24 research outputs found

    What research agenda could be generated from the European General Practice Research Network concept of Multimorbidity in Family Practice?

    Get PDF
    This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is an intuitively appealing, yet challenging, concept for Family Medicine (FM). An EGPRN working group has published a comprehensive definition of the concept based on a systematic review of the literature which is closely linked to patient complexity and to the biopsychosocial model. This concept was identified by European Family Physicians (FPs) throughout Europe using 13 qualitative surveys. To further our understanding of the issues around multimorbidity, we needed to do innovative research to clarify this concept. The research question for this survey was: what research agenda could be generated for Family Medicine from the EGPRN concept of Multimorbidity? METHODS: Nominal group design with a purposive panel of experts in the field of multimorbidity. The nominal group worked through four phases: ideas generation phase, ideas recording phase, evaluation and analysis phase and a prioritization phase. RESULTS: Fifteen international experts participated. A research agenda was established, featuring 6 topics and 11 themes with their corresponding study designs. The highest priorities were given to the following topics: measuring multimorbidity and the impact of multimorbidity. In addition the experts stressed that the concept should be simplified. This would be best achieved by working in reverse: starting with the outcomes and working back to find the useful variables within the concept. CONCLUSION: The highest priority for future research on multimorbidity should be given to measuring multimorbidity and to simplifying the EGPRN model, using a pragmatic approach to determine the useful variables within the concept from its outcomes.The study had a Grant of 8000 Euros from the EGPRN

    Defining Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Preparation for Randomised Controlled Trials: Development of a Conceptual Framework

    Get PDF
    We describe a framework for defining pilot and feasibility studies focusing on studies conducted in preparation for a randomised controlled trial. To develop the framework, we undertook a Delphi survey; ran an open meeting at a trial methodology conference; conducted a review of definitions outside the health research context; consulted experts at an international consensus meeting; and reviewed 27 empirical pilot or feasibility studies. We initially adopted mutually exclusive definitions of pilot and feasibility studies. However, some Delphi survey respondents and the majority of open meeting attendees disagreed with the idea of mutually exclusive definitions. Their viewpoint was supported by definitions outside the health research context, the use of the terms ‘pilot’ and ‘feasibility’ in the literature, and participants at the international consensus meeting. In our framework, pilot studies are a subset of feasibility studies, rather than the two being mutually exclusive. A feasibility study asks whether something can be done, should we proceed with it, and if so, how. A pilot study asks the same questions but also has a specific design feature: in a pilot study a future study, or part of a future study, is conducted on a smaller scale. We suggest that to facilitate their identification, these studies should be clearly identified using the terms ‘feasibility’ or ‘pilot’ as appropriate. This should include feasibility studies that are largely qualitative; we found these difficult to identify in electronic searches because researchers rarely used the term ‘feasibility’ in the title or abstract of such studies. Investigators should also report appropriate objectives and methods related to feasibility; and give clear confirmation that their study is in preparation for a future randomised controlled trial designed to assess the effect of an intervention

    Which positive view of general practice do medical students and trainees have? A systematic literature review

    Get PDF
    International audienceBackground: Despite several studies focusing on the negative aspects of general medicine, the speciality seems attractive for students. Researchers from the European General Practice Research Network created a group to study job satisfaction in general practice. The aim of this eight-country European study was to determine which positive view students have about general practice.Method: Systematic review of the literature from Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Articles published between 01/01/2000 and 12/31/2018 were searched and analysed by two researchers working blind. The data on satisfaction factors were extracted from the full text article used as verbatims. Then the data were coded with a thematic analysis.Results: 24 articles out of 414 were selected. Satisfaction factors were classified: teaching of general practice, workplace and organisational freedom, quality of life, variety in practice, workload balance and income. The analysis highlighted intellectual stimulation and the relationship built with patients and other professionals.Conclusion: Literature on the appeal of general practice for students revealed many factors of job satisfaction in general practice. It is possible to create a global view of a satisfied GP on the students' opinion. Courses and clerkships in general practice with positive role models are determining factors in career choice

    How do general practitioners recognize the definition of multimorbidity? A European qualitative study

    No full text
    Background: Multimorbidity is a challenging concept for general practice. An EGPRN working group has published a comprehensive definition of the concept of multimorbidity. As multimorbidity could be a way to explore complexity in general practice, it was of importance to explore whether European general practitioners (GPs) recognize this concept and whether they would change it. Objectives: To investigate whether European GPs recognize the EGPRN concept of multimorbidity and whether they would change it. Methods: Focus group meetings and semi-structured interviews as data collection techniques with a purposive sample of practicing GPs from every country. Data collection continued until saturation was reached in every country. The analysis was undertaken using a grounded theory based method. In each national team, four independent researchers, working blind and pooling data, carried out the analysis. To ensure the internationalization of the data, an international team of 10 researchers pooled the axial and selective coding of all national teams to check the concept and highlight emerging themes. Results: The maximal variation and saturation of the sample were reached in all countries with 211 selected GPs. The EGPRN definition was recognized in all countries. Two additional ideas emerged, the use of Wonca�s core competencies of general practice, and the dynamics of the doctor�patient relationship for detecting and managing multimorbidity and patient�s complexity. Conclusion: European GPs recognized and enhanced the EGPRN concept of multimorbidity. These results open new perspectives regarding the management of complexity using the concept of multimorbidity in general practice. Key Messages European general practitioners recognize the EGPRN enhanced, comprehensive concept of multimorbidity. They add the use of Wonca�s core competencies and the patient�doctor relationship dynamics for detecting and managing multimorbidity. The EGPRN concept of multimorbidity leads to new perspectives for the management of complexity. © 2016 WONCA Europe (the European Society of General Practice/Family Medicine)
    corecore