Palliative care at home: general practitioners working with palliative care teams

Home care is the preferred option for most people with a terminal illness. Providing home care relies on good community-based services, and a general practice workforce competent in palliative care practice and willing to accommodate patients' needs. Structured palliative care training of general practitioners is needed at undergraduate and postgraduate level, with attention to barriers to teamwork and communication. Good palliative care-can be delivered to patients at home by GPs (supported by specialist palliative care teams) and community nurses, with access to an inpatient facility when required. To optimise patient care, careful planning and good communication between all members of the healthcare team is crucial.

Improving access to evidence-based mental health care: general practitioners and allied health professionals collaborate

This study evaluated whether projects conducted through the Access to Allied Health Services component of the Australian Better Outcomes in Mental Health Care initiative are improving access to evidence-based, non-pharmacological therapies for people with depression and anxiety. Synthesising data from the first 29 projects funded through the initiative, the study found that the models utilised in the projects have evolved over time. The projects have achieved a high level uptake; at a conservative estimate, 710 GPs and 160 allied health professionals (AHPs) have provided care to 3,476 consumers. The majority of these consumers have depression (77%) and/or anxiety disorders (55%); many are low income earners (57%); and a number have not previously accessed mental health care (40%). The projects have delivered 8,678 sessions of high quality care to these consumers, most commonly providing CBT-based cognitive and behavioural interventions (55% and 41%, respectively). In general, GPs, AHPs and consumers are sanguine about the projects, and have reported positive consumer outcomes. However, as with any new initiative, there are some practical and professional issues that need to be addressed. The projects are improving access to evidence-based, non-pharmacological therapies. The continuation and expansion of the initiative should be a priority.

Feasibility of an evidence-based literature search service for general practitioners

Objective: To test the feasibility of an evidence-based clinical literature search service to help answer general practitioners' (GPs') clinical questions. Design: Two search services supplied GPs who submitted questions with the best available empirical evidence to answer these questions. The GPs provided feedback on the value of the service, and concordance of answers from the two search services was assessed. Setting: Two literature search services (Queensland and Victoria), operating for nine months from February 1999. Main outcome measures: Use of the service; time taken to locate answers; availability of evidence; value of the service to GPs; and consistency of answers from the two services. Results: 58 GPs asked 160 questions (29 asked one, 11 asked five or more). The questions concerned treatment (65%), aetiology (17%), prognosis (13%), and diagnosis (5%). Answering a question took a mean of 3 hours 32 minutes of personnel time (95% Cl, 2.67-3.97); nine questions took longer than 10 hours each to answer, the longest taking 23 hours 30 minutes. Evidence of suitable quality to provide a sound answer was available for 126 (79%) questions. Feedback data for 84 (53%) questions, provided by 42 GPs, showed that they appreciated the service, and asking the questions changed clinical care. There were many minor differences between the answers from the two centres, and substantial differences in the evidence found for 4/14 questions. However, conclusions reached were largely similar, with no or only minor differences for all questions. Conclusions: It is feasible to provide a literature search service, but further assessment is needed to establish its cost effectiveness.

Guidelines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis for general practitioners

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis Australia has been committed to the education of general practitioners and the community with a series of updated guidelines on the management of osteoporosis. Since the last series was published in Australian Family Physician (August 2000), there have been further advances in our understanding of the treatments involved in both prevention of bone loss and the management of established osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE: This article represents updated guidelines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis to assist GPs identify those women at risk and to review current treatment strategies. DISCUSSION: Osteoporosis and its associated problems are major health concerns in Australia, especially with an aging population. While important principles of management are still considered to be maximising peak bone mass and preventing postmenopausal bone loss, new clinical trial data about drugs such as the bisphosphonates, raloxifene and oestrogen have recently become available and the relative role of various agents is gradually becoming clearer. The use of long term hormone replacement therapy has mixed risks and benefits that requires individual patient counselling.

Attitudes and practices of general practitioners in the diagnosis and management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Objective: To assess understanding of, and actual and potential roles in management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among GPs. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of Queensland GPs selected randomly from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners directory of members was carried out. Main outcome measures were knowledge levels of ADHD, current management practices, referral patterns and self-perceived information and training needs. Results: Three hundred and ninety-nine GPs returned a completed questionnaire (response rate 76%). Roles identified by GPs were: the provisional diagnosis of ADHD and referral to specialist services for confirmation of the diagnosis and initiation of management; assistance with monitoring progress once a management plan was in place; education of the child and their family regarding the disorder; and liaison with the school where necessary. Perceived barriers to increased involvement of GPs were: time and resource constraints of general practice; concerns regarding abuse and addiction liability of prescription stimulants; complex diagnostic issues associated with childhood behavioural problems; and lack of training and education regarding ADHD. Conclusions: General practitioners identify a role for themselves in ADHD care that is largely supportive in nature and involves close liaison with specialist services.

How well do general practitioners deliver palliative care? A systematic review

General practitioners (GPs) deliver the majority of palliative care to patients in the last year of life. This article seeks to examine the nature of GP care, perceptions of the GPs themselves and others of that care, the adequacy of palliative care training, issues relating to accessibility of GPs to palliative care patients, and strategies that may be of use in encouraging more effective delivery of palliative care by GPs. Medline and PubMed databases from 1966 to 2000 were searched, and 135 references identified. Sixty-six of these described studies relevant to GP palliative care. GPs value this part of their work. Most of the time, patients appreciate the contribution the GP makes to palliative care particularly if the GP is accessible, takes time to listen, allows patient and carer to ventilate their feelings, and is seen to be making efforts made regarding symptom relief. However, reports from bereaved relatives suggest that palliative care is performed less well in the community than in other settings. GPs express discomfort about their competence to perform palliative care adequately. They tend to miss symptoms which are not treatable by them, or which are less common. However, with appropriate specialist support and facilities, GPs have been shown to deliver sound and effective care. GP comfort working with specialist teams increases with exposure to this form of patient management, as does the understanding of the potential other team members have in contributing to the care of the patient. Formal arrangements engaging GPs to work with specialist teams have been shown to improve functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, improve effective use of resources and improve effective physician behaviour in other areas of medicine. Efforts by specialist services to develop formal involvement of GPs in the care of individual patients, may be an effective method of improving GP palliative care skills and appreciation of the roles specialist services can play.