Patients' experiences of the choice of GP practice pilot, 2012/2013: a mixed methods evaluation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tan S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4322193 | biostudies-other | 2015 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Patients' experiences of the choice of GP practice pilot, 2012/2013: a mixed methods evaluation.
Tan Stefanie S Erens Bob B Wright Michael M Mays Nicholas N
BMJ open 20150209 2
<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate patients' experiences of the choice of general practitioner (GP) practice pilot.<h4>Design</h4>Mixed-method, cross-sectional study.<h4>Setting</h4>Patients in the UK National Health Service (NHS) register with a general practice responsible for their primary medical care and practices set geographic boundaries. In 2012/2013, 43 volunteer general practices in four English NHS primary care trusts (PCTs) piloted a scheme allowing patients living outside practice bo ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimsHeart failure (HF) is an important health problem for which multidisciplinary care is recommended, yet few studies involve primary care practitioners in the multidisciplinary management of HF. We set up a multifaceted prospective observational trial, OSCAR-HF, piloting audit and feedback, natriuretic peptide testing at the point of care, and the assistance of a specialist HF nurse in primary care. The aim was to optimize HF care in general practice.Methods and resultsThis is an analysis at 6 month follow-up of the study interventions of the OSCAR-HF pilot study, a nonrandomized, noncontrolled prospective observational trial conducted in eight Belgian general practices [51 general practitioners (GPs)]. Patients who were assessed by their GP to have HF constituted the OSCAR-HF study population. We used descriptive statistics and mixed-effects modelling for the quantitative analysis and thematic analysis of the focus group interviews. There was a 10.2% increase in the registered HF population after 6 months of follow-up (n = 593) compared with baseline (n = 538) and a 27% increase in objectified HF diagnoses (baseline n = 359 to 456 at T6 M). Natriuretic peptide testing (with or without referral) accounted for 54% (n = 60/111) of the newly registered HF diagnoses. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction who received their target dosage of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors or beta-blockers at 6 months compared with baseline (P = 0.9). Patients who received an HF nurse intervention (n = 53) had significantly worse quality of life at baseline [difference in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score 9.2 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0, 14] and had a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up [change in MLHFQ score -9.8 points; 95% CI -15, -4.5] than patients without an HF nurse intervention. GPs found audit and feedback valuable but time intensive. Natriuretic peptides were useful, but the point-of-care test was impractical, and the assistance of an HF nurse was a useful addition to routine HF care.ConclusionsThe use of audit and feedback combined with natriuretic peptide testing was a successful strategy to increase the number of registered and objectified HF diagnoses at 6 months. GPs and HF nurses selected patients with worse quality-of-life scores at baseline for the HF nurse intervention, which led to a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up compared with patients without an HF nurse intervention. The interventions were deemed feasible and useful by the participating GPs with some specific remarks that can be used for optimization.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02905786), registered on 14 September 2016 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/.
| S-EPMC10053264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Failure to recruit sufficient applicants to general practice (GP) training has been a problem both nationally and internationally for many years and undermining of GP is one possible contributing factor. The aim of our study was to ascertain what comments, both negative and positive, are being made in UK clinical settings to GP trainees about GP and to further explore these comments and their influence on career choice. METHODOLOGY:We conducted a mixed methods study. We surveyed all foundation doctors and GP trainees within one region of Health Education England regarding any comments they experienced relating to a career in GP. We also conducted six focus groups with early GP trainees to discuss any comments that they experienced and whether these comments had any influence on their or others career choice. RESULTS:Positive comments reported by trainees centred around the concept that choosing GP is a positive, family-focused choice which facilities a good work-life balance. Workload was the most common negative comment, alongside the notion of being 'just a GP'; the belief that GP is boring, a waste of training and a second-class career choice. The reasons for and origin of the comments are multifactorial in nature. Thematic analysis of the focus groups identified key factors such as previous exposure to and experience of GP, family members who were GPs, GP role models, demographics of the clinician and referral behaviour. Trainees perceived that negative comments may be discouraging others from choosing GP as a career. CONCLUSION:Our study demonstrates that negative comments towards GP as a career do exist within clinical settings and are having a potential impact on poor recruitment rates to GP training. We have identified areas in which further negative comments could be prevented by changing perceptions of GP as a career. Additional time spent in GP as undergraduates and postgraduates, and positive GP role models, could particularly benefit recruitment. We recommend that undermining of GP as a career choice be approached with a zero-tolerance policy.
