups and seven semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 13 adult patients (age range, 20-70) with body mass index (BMI) 27-35 kg/m2 attended the focus groups. In-person semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven healthcare providers (three PCPs, two population health managers, one primary care nurse, and one registered dietitian). MAIN MEASURES:We developed and used semi-structured focus groups and interview guides. The focus group and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Using grounded theory, we analyzed the transcripts to identify and extract common concepts and themes. KEY RESULTS:Although patients and healthcare providers expressed positive opinions about online weight management programs, few patients had experience with them, and providers stated that such programs are not being widely implemented in primary care settings. Some participants highlighted the flexibility and low cost as strengths of online weight management tools compared with in-person programs. All participants had favorable opinions about our proposed intervention and were overwhelmingly positive about the combination of an online program and PHM support. CONCLUSIONS:This study highlights the potential value of online weight management programs and PHM support in primary care. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:NCT02656693.