19 research outputs found

    Self-Reported and Actual Beta-Blocker Prescribing for Heart Failure Patients: Physician Predictors

    Get PDF
    Beta-blockers reduce mortality among patients with systolic heart failure (HF), yet primary care provider prescription rates remain low.To examine the association between primary care physician characteristics and both self-reported and actual prescription of beta-blockers among patients with systolic HF.Cross-sectional survey with supplementary retrospective chart review.Primary care providers at three New York City Veterans Affairs medical centers.Main outcomes were: 1) self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers, and 2) actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients. Physician HF practice patterns and confidence levels, as well as socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, were also assessed.Sixty-nine of 101 physicians (68%) completed the survey examining self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers. Physicians who served as inpatient ward attendings self-reported significantly higher rates of beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients when compared with physicians who did not attend (78% vs. 58%; p = 0.002), as did physicians who were very confident in managing HF patients when compared with physicians who were not (82% vs. 68%; p = 0.009). Fifty-one of these 69 surveyed physicians (74%) were successfully matched to 287 HF patients for whom beta-blocker prescribing data was available. Physicians with greater self-reported rates of prescribing beta-blockers were significantly more likely to actually prescribe beta-blockers (p = 0.02); however, no other physician characteristics were significantly associated with actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients.Physician teaching responsibilities and confidence levels were associated with self-reported beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients. Educational efforts focused on improving confidence levels in HF care and increasing exposure to teaching may improve beta-blocker presciption in HF patients managed in primary care

    Potential barriers and facilitators for implementation of an integrated care pathway for hearing-impaired persons: an exploratory survey among patients and professionals

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Because of the increasing costs and anticipated shortage of Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) specialists in the care for hearing-impaired persons, an integrated care pathway that includes direct hearing aid provision was developed. While this direct pathway is still under investigation, in a survey we examined expectations and potential barriers and facilitators towards this direct pathway, of patients and professionals involved in the pathway. METHODS: Two study populations were assessed: members of the health professions involved in the care pathway for hearing-impaired persons (general practitioners (GPs), hearing aid dispensers, ENT-specialists and clinical audiologists) and persons with hearing complaints. We developed a comprehensive semi-structured questionnaire for the professionals, regarding expectations, barriers, facilitators and conditions for implementation. We developed two questionnaires for persons with hearing complaints, both regarding evaluations and preferences, and administered them after they had experienced two key elements of the direct pathway: the triage and the hearing aid fitting. RESULTS: On average GPs and hearing aid dispensers had positive expectations towards the direct pathway, while ENT-specialists and clinical audiologists had negative expectations. Professionals stated both barriers and facilitators towards the direct pathway. Most professionals either supported implementation of the direct pathway, provided that a number of conditions were satisfied, or did not support implementation, unless roughly the same conditions were satisfied. Professionals generally agreed on which conditions need to be satisfied. Persons with hearing complaints evaluated the present referral pathway and the new direct pathway equally. Many, especially older, participants stated however that they would still visit the GP and ENT-specialist, even when this would not be necessary for reimbursement of the hearing aid, and found it important that the ENT-specialist or Audiological Centre evaluated their hearing aid. CONCLUSION: This study identified professional concerns about the direct pathway for hearing-impaired persons. Gaps exist in expectations amongst professions. Also gaps exist between users of the pathway, especially between age groups and regions. Professionals are united in the conditions that need to be fulfilled for a successful implementation of the direct pathway. Implementation on a regional level is recommended to best satisfy these conditions

    Feasibility of a wiki as a participatory tool for patients in clinical guideline development

    Get PDF
    Contains fulltext : 107901.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Patient participation is essential in developing high-quality guidelines but faces practical challenges. Evidence on timing, methods, evaluations, and outcomes of methodologies for patient participation in guideline development is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a wiki as a participatory tool for patients in the development of a guideline on infertility determined by (1) use of the wiki (number of page views and visitors), (2) benefits of the wiki (ie, number, content, and eligibility of the recommendations to be integrated into the guideline), and (3) patients' facilitators of and barriers to adoption, and the potential challenges to be overcome in improving this wiki. METHODS: To obtain initial content for the wiki, we conducted in-depth interviews (n = 12) with infertile patients. Transcripts from the interviews were translated into 90 draft recommendations. These were presented on a wiki. Over 7 months, infertile patients were invited through advertisements or mailings to formulate new or modify existing recommendations. After modifying the recommendations, we asked patients to select their top 5 or top 3 recommendations for each of 5 sections on fertility care. Finally, the guideline development group assessed the eligibility of the final set of recommendations within the scope of the guideline. We used a multimethod evaluation strategy to assess the feasibility of the wiki as a participatory tool for patients in guideline development. RESULTS: The wiki attracted 298 unique visitors, yielding 289 recommendations. We assessed the 21 recommendations ranked as the top 5 or top 3 for their eligibility for being integrated into the clinical practice guideline. The evaluation identified some challenges needed to be met to improve the wiki tool, concerning its ease of use, website content and layout, and characteristics of the wiki tool. CONCLUSIONS: The wiki is a promising and feasible participatory tool for patients in guideline development. A modified version of this tool including new modalities (eg, automatically limiting the number and length of recommendations, using a fixed format for recommendations, including a motivation page, and adding a continuous prioritization system) should be developed and evaluated in a patient-centered design
    corecore