| S-EPMC5722080 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based medicine (EBM) is a core skillset for enhancing the quality and safety of patients' care. Online EBM education could improve clinicians' skills in EBM, particularly when it is conducted during vocational training. There are limited studies on the impact of online EBM training on clinical practice among general practitioner (GP) registrars (trainees in specialist general practice). We aimed to describe and evaluate the acceptability, utility, satisfaction and applicability of the GP registrars experience with the online course. The course was developed by content-matter experts with educational designers to encompass effective teaching methods (e.g. it was interactive and used multiple teaching methods).MethodsMixed-method data collection was conducted after individual registrars' completion of the course. The course comprised six modules that aimed to increase knowledge of research methods and application of EBM skills to everyday practice. GP registrars who completed the online course during 2016-2020 were invited to complete an online survey about their experience and satisfaction with the course. Those who completed the course within the six months prior to data collection were invited to participate in semi-structured phone interviews about their experience with the course and the impact of the course on clinical practice. A thematic analysis approach was used to analyse the data from qualitative interviews.ResultsThe data showed the registrars were generally positive towards the course and the concept of EBM. They stated that the course improved their confidence, knowledge, and skills and consequently impacted their practice. The students perceived the course increased their understanding of EBM with a Cohen's d of 1.6. Registrars identified factors that influenced the impact of the course. Of those, some were GP-related including their perception of EBM, and being comfortable with what they already learnt; some were work-place related such as time, the influence of supervisors, access to resources; and one was related to patient preferences.ConclusionsThis study showed that GP registrars who attended the online course reported that it improved their knowledge, confidence, skill and practice of EBM over the period of three months. The study highlights the supervisor's role on GP registrars' ability in translating the EBM skills learnt in to practice and suggests exploring the effect of EBM training for supervisors.
| S-EPMC8439372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVirtual care was rapidly integrated into pediatric health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. While virtual care offers many benefits, it is necessary to better understand the experiences of those who receive, deliver, and coordinate virtual care in order to support sustainable, high-quality, and patient-centered health care. To date, methods implemented to evaluate users' experiences of virtual care have been highly variable, making comparison and data synthesis difficult.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe evaluation strategies currently used to understand personal experiences with pediatric virtual care in Canada.MethodsIn this mixed methods environmental scan, we first distributed a web-based questionnaire to clinical, research, and operational leaders delivering and evaluating pediatric virtual care in Canada. The questionnaire collected information about how experiences with virtual care have been or are currently being evaluated and whether these evaluations included the perspectives of children or youth, families, providers, or support staff. Second, respondents were asked to share the questions they used in their evaluations, and a content analysis was performed to identify common question categories. Third, we conducted semistructured interviews to further explore our respondents' evaluation experiences across 4 domains-evaluation approaches, distribution methods, response rates, and lessons learned-and interest in a core set of questions for future evaluations.ResultsThere were 72 respondents to the web-based questionnaire; among those who had conducted an evaluation, we identified 15 unique evaluations, and 14 of those provided a copy of the tools used to evaluate virtual care. These evaluations measured the virtual care experiences of parents or caregivers (n=15, 100%), children or youth (n=11, 73%), health care providers (n=11, 73%), and support staff (n=4, 27%). The most common data collection method used was electronic questionnaires distributed by email. Two respondents used validated tools; the remainder modified existing tools or developed new tools. Content analysis of the 14 submitted questionnaires revealed that the most common questions were about overall participant satisfaction, the comparison of virtual care to in-person care, and whether participants would choose virtual care options in the future. Interview findings indicate respondents frequently relied on methods used by peers and that a standardized, core set of questions to evaluate experiences with virtual care would be helpful to improve evaluation practices and support pediatric health care delivery.ConclusionsAt our institution and elsewhere in Canada, experiences with pediatric virtual care have been evaluated using a variety of methods. A more consistent evaluation approach using standardized tools may enable more regular comparisons of experiences with virtual care and the synthesis of findings across health care settings. In turn, this may better inform our approach to virtual care, improve its integration into health systems, and facilitate sustainable, high-quality, patient-centered care.
