A Model for Assessment and Referral of Clients with Bowel Symptoms in Community Pharmacies

BACKGROUND: To expedite diagnosis of serious bowel disease, efforts are required to signpost patients with high-risk symptoms to appropriate care. Community pharmacies are a recognised source of health advice regarding bowel symptoms. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of a validated self-administered questionnaire, Jodi Lee Test (JLT), for detection, triage and referral of bowel symptoms suggestive of carcinoma, in pharmacies. METHOD: 'Usual Practice' was monitored for 12 weeks in 21 pharmacies in Western Australia, documenting outcomes for 84 clients presenting with bowel symptoms. Outcome measures were: acceptance of verbal advice from the pharmacist; general practitioner consultation; and diagnosis. Trial of the JLT involved staff training in the research protocol and monitoring of outcomes for 80 recruited clients over 20 weeks. Utility of the JLT was assessed by post-trial survey of pharmacy staff. RESULTS: Significantly more referrals were made by staff using the JLT than during Usual Practice: 30 (38%) vs 17 (20%). Clients' acceptance of referrals was also higher for the intervention group (40% vs 6%). Two-thirds of pharmacy staff agreed that the JLT could be incorporated into pharmacy practice, and 70% indicated they would use the JLT in the future. CONCLUSION: A pre-post design was considered more appropriate than a randomised control trial due to an inability to match pharmacies. Limitations of this study were: lack of control over adherence to the study protocol by pharmacy staff,\; no direct measure of client feedback on the JLT; and loss to follow-up. The JLT was effective in prompting decision-making by pharmacy staff and inter-professional care between pharmacies and general practice, in triage of clients at risk of bowel cancer

Rating general practitioner consultation performance in cancer care: Does the specialty of assessors matter? A simulated patient study

Background: Patients treated for prostate cancer may present to general practitioners (GPs) for treatment follow up, but may be reticent to have their consultations recorded. Therefore the use of simulated patients allows practitioner consultations to be rated. The aim of this study was to determine whether the speciality of the assessor has an impact on how GP consultation performance is rated. Methods: Six pairs of scenarios were developed for professional actors in two series of consultations by GPs. The scenarios included: chronic radiation proctitis, Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) ‘bounce’, recurrence of cancer, urethral stricture, erectile dysfunction and depression or anxiety. Participating GPs were furnished with the patient’s past medical history, current medication, prostate cancer details and treatment, details of physical examinations. Consultations were video recorded and assessed for quality by two sets of assessors- a team of two GPs and two Radiation Oncologists deploying the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP). LAP scores by the GPs and Radiation Oncologists were compared. Results: Eight GPs participated. In Series 1 the range of LAP scores by GP assessors was 61%-80%, and 67%-86% for Radiation Oncologist assessors. The range for GP LAP scores in Series 2 was 51%- 82%, and 56%-89% for Radiation Oncologist assessors. Within GP assessor correlations for LAP scores were 0.31 and 0.87 in Series 1 and 2 respectively. Within Radiation Oncologist assessor correlations were 0.50 and 0.72 in Series 1 and 2 respectively. Radiation Oncologist and GP assessor scores were significantly different for 4 doctors and for some scenarios. Anticipatory care was the only domain where GPs scored participants higher than Radiation Oncologist assessors. Conclusion: The assessment of GP consultation performance is not consistent across assessors from different disciplines even when they deploy the same assessment tool

Continuity of cancer care: Where do primary care practitioners fit in?

Cancer is the leading cause of illness in Australia and is a national health priority. Primary care in Australia is well positioned to support individuals diagnosed with cancer and their family/caretakers. However, obstacles exist that impact on the quality and continuity of care that primary care providers and community health professionals can provide. A rapid review of the research available revealed that the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs held by health professionals and patients can impact engagement in early detection, treatment and follow-up care. Health professionals have limited knowledge of evidence-based practices, while cancer literacy among minority groups, including Aboriginal Australians, is lower than the population overall. In this paper, we provide a summary of the rapid review of the literature and provide some recommendations based on our research

