Involving patients in medicines optimisation in general practice:a development study of the "PREparing Patients for Active Involvement in medication Review" (PREPAIR) tool

BACKGROUND: Many patients have multiple health conditions and take multiple medications (polypharmacy). Active patient involvement may improve treatment outcomes and ensure patient-centred care. Yet, patient involvement remains a challenge in clinical practice. We aimed to develop and pilot test a questionnaire-based preparation and dialogue tool, the PREparing Patients for Active Involvement in medication Review (PREPAIR) tool, to encourage the involvement of patients with polypharmacy in medicines optimisation in general practice. METHODS: We conducted a literature review followed by a co-production process to develop the tool: a workshop with six GPs and pilot testing, including observations and interviews, with 22 patients, three GPs and three practice staff. During this process, we made continuous adaptations to the prototype. We analysed the qualitative data thematically, focusing on the development process and mechanisms of impact. FINDINGS: The final PREPAIR tool included five items concerning the patient’s experience of 1) adverse drug reactions, 2) excess medication, 3) unnecessary medication, 4) medication satisfaction and 5) medication-related topics to discuss with the GP (open-ended question). The applied workflow during testing was as follows; the patient completed the PREPAIR tool at home, to encourage reflection on the medication, and brought it to the GP consultation. During the consultation, the GP and the patient reviewed the patient’s responses and discussed potential medication-related problems. For some patients, the increased reflection led to worries about the medications. Still, the pilot testing showed that, when using the PREPAIR tool, the patients arrived at the clinic well prepared and empowered to speak. From the PREPAIR-supported dialogue, the GPs obtained a better understanding of patients’ perspectives and provided a more patient-centred consultation. For the patients, the PREPAIR-supported dialogue ultimately promoted an increased sense of security, satisfaction and insight into their medication, despite initial worries for some patients. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a brief tool to support active patient involvement in medication review in general practice. The PREPAIR-tool was well received by both patients and GPs and fitted well into the existing clinical practice. Our findings suggest that the PREPAIR-tool can support patient involvement during consultations and facilitate patient-centred care. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01733-8

Guidance for implementing video consultations in Danish general practice:Rapid cycle coproduction study

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed various spheres of health care. General practitioners (GPs) have widely replaced face-to-face consultations with telephone or video consultations (VCs) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Using VCs for health service delivery is an entirely new way of practicing for many GPs. However, this transition process has largely been conducted with no formal guidelines, which may have caused implementation barriers. This study presents a rapid cycle coproduction approach for developing a guide to assist VC implementation in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe the developmental phases of the VC guide to assist general practices in implementing VCs and summarize the evaluation made by general practice users. METHODS: The development of a guide for VC in general practice was structured as a stepped process based on the coproduction and prototyping processes. We used an iterative framework based on rapid qualitative analyses and interdisciplinary collaborations. Thus, the guide was developed in small, repeated cycles of development, implementation, evaluation, and adaptation, with a continuous exchange between research and practice. The data collection process was structured in 3 main phases. First, we conducted a literature review, recorded observations, and held informal and semistructured interviews. Second, we facilitated coproduction with stakeholders through 4 workshops with GPs, a group interview with patient representatives, and individual revisions by GPs. Third, nationwide testing was conducted in 5 general practice clinics and was followed by an evaluation of the guide through interviews with GPs. RESULTS: A rapid cycle coproduction approach was used to explore the needs of general practice in connection with the implementation of VC and to develop useful, relevant, and easily understandable guiding materials. Our findings suggest that a guide for VCs should include advice and recommendations regarding the organization of VCs, the technical setup, the appropriate target groups, patients’ use of VCs, the performance of VCs, and the arrangements for booking a VC. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of coproduction, prototyping, small iterations, and rapid data analysis is a suitable approach when contextually rich, hands-on guide materials are urgently needed. Moreover, this method could provide an efficient way of developing relevant guide materials for general practice to aid the implementation of new technology beyond the pandemic period

Altered sense of Agency in children with spastic cerebral palsy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Children diagnosed with spastic Cerebral Palsy (CP) often show perceptual and cognitive problems, which may contribute to their functional deficit. Here we investigated if altered ability to determine whether an observed movement is performed by themselves (sense of agency) contributes to the motor deficit in children with CP.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Three groups; ₁₎CP children, ₂₎healthy peers, and ₃₎healthy adults produced straight drawing movements on a pen-tablet which was not visible for the subjects. The produced movement was presented as a virtual moving object on a computer screen. Subjects had to evaluate after each trial whether the movement of the object on the computer screen was generated by themselves or by a computer program which randomly manipulated the visual feedback by angling the trajectories 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 degrees away from target.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Healthy adults executed the movements in 310 seconds, whereas healthy children and especially CP children were significantly slower (p < 0.002) (on average 456 seconds and 543 seconds respectively). There was also a statistical difference between the healthy and age matched CP children (p = 0.037). When the trajectory of the object generated by the computer corresponded to the subject's own movements all three groups reported that they were responsible for the movement of the object. When the trajectory of the object deviated by more than 10 degrees from target, healthy adults and children more frequently than CP children reported that the computer was responsible for the movement of the object. CP children consequently also attempted to compensate more frequently from the perturbation generated by the computer.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We conclude that CP children have a reduced ability to determine whether movement of a virtual moving object is caused by themselves or an external source. We suggest that this may be related to a poor integration of their intention of movement with visual and proprioceptive information about the performed movement and that altered sense of agency may be an important functional problem in children with CP.</p

Point-of-care testing and antibiotics prescribing in out-of-hours general practice: a register-based study in Denmark

Abstract Background Point-of-care testing may reduce diagnostic uncertainty in case of suspicion of bacterial infection, thereby contributing to prudent antibiotic prescribing. We aimed to study variations in the use of point-of-care tests (C-reactive protein test, rapid streptococcal antigen detection test, and urine dipstick) among general practitioners (GPs) and the potential association between point-of-care testing and antibiotic prescribing in out-of-hours general practice. Methods We conducted a population-based observational register-based study, based on patient contacts with out-of-hours general practice in the Central Denmark Region in 2014–2017. The tendency of GPs to use point-of-care testing was calculated, and the association between the use of point-of-care testing and antibiotic prescribing was evaluated with the use of binomial regression. Results Out-of-hours general practice conducted 794,220 clinic consultations from 2014 to 2017, of which 16.1% resulted in an antibiotic prescription. The GP variation in the use of point-of-care testing was largest for C-reactive protein tests, with an observed variation (p90/p10 ratio) of 3.0; this means that the GPs in the 90th percentile used C-reactive protein tests three times as often as the GPs in the 10th percentile. The observed variation was 2.1 for rapid streptococcal antigen detection tests and 1.9 for urine dipsticks. The GPs who tended to use more point-of-care tests prescribed significantly more antibiotics than the GPs who tended to use fewer point-of-care tests. The GPs in the upper quintile of the tendency to use C-reactive protein test prescribed 22% more antibiotics than the GPs in the lowest quintile (21% for rapid streptococcal antigen detection tests and 8% for urine dipsticks). Up through the quintiles, this effect exhibited a positive linear dose–response correlation. Conclusion The GPs varied in use of point-of-care testing. The GPs who tended to perform more point-of-care testing prescribed more antibiotics compared with the GPs who tended to perform fewer of these tests