			Home About us Contact

Practice Care (practice + care)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	75%

Selected Abstracts

Patient characteristics as predictors of primary health care preferences: a systematic literature analysis

HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, Issue 2 2003
Hans Peter Jung MD PhD GP
Abstract Objective To identify associations between various cultural and demographic factors and patients' primary health care preferences. Search strategy Searches were performed in MEDLINE (1966,December 2000), PsycINFO (1977,May 2001) and Sociological Abstracts (1963,December 2000). Identified papers were checked for more papers. Inclusion criteria Studies with a focus on primary health care or health care in general, asking patients about preferences with regard to health care, reporting quantitative results and examining the relations between specific patient characteristics and patient preferences. Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted from studies using a scoring form to register what methods were used, which patient characteristics were analysed and which patient characteristics significantly influenced patients' preferences with regard to different aspects of health care (P < 0.05). Main results A total of 145 studies were included with 2276 comparisons between subgroups of patients. Of all the comparisons, 607 (27%) showed a significant association between patient characteristics and preferences with regard to primary health care. Age and economic status significantly related to patient preferences in 38 and 33% of the comparisons, respectively. Education, health status, family situation, sex, and utilization of health care related significantly to patient preferences in less than 25% of the comparisons. Conclusions This review of the literature showed patient characteristics to be an important determinant of preferences regarding many aspects of primary health care defined as general practice care or health care, in general. All of the patient characteristics examined here showed at least some significant associations with preferences for primary health care. [source]

Quality assessment in general practice trainers

MEDICAL EDUCATION, Issue 12 2000
M J F J Vernooij-Dassen
Introduction General practice trainers hold a key position in general practice training, especially through their provision of a role model. Their own competence in general practice care is important in this regard. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a quality assessment programme could identify the strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers in four main domains of general practice care. Methods The quality assessment programme comprised validated tests on four domains of general practice: general medical knowledge, knowledge of medical-technical skills, consultation skills and practice management. The criterion for the identification of relative strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers was a variation in the scores of trainers indicating higher and lower scores (strengths and weaknesses) within each domain. Results GP trainers (n=105) were invited to participate in the study and 90% (n=94) did so. The variation in scores allowed the indication of strengths and weaknesses. Main strengths were: general medical knowledge of the digestive system; knowledge of medical skills relating to the skin; consultation skills concerning empathy; practice management with regard to accessibility. Main weaknesses were: general medical knowledge of the neurological system; knowledge of the medical/technical skills relating to the endocrine metabolic and nutritional system; consultation skills regarding shared decision making; practice management involving cooperation with staff and other care providers. Discussion This first systematic evaluation of GP trainers identified their strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses identified will be used in the improvement process as topics for collective improvement in the GP trainers' general curriculum and in individual learning plans. [source]

A randomised controlled trial of clinics in secondary schools for adolescents with asthma

CHILD: CARE, HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT, Issue 1 2004
Cliona Ni Bhrolchain
Aim To test the hypothesis that delivery of a programme of asthma care in nurse-led clinics in school would improve access to care and health outcomes compared with care in general practice. Methods Pupils at four secondary schools in Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire, UK, were included in the randomized controlled trial. Another two schools were included to control for any cross-contamination between school clinic attenders and general practice attenders in the trial schools. Pupils in trial schools were randomly assigned to receive an invitation for an asthma review at school or in general practice. Schools were stratified for deprivation and covered rural, urban and suburban populations. Pupils with asthma were identified using a screening questionnaire and then cross-referenced with practice prescribing records. Four school nurses with additional specialist asthma training ran the school clinics weekly. Consultations concentrated on the needs and interests of adolescents and followed national guidelines for treatment changes. Reviews were arranged at 1 and 6 months, with an additional 3-month review if needed. The pupil's GP was kept informed. General practice care was according to the practice's usual treatment protocols. Primary outcomes were the proportion of pupils who had had an asthma review in 6 months, health-related quality of life and level of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were pupil knowledge and attitude to asthma, inhaler technique, the proportion taking inhaled steroids daily, school absence due to asthma, PEFR and pupil preference for the setting of care. Sample size was calculated to have an 80% chance of showing an increase from 40% to 60% having a review in 6 months and half a standard deviation improvement on the quality of life measure. Analysis was on an intention to treat basis. Results School clinic pupils were more likely to attend (91% vs. 51%). However, symptom control or quality of life were no better. School clinic pupils knew more about asthma, had a more positive attitude and better inhaler technique. Absence and PEFR showed no difference. 63% who attended school clinics preferred this model but, taking both groups together, just over half would prefer to attend their GP for follow-up. Cost of care (including practice, school clinic, hospital and medication) was £32.10 at school, £19.80 at the trial practices and £18.00 at control practices. Conclusions Previous evaluations of nurse-led asthma clinics in practice have also failed to show improvements in outcomes, though process measures do improve. This may be due to the need for nurses to refer patients to doctors for changes in medication, rather than doing this themselves. Some weaknesses in study design that may have affected outcome, but the essential conclusion is that nurse-led asthma clinics in school are not cost effective. The study does suggest that such clinics can reach a high proportion of adolescents, but for asthma at least this does not result in any measurable improvement in outcome. [source]