48 research outputs found

    Does the attention General Practitioners pay to their patients' mental health problems add to their workload? A cross sectional national survey

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The extra workload induced by patients with mental health problems may sometimes cause GPs to be reluctant to become involved in mental health care. It is known that dealing with patients' mental health problems is more time consuming in specific situations such as in consultations. But it is unclear if GPs who are more often involved in patients' mental health problems, have a higher workload than other GPs. Therefore we investigated the following: Is the attention GPs pay to their patients' mental health problems related to their subjective and objective workload? METHODS: Secondary analyses were made using data from the Second Dutch National Survey of General Practice, a cross sectional study conducted in the Netherlands in 2000–2002. A nationally representative selection of 195 GPs from 104 general practices participated in this National Survey. Data from: 1) a GP questionnaire; 2) a detailed log of the GP's time use during a week and; 3) an electronic medical registration system, including all patients' contacts during a year, were used. Multiple regression analyses were conducted with the GP's workload as an outcome measure, and the GP's attention for mental health problems as a predictor. GP, patient, and practice characteristics were included in analyses as potential confounders. RESULTS: Results show that GPs with a broader perception of their role towards mental health care do not have more working hours or patient contacts than GPs with a more limited perception of their role. Neither are they more exhausted or dissatisfied with the available time. Also the number of patient contacts in which a psychological or social diagnosis is made is not related to the GP's objective or subjective workload. CONCLUSION: The GP's attention for a patient's mental health problems is not related to their workload. The GP's extra workload when dealing in a consultation with patients' mental health problems, as is demonstrated in earlier research, is not automatically translated into a higher overall workload. This study does not confirm GPs' complaints that mental health care is one of the components of their job that consumes a lot of their time and energy. Several explanations for these results are discussed

    To support and not to cure: general practitioner management of loneliness

    Get PDF
    Loneliness is associated with numerous detrimental effects on physical health, mental health, cognition and lifestyle. Older adults are one of the groups at highest risk of loneliness, and indeed about 46% of older adults in England feel lonely. Those experiencing loneliness visit their general practitioner (GP) more frequently than those who are not, which has the capacity to put a strain on GPs and primary care waiting lists and costs. This study's aim was to explore GPs' views and experiences of loneliness within their older adult patients, and to understand GPs' awareness and feelings of agency within this. Nineteen UK GPs were recruited using purposive sampling and snowballing techniques. Individual semi‐structured interviews were conducted either in person or over the telephone. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Four overarching themes were identified from the data: Whose responsibility is it anyway?, Pandora's box of shame; Keeping distance; and Community responsibility. Themes emphasise that GPs tend to hold a medicalised and individualistic view of loneliness. This intensifies stigma which in turn creates barriers to raising the topic. GPs felt powerless in their ability to fix the ‘problem’ and tended to believe that the solution had to lie in the community, the individual or in social care rather than in primary care. The findings are discussed in the context of literature on GP management of other social problems which give rise to similar issues concerning the restrictions of the medical model and the need for joined‐up approaches in which the GP is one part of a wider social support structure. It is suggested that it might be useful for training and support for GPs to address management of social problems jointly rather than training specific to loneliness which GPs tend to see as peripheral to their core remit

    Doctor-patient communication with people with intellectual disability - a qualitative study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>People with intellectual disability (ID) expressed dissatisfaction with doctor-patient communication and mentioned certain preferences for this communication (our research). Since many people with ID in the Netherlands have recently moved from residential care facilities to supported accommodations in the community, medical care for them was transferred from ID physicians (IDPs) to general practitioners (GPs) in the vicinity of the new accommodation. We addressed the following research question: 'What are the similarities and differences between the communication preferences of people with ID and the professional criteria for doctor-patient communication by GPs?'</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A focus group meeting and interviews were used to identify the preferences of 12 persons with ID for good communication with their GP; these were compared with communication criteria used to assess trainee GPs, as described in the MAAS-Global manual.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eight preferences for doctor-patient communication were formulated by the people with ID. Six of them matched the criteria used for GPs. Improvements are required as regards the time available for consultation, demonstrating physical examinations before applying them and triadic communication.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>People with ID hold strong views on communication with their doctors during consultations. GPs, people with ID and their support workers can further fine-tune their communication skills.</p

    Cost-effectiveness of problem-solving treatment in comparison with usual care for primary care patients with menthal health problems: a randomized trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common and are associated with increased disability and health care costs. Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) delivered to these patients by nurses in primary care might be efficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PST by mental health nurses compared with usual care (UC) by the general practitioner for primary care patients with mental health problems. METHODS: An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized clinical trial. Patients with a positive General Health Questionnaire score (score ≥ 4) and who visited their general practitioner at least three times during the past 6 months were eligible. Outcome measures were improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and QALYs based on the EQ-5D. Resource use was measured using a validated questionnaire. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Bootstrapping was used to analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of PST compared with UC. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes at 9 months. Mean total costs were €4795 in the PST group and €6857 in the UC group. Costs were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (95% CI -4698;359). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PST was cost-effective in comparison with UC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: PST delivered by nurses seems cost-effective in comparison with UC. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since the difference in total costs was mainly caused by 3 outliers with extremely high indirect costs in the UC group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register ISRCTN5102101

    Raising positive expectations helps patients with minor ailments: A cross-sectional study

    Get PDF
    Background: Consultations for minor ailments constitute a large part of the workload of general practitioners (GPs). As medical interventions are not always available, specific communication strategies, such as active listening and positive communication, might help GPs to handle these problems adequately. This study examines to what extent GPs display both strategies during consultations for minor ailments and investigates how each of these relate to the patients' perceived health, consultation frequency and medication adherence. Methods: 524 videotaped consultations between Dutch GPs and patients aged 18 years or older were selected. All patients presented a minor ailment, and none of them suffered from a diagnosed chronic illness. The observation protocol included the validated Active Listening Observation Scale (ALOS-global), as well as three domains of positive communication, i.e. providing reassurance, a clear explanation, and a favourable prognosis. Patients completed several questionnaires before, immediately after, and two weeks after the consultation. These included measures for state anxiety (STAI), functional health status (COOP/ WONCA charts) and medication adherence (MAQ). Consultation frequency was available from an ongoing patient registration. Data were analysed using multivariate regression analyses. Results: Reassurance was related to patients' better overall health. Providing a favourable prognosis was linked to patients feeling better, but only when accompanied by a clear explanation of the complaints. A clear explanation was also related to patients feeling better and less anxious, except when patients reported a low mood pre-visit. Active listening alone was positively associated with patients feeling worse. Among patients in a good mood state, active listening was associated with less adherence. Conclusion: To some extent, it seems helpful when GPs are at the same time clear and optimistic about the nature and course of minor ailments. Yet, it does not seem helpful always and in all cases, e.g. when patients feel low upon entering the consulting room. Although communication strategies might to some extent contribute to the management of minor ailments, the results of this observational study also indicate that it is important for a physician to pay attention to the mood of the patient who enters the consulting room. (aut. ref.
    corecore