| S-EPMC10500354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2014 Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (i.e., "Choice") allows eligible Veterans to receive covered health care outside the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System. The initial implementation of Choice was challenging, and use was limited in the first year.ObjectiveTo assess satisfaction with Choice, and identify reasons for satisfaction and dissatisfaction during its early implementation.Design and participantsSemi-structured telephone interviews from July to September 2015 with Choice-eligible Veterans from 25 VA facilities across the USA.Main measuresSatisfaction was assessed with 5-point Likert scales and open-ended questions. We compared ratings of satisfaction with Choice and VA health care, and identified reasons for satisfaction/dissatisfaction with Choice in a thematic analysis of open-ended qualitative data.ResultsOf 195 participants, 35 had not attempted to use Choice; 43 attempted but had not received Choice care (i.e., attempted only); and 117 attempted and received Choice care. Among those who attempted only, a smaller percentage were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice than with VA health care (17.9% and 71.8%, p < 0.001); among participants who received Choice, similar percentages were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice and VA health care (66.6% and 71.1%, p = 0.45). When asked what contributed to Choice ratings, participants who attempted but did not receive Choice care reported poor access (50%), scheduling problems (20%), and care coordination issues (10%); participants who received Choice care reported improved access (27%), good quality of care (19%), and good distance to Choice provider (16%). Regardless of receipt of Choice care, most participants expressed interest in using Choice in the future (70-82%).ConclusionsAccess and scheduling barriers contributed to dissatisfaction for Veterans unsuccessfully attempting to use Choice during its initial implementation, whereas improved access and good care contributed to satisfaction for those receiving Choice care. With Veterans' continued interest in using services outside VA facilities, subsequent policy changes should address Veterans' barriers to care.
| S-EPMC6712120 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAn evaluation of a short animated film on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) to explore attitudes and sentiment towards the film including, for a subsample of professionals, associations between attitudes and personal experience of ACEs.DesignMixed-method exploratory design.SettingProfessionals and the general public.ParticipantsA short online survey with 239 professionals. Interaction and user sentiment towards with the film on social media (Twitter, YouTube).Primary and secondary outcome measuresSurvey: participants' attitudes towards the film including feelings invoked, learning gained and ACE count prevalence. Twitter user and YouTube viewer sentiment (positive, negative or neutral) and interaction (likes, retweets or comments) with the film.ResultsAttitudes to the film were positive: 94.1% and 93.7%, respectively, agreed that it provided a helpful explanation of ACEs and trusted that the film was credible. Of those who reported ACE exposure, 88.9% agreed that those with ACEs would benefit from watching the film. Despite 50.6% reporting that the film had made them feel sad or upset, the majority (66.4%) reported they found the film hopeful or encouraging. Across 358 publicly available tweets from 313 users, 39.1% of tweets expressed positive sentiment, with only 1.4% negative (59.5% neutral). However, there was no association between tweet sentiment and interaction. Thirteen YouTube versions of the film received 171 812 views, 97.3% (n=889/914) ratings were positive (ie, 'thumbs up').ConclusionsDespite being emotionally arousing, many professionals reflected positive impacts of the film including a perceived increased ability to discuss ACEs. Public sentiment demonstrated a positive reaction to and acceptability of the film. Understanding the professional and public response to materials developed to increase ACE awareness, such as the film explored here, is important given the growing number of international movements which seek to increase ACE awareness, prevent ACEs and mitigate their lifelong negative effects.
| S-EPMC8372873 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising steeply. National Health Service England (NHSE) is exploring the potential of a digital diabetes prevention programme (DDPP) and has commissioned a pilot with embedded evaluation.Methods and analysisThis study aims to determine whether, and if so, how, should NHSE implement a national DDPP, using a mixed-methods pretest and post-test design, underpinned by two theoretical frameworks: the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy of behavioural change techniques for the digital interventions and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for implementation processes. In eight pilot areas across England, adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 42-47 mmol/mol or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) and adults without NDH who are overweight (body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m2) or obese (BMI >30 kg/m2) will be referred to one of five digitally delivered diabetes prevention interventions. The primary outcomes are reduction in HbA1c and weight (for people with NDH) and reduction in weight (for people who are overweight or obese) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include use of the intervention, satisfaction, physical activity, patient activation and resources needed for successful implementation. Quantitative data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months by the digital intervention providers. Qualitative data will be collected through semistructured interviews with commissioners, providers, healthcare professionals and patients. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and using generalised linear models to determine whether changes in outcomes are associated with demographic and intervention factors. Qualitative data will be analysed using framework analysis, with data pertaining to implementation mapped onto the CFIR.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received ethical approval from the Public Health England Ethics and Research Governance Group (reference R&D 324). Dissemination will include a report to NHSE to inform future policy and publication in peer-reviewed journals.
