901 resultados para GP 43
Resumo:
Background: Insufficient physical activity (PA) levels which increase the risk of chronic disease are reported by almost two-thirds of the population. More evidence is needed about how PA promotion can be effectively implemented in general practice (GP), particularly in socio-economically disadvantaged communities. One tool recommended for the assessment of PA in GP and supported by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) is The General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPPAQ) but details of how it may be used and of its acceptability to practitioners and patients are limited. This study aims to examine aspects of GPPAQ administration in non-urgent patient contacts using different primary care electronic recording systems and to explore the views of health professionals regarding its use.
Methods: Four general practices, selected because of their location within socio-economically disadvantaged areas, were invited to administer GPPAQs to patients, aged 35-75 years, attending non-urgent consultations, over two-week periods. They used different methods of administration and different electronic medical record systems (EMIS, Premiere, Vision). Participants’ (general practitioners (GPs), nurses and receptionists) views regarding GPPAQ use were explored via questionnaires and focus groups.
Results: Of 2,154 eligible consultations, 192 (8.9%) completed GPPAQs; of these 83 (43%) were categorised as inactive. All practices were located within areas ranked as being in the tertile of greatest socio-economic deprivation in Northern Ireland. GPs/nurses in two practices invited completion of the GPPAQ, receptionists did so in two. One practice used an electronic template; three used paper copies of the questionnaires. End-of-study questionnaires, completed by 11 GPs, 3 nurses and 2 receptionists and two focus groups, with GPs (n = 8) and nurses (n = 4) indicated that practitioners considered the GPPAQ easy to use but not in every consultation. Its use extended consultation time, particularly for patients with complex problems who could potentially benefit from PA promotion.
Conclusions: GPs and nurses reported that the GPPAQ itself was an easy tool with which to assess PA levels in general practice and feasible to use in a range of electronic record systems but integration within routine practice is constrained by time and complex consultations. Further exploration of ways to facilitate PA promotion into practice is needed.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a significant worldwide health issue, however, it is often insidious in onset and difficult to diagnose, therefore GPs have expressed a limited confidence in their diagnostic skills, extending into their prognostication of the disease. As a result diagnosing the terminal phase of dementia has been identified as a significant challenge to delivering effective palliative care. Therefore, identifying the challenges faced by the GPs in this field will help to guide their training and support, and as a result could assist in the provision of sustained and effective palliative care for their dementia patients.
Resumo:
Metallo-azomethine ylides, generated from imines by the action of amine bases in combination with LiBr or AgOAc, undergo cycloaddition with both 1R, 2S, 5R- and 1S, 2R, 5S-menthyl acrylate at room temperature to give homochiral pyrrolidines in excellent yield. The stronger the base the faster the cycloaddition and the greater the yield with: 2-t-butyl-1,1,3,3-tetramethylguanidine > DBU > NEt(3) X-Ray crystal structures of representative cycloadducts establish that the absolute configuration of the newly established pyrrolidine stereocentres is independent of the metal salt and the size of the pyrrolidineC(2)-substituent for a series of aryl and aliphatic imines.
Resumo:
Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints are common within primary care (1) (2) (3) but some General Practitioners (GPs)/family physicians do not feel comfortable managing these symptoms (3), preferring to refer onto hospital specialists or Integrated Clinical Assessment and Treatment Services (ICATs). Long waiting times for hospital outpatient reviews are a major cause of patient inconvenience and complaints (4). We therefore aimed to establish a GP-ran MSK and sport and exercise medicine (SEM) clinic based within a Belfast GP surgery that would contribute to a sustainable improvement in managing these common conditions within primary care as well as reducing waiting times for patients with these conditions to see a specialist. This shift from hospital-based to community-based management is in-keeping with recent policy changes within the UK health-system, including Transforming Your Care within Northern Ireland (NI) (5). The GP-ran MSK and SEM clinic was held monthly within a Belfast GP practice, staffed by one GP with a specialist interest in MSK and SEM conditions and its performance was reviewed over a three month period. Parameters audited included cases seen, orthopaedic and x-ray referral rates and secondary care referrals comparing the GP practice’s performance to the same time period in the previous year as well as patient satisfaction questionnaires.
