Building family/general practice research capacity

To promote the range of interventions for building family/general practice (family medicine) research capacity, we describe successful international examples. Such examples of interventions that build research capacity focus on diseases and illness research, as well as process research; monitor the output of research in family/general practice (family medicine); increase the number of family medicine research journals; encourage and enable research skills acquisition (including making it part of professional training); strengthen the academic base; and promote research networks and collaborations. The responsibility for these interventions lies with the government, colleges and academies, and universities. There are exciting and varied methods of building research capacity in family medicine.

Influence of socioeconomic deprivation on the primary care burden and treatment of patients with a diagnosis of heart failure in general practice in Scotland: population based study

Objectives To examine whether there are socioeconomic gradients in die incidence, prevalence, treatment, and follow up of patients with heart failure in primary care. Design Population based study. Setting 53 general practices (307741 patients) participating in the Scottish continuous morbidity recording project between 1 April 1999 and 31 March 2000. Participants 2186 adults with heart failure. Main outcome measures Comorbid diagnoses, frequency of visits to general practitioner, and prescribed drugs. Results 2186 patients with heart failure were seen (prevalence 7.1 per 1000 population, incidence 2.0 per 1000 population). The age and sex standardised incidence of heart failure increased with greater socioeconomic deprivation, from 1.8 per 1000 population in the most affluent stratum to 2.6 per 1000 population in the most deprived stratum (odds ratio 1.44, P=0.0003). On average, patients were seen 2.4 times yearly, but follow up rates were less frequent with increasing socioeconomic deprivation (from 2.6 yearly in the most affluent subgroup to 2.0 yearly in the most deprived subgroup, P=0.00009). Overall, 812 (80.6%) patients were prescribed diuretics, 396 (39.3%) angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, 216 (21.4%) beta blockers, 208 (20.7%) digoxin, and 86 (8.5%) spironolactone. The wide discrepancies in prescribing between different general practices disappeared after adjustment for patient age and sex. Prescribing patterns did not vary by deprivation categories on univariate or multivariate analyses. Conclusions Compared with affluent patients, socioeconomically deprived patients were 44% more likely to develop heart failure but 23% less likely to see their general practitioner on an ongoing basis. Prescribed treatment did not differ across socioeconomic gradients.

Mentoring for population health in general practice divisions

This paper describes the implementation and evaluation of a three-way model of service development mentoring. This population health mentoring program was funded by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing to enable staff from eight Divisions of General Practice in South Australia to gain a sound understanding of population health concepts relevant to their workplace. The distinguishing features of service development mentoring were that the learning was grounded within an individual's work setting and experience; there was an identified population health problem or issue confronting the Division of General Practice; and there was an expectation of enhanced organisational performance. A formal evaluation found a consensus among all learners that mentoring was a positive and worthwhile experience, where they had achieved what they had set out to do. Mentors found the model of learning agreeable and effective. Division executive officers recognised enhanced skills among their "learner" colleagues, and commented positively on the benefits to their organisations through the development of well researched and relevant projects, with the potential to improve the efficiency of their population health activities.

Smoking status of Australian general practice patients and their attempts to quit

This paper seeks to report on smoking rates, quit attempt methods and success rates among adult patients attending Australian general practice. A cluster cross-sectional survey was used to survey adult patients (18+), who attended Australian GPs in during 2002 and 2003. Over a quarter of patients (27.3%; 95% CI: 26.0-28.7) were former smokers and one in five (21.5%; 95% CI: 20.1-22.9) were current smokers. Ninety-two percent of former and 80% of current smokers used only one method in their last quit attempt with cold turkey the most common method used by both former (88%) and current (62%) smokers. Overall, success rates varied from 77% for cold turkey to 23% for bupropion. Success rates were re-analysed to consider quit attempts post-bupropion listing, with success rate for cold turkey reduced to 40% while bupropion remained reasonably constant at 21%. By tailoring smoking cessation interventions to a smokers' preparedness to quit, scope exists to increase the pool of smokers offered strategies that are more effective in achieving abstinence and avoiding relapse rather than relying on less effective self-quitting behaviours such as cold turkey. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

General practice in Australia 2020: "robust and ready" or "rudderless and reeling"?

The future role and structure of Australian general practice remains uncertain, despite a decade of seemingly constant change following the release of the National Health Strategy papers. Some of the suggested change strategies (such as rural Practice Incentive Payments and practice accreditation) have been implemented; others (such as general practitioner involvement with area health authorities in delivering national goals and targets for communities) still await attention. An overarching vision for our health care system in 2020 and general practice's role within it are still to be clearly enunciated. Australia is at variance with other Western countries, such as the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand, which have spent significant time refocusing their health systems to deal with an ageing population with an increased burden of chronic disease. Health bureaucrats and governments need to invest strategically in operational primary care now. This will require the active commitment of general practice's national bodies to articulate and actively promote a shared vision for Australian general practice.