| S-EPMC6538049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesEvidence in the literature suggests that satisfaction with postgraduate general practice (GP) training is associated with the quality of the educational environment. This study aimed to examine GP registrars' level of satisfaction with a distributed model of training in a regional educational environment and investigate the relationship between satisfaction and academic performance.Study designA longitudinal 3-year study was conducted among GP registrars at James Cook University using a sequential explanatory mixed methods research design. GP registrars' satisfaction was obtained using the scan of postgraduate educational environment domains tool. A focus group discussion was conducted to explore GP registrars' perceptions of satisfaction with the educational environment.SettingJames Cook University General Practice Training (JCU GPT) programme.ParticipantsSix hundred and fifty one (651) GP registrars enrolled between 2016 and 2018 at JCU GPT programme.Results651 registrars completed the satisfaction survey between 2016 and 2018. Overall, 92% of the registrars were satisfied with the educational training environment. Registrars who had become fellows reported higher satisfaction levels compared with those who were still in training (mean=4.39 vs 4.20, p=0.001). However, academic performance had no impact on level of satisfaction with the educational environment. Similarly, practice location did not influence registrars' satisfaction rates. Four themes (rich rural/remote educational environment, supportive learning environment, readiness to continue with rural practice and practice culture) emerged from the thematic data analysis.ConclusionA clinical learning environment that focuses on and supports individual learning needs is vital for effective postgraduate medical training. This study suggests that JCU GPT programme's distributed model fostered a satisfying and supportive training environment with rich educational experiences that enhance retention of GP registrars in rural/remote North Queensland, Australia. The findings of this study may be applicable to other settings with similar training models.
| S-EPMC7887342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Mealtimes are important to quality of life for residents in long-term care (LTC). CHOICE (which stands for Connecting, Honouring dignity, Offering support, supporting Identity, Creating opportunities, and Enjoyment) is a multi-component intervention to improve relationship-centred care (RCC) and overall mealtime experience for residents. The objective of this developmental evaluation was to determine: a) if the dining experience (e.g. physical, social and RCC practices) could be modified with the CHOICE Program, and b) how program components needed to be adapted and/or if new components were required. METHODS:A mixed methods study conducted between April-November 2016 included two home areas (64 residents; 25 care staff/home management) within a single LTC home in Ontario. Mealtime Scan (MTS), which measures mealtime experience at the level of the dining room, was used to evaluate the effectiveness of CHOICE implementation at four time points. Change in physical, social, RCC dining environment ratings and overall quality of the mealtime experience over time was determined with linear mixed-effects analyses (i.e., repeated measures). Semi-structured interviews (n?=?9) were conducted with home staff to identify what components of the intervention worked well and what improvements could be made. RESULTS:Physical and overall mealtime environment ratings showed improvement over time in both areas; one home area also improved social ratings (p?<?0.05). Interviews revealed in-depth insights into the program and implementation process: i) Knowing the context and culture to meet staff and resident needs; ii) Getting everyone on board, including management; iii) Keeping communication lines open throughout the process; iv) Sharing responsibility and accountability for mealtime goals and challenges; v) Empowering and supporting staff's creative mealtime initiatives. CONCLUSIONS:This developmental evaluation demonstrated the potential value of CHOICE. Findings suggest a need to: extend the time to tailor program components; empower home staff in change management; and provide increased coaching.
| S-EPMC6234643 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundOffice workers typically sit for most of the workday, which has been linked to physical and mental ill-health and premature death. This mixed-methods study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to reducing sitting and increasing standing among office workers who received an intervention prototype (the 'ReSiT [Reducing Sitting Time] Study'). The intervention comprised a sit-stand workstation and tailored advice to enhance motivation, capability and opportunity to displace sitting with standing.MethodsTwenty-nine UK university office workers (aged ≥18y, working ≥3 days per week, most time spent at a seated desk) participated in a 13-week uncontrolled study. They were initially monitored for one-week. In a subsequent face-to-face consultation, participants received sitting time feedback from a prior one-week monitoring period, and selected from a set of tailored sitting-reduction techniques. Quantitative data comprising sitting, standing and stepping time, which were objectively monitored for 7 consecutive days across three post-intervention timepoints, were descriptively analysed. Qualitative data, from semi-structured interviews conducted at 1, 6 and 12-weeks post-intervention, were thematically analysed.ResultsCompared to baseline, mean sitting time decreased at weeks 1, 6 and 12 by 49.7mins, 118.2mins, and 109.7mins respectively. Despite prior concerns about colleagues' reactions to standing, many reported encouragement from others, and standing could be equally conducive to social interaction or creating private, personal space. Some perceived less cognitively-demanding tasks to be more conducive to standing, though some found standing offered a valued break from challenging tasks. Participants prioritised workload over sitting reduction and were more likely to stand after rather than during work task completion. Temporary context changes, such as holidays, threatened to derail newfound routines.ConclusionsOur findings emphasise the importance of understanding workers' mental representations of their work, and the social functions of sitting and standing in the workplace. Workplace intervention developers should incorporate a pre-intervention sitting time monitoring period, encourage workers to identify personally meaningful tasks and cues for standing, and build organisational support for sitting-reduction. We will use these insights to refine our intervention for self-administered delivery.Trial registrationISRCTN29395780 (registered 21 November 2016).
| S-EPMC6593587 | biostudies-literature