Video Consultation Use by Australian General Practitioners: Video Vignette Study

Background: There is unequal access to health care in Australia, particularly for the one-third of the population living in remote and rural areas. Video consultations delivered via the Internet present an opportunity to provide medical services to those who are underserviced, but this is not currently routine practice in Australia. There are advantages and shortcomings to using video consultations for diagnosis, and general practitioners (GPs) have varying opinions regarding their efficacy. Objective: The aim of this Internet-based study was to explore the attitudes of Australian GPs toward video consultation by using a range of patient scenarios presenting different clinical problems. Methods: Overall, 102 GPs were invited to view 6 video vignettes featuring patients presenting with acute and chronic illnesses. For each vignette, they were asked to offer a differential diagnosis and to complete a survey based on the theory of planned behavior documenting their views on the value of a video consultation.Results: A total of 47 GPs participated in the study. The participants were younger than Australian GPs based on national data, and more likely to be working in a larger practice. Most participants (72%-100%) agreed on the differential diagnosis in all video scenarios. Approximately one-third of the study participants were positive about video consultations, one-third were ambivalent, and one-third were against them. In all, 91% opposed conducting a video consultation for the patient with symptoms of an acute myocardial infarction. Inability to examine the patient was most frequently cited as the reason for not conducting a video consultation. Australian GPs who were favorably inclined toward video consultations were more likely to work in larger practices, and were more established GPs, especially in rural areas. The survey results also suggest that the deployment of video technology will need to focus on follow-up consultations. Conclusions: Patients with minor self-limiting illnesses and those with medical emergencies are unlikely to be offered access to a GP by video. The process of establishing video consultations as routine practice will need to be endorsed by senior members of the profession and funding organizations. Video consultation techniques will also need to be taught in medical schools

Do patients with long-term side effects of cancer treatment benefit from general practitioner support? A literature review

Background: Alongside specialist cancer clinics, general practitioners have an important role in cancer patients’ follow-up care, yet no literature summarises the nature, extent and impact of their involvement. This paper addresses this issue through a review of the literature. Methods: Studies were sourced from six academic databases - AustHealth (n = 202), CINAHL (n = 500), the Cochrane Library (reviews and trials; n = 200), Embase (n = 368), PHCRIS (n = 132) and PubMed/Medline (n = 410). Studies that focused on interventions designed for patients receiving follow-up care and reported cancer care provided by a general practitioner delivered alongside specialist care were reviewed. Results: A total of 19 papers were identified as relevant for this review (3 randomised control trials; 4 cross-sectional, 5 cohort and 3 qualitative studies, and 3 systematic reviews). The reviewed studies indicated that providing general practitioner-led supportive interventions for post-treatment care of cancer patients is feasible and acceptable to patients. General practitioner involvement resulted in improved physical and psychosocial well-being of patients and continuity of care, especially for patients with concomitant health conditions. Conclusion: Involving general practitioners in post-treatment cancer care is beneficial to patients. However, proactive initiatives that encourage and facilitate patients to consult their general practitioner about their needs or symptoms of recurrence should be considered

An inclusive approach to raising standards in general practice: working with a 'community of practice' in Western Australia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In this study we explored the challenges to establishing a community of practice (CoP) to address standards in general practice. We focused on the issue of improving referral letters which are the main form of communication between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists. There is evidence to suggest that the information relayed to specialists at the time of referral could be improved.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We aimed to develop a community of practice consisting of GPs in Western Australia to improve the quality of referral letters to six specialty clinics. Three phases included: establishing the CoP, monitoring the progress of the CoP and sustaining and managing the CoP. The CoP's activity centred on referral letters to each of six selected specialties. A local measure for the quality of the referral letters was developed from a survey of participants about specific items of history and weighted for their perceived importance in the referral letter. Referral letters by participants written before and after the benchmarking exercise were scored for quality based on the standards set by the CoP. Feedback to participants regarding the 'quality' of their individual referrals was provided by a nominated member of the CoP, including a comparison of before and after scores.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>15 GPs were recruited. Only five GPs submitted referral letters both before and after benchmarking. The five GPs that participated in both study phases submitted a total of 102 referral letters (53 before and 49 after). There was a 26 point (95% CI 11–41) improvement in the average scores of the second set of letters after taking clustering by speciality into account, indicating the quality of referral letters improved substantially after feedback.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There are many challenges to forming a CoP to focus on improving a specific issue in general practice. However we were able to demonstrate that those practitioners who participated in all aspects of the project substantially improved the quality of their referral letters. For recruitment it was important to work with a champion for the project from within the practice. The project took several months to complete therefore some GPs became disengaged. Some were very disappointed by their performance when compared to colleagues. This reaction may be an important motivation to change, however it needs to be sensitively handled if participants are not to become disillusioned or disheartened.</p

Can a community of practice enhance a palliative approach for people drawing close to death with dementia?

This action research study was conducted to trial a strategy intended to support a consistent, high-quality, palliative approach for people with dementia drawing close to death-the implementation of a community of practice. Professionals from community/residential care and hospitals formed this community of practice, which took on the role of an action research group. The group was supported to identify and address practice problems. Four action plans were implemented; outcomes from two are reported. When actioning the plan 'providing education and information for the staff', the staff's ratings of sessions and resources were positive but impacts upon knowledge, views, or confidence were small. When actioning 'supporting families', families providing care in non-hospital settings received information about severe dementia from suitably prepared staff, plus contact details to access support. Family feedback was primarily positive. Reference to additional practice change frameworks and inclusion of specialist palliative care professionals are recommendations for future initiatives; also focusing on targeted, achievable goals over longer timeframes