Resumo:
The problem-Musculoskeletal (MSK) symptoms are common within primary care but some GPs are not comfortable managing these; waiting times for hospital appointments are a major cause of patients’ complaints. Current UK healthcare policies emphasise a need for more community-based management. We aimed to pilot an innovative general practice-based clinic to improve the management of MSK and Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) symptoms within general practice.
The approach-This project was conducted in an inner-city practice of approximately 9,000 patients and 5 GP partners. The practice commissioned a novel monthly 4-hour clinic staffed by one GP with a specialist interest in MSK and SEM conditions. Each patient was allocated a 20-minute appointment. All primary care staff within the practice could refer any patient for whom they considered hospital referral appropriate, with no specific exclusion criteria. Management plans included injection therapy, exercise prescription and onward referral. After three months (August-October 2014) numbers of consultations, sources of referral, reasons for referral and management outcomes were described; patient satisfaction was assessed by questionnaire, offered to 10 randomly selected patients by reception staff and self-completed by patients. Costs of the clinic were compared to current options.
Findings- All patients (14 males; 21 females; aged 35-77 years), were seen within four weeks of referral (one third of orthopaedic referrals in 2013 waited over 9 weeks for appointment). Most were referred from other GPs; some came from physiotherapy and podiatry. Shoulder problems were the most frequent reason for referral. The commonest management option was steroid injection, with most patients being given advice regarding exercise and analgesia; there were 3 onward referrals (2 physiotherapy; 1 rheumatology).
Comparing August-October data in 2014 and 2013, total, orthopaedic and rheumatology referrals were reduced by 147, 2 and 3, respectively; within the practice MSK presentations and physiotherapy and x-ray referrals were 60, 47 and 90 fewer, respectively.
The cost per attendance at the clinic was £61; initial orthopaedic-ICAT assessments cost £82 and a consultant appointment £213.
Satisfaction questionnaires were returned by all 10 selected participants and provided positive feedback, expressing preference for community-based, rather than hospital, management.
Consequence- Our pilot study indicates that this novel service model has potential for efficient and effective management of MSK and SEM complaints in primary care, reducing the need for hospital referral and the clinical burden on general practices. The innovation deserves further evaluation in a full-scale trial to determine its generalisability to other practice settings and populations.
Resumo:
Background A 2014 national audit used the English General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) to compare service users’ experience of out-of-hours general practitioner (GP) services, yet there is no published evidence on the validity of these GPPS items. Objectives Establish the construct and concurrent validity of GPPS items evaluating service users’ experience of GP out-of-hours care. Methods Cross-sectional postal survey of service users (n=1396) of six English out-of-hours providers. Participants reported on four GPPS items evaluating out-of-hours care (three items modified following cognitive interviews with service users), and 14 evaluative items from the Out-of-hours Patient Questionnaire (OPQ). Construct validity was assessed through correlations between any reliable (Cochran's α>0.7) scales, as suggested by a principal component analysis of the modified GPPS items, with the ‘entry access’ (four items) and ‘consultation satisfaction’ (10 items) OPQ subscales. Concurrent validity was determined by investigating whether each modified GPPS item was associated with thematically related items from the OPQ using linear regressions. Results The modified GPPS item-set formed a single scale (α=0.77), which summarised the two-component structure of the OPQ moderately well; explaining 39.7% of variation in the ‘entry access’ scores (r=0.63) and 44.0% of variation in the ‘consultation satisfaction’ scores (r=0.66), demonstrating acceptable construct validity. Concurrent validity was verified as each modified GPPS item was highly associated with a distinct set of related items from the OPQ. Conclusions Minor modifications are required for the English GPPS items evaluating out-of-hours care to improve comprehension by service users. A modified question set was demonstrated to comprise a valid measure of service users’ overall satisfaction with out-of-hours care received. This demonstrates the potential for the use of as few as four items in benchmarking providers and assisting services in identifying, implementing and assessing quality improvement initiatives.
Resumo:
Revista elaborada pela Assessoria de Comunicação e Imprensa da Reitoria da UNESP