Impact of Provider Self-Management Education, Patient Self-Efficacy, and Health Status on Patient Adherence in Heart Failure in a Veterans Administration Population

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73786/1/j.1751-7133.2008.07174.x.pd

Using the Teamlet Model to Improve Chronic Care in an Academic Primary Care Practice

Team care can improve management of chronic conditions, but implementing a team approach in an academic primary care clinic presents unique challenges. To implement and evaluate the Teamlet Model, which uses health coaches working with primary care physicians to improve care for patients with diabetes and/or hypertension in an academic practice. Process and outcome measures were compared before and during the intervention in patients seen with the Teamlet Model and in a comparison patient group. First year family medicine residents, medical assistants, health workers, and adult patients with either type 2 diabetes or hypertension in a large public health clinic. Health coaches, in coordination with resident primary care physicians, met with patients before and after clinic visits and called patients between visits. Measurement of body mass index, assessment of smoking status, and formulation of a self-management plan prior to and during the intervention period for patients in the Teamlet Model group. Testing for LDL and HbA1C and the proportion of patients at goal for blood pressure, LDL, and HbA1C in the Teamlet Model and comparison groups in the year prior to and during implementation. Teamlet patients showed improvement in all measures, though improvement was significant only for smoking, BMI, and self-management plan documentation and testing for LDL (p = 0.02), with a trend towards significance for LDL at goal (p = 0.07). Teamlet patients showed a greater, but non-significant, increase in the proportion of patients tested for HbA1C and proportion reaching goal for blood pressure, HgbA1C, and LDL compared to the comparison group patients. The difference for blood pressure was marginally significant (p = 0.06). In contrast, patients in the comparison group were significantly more likely to have had testing for LDL (P = 0.001). The Teamlet Model may improve chronic care in academic primary care practices

Treating latent TB in primary care: a survey of enablers and barriers among UK General Practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Treating latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is an important public health intervention. In the UK, LTBI treatment is delivered in secondary care. Treating LTBI in the community would move care closer to home and could increase uptake and treatment completion rates. However, healthcare providers' views about the feasibility of this in the UK are unknown. This is the first study to investigate perceived barriers and enablers to primary care-based LTBI treatment among UK general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: A national survey amongst 140 randomly sampled UK GPs practising in areas of high TB incidence was performed. GPs' experience and perceived confidence, barriers and enablers of primary care-based LTBI treatment were explored and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether these were associated with a GP's willingness to deliver LTBI treatment. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve (80 %) GPs responded. Ninety-three (83 %; 95 % CI 75 %-89 %) GPs said they would be willing to deliver LTBI treatment in primary care, if key perceived barriers were addressed during service development. The major perceived barriers to delivering primary care-based LTBI treatment were insufficient experience among GPs of screening and treating LTBI, lack of timely specialist support and lack of allied healthcare staff. In addition, GPs felt that appropriate resourcing was key to the successful and sustainable delivery of the service. GPs who reported previous experience of screening or treatment of patients with active or latent TB were almost ten times more likely to be willing to deliver LTBI treatment in primary care compared to GPs with no experience (OR: 9.98; 95 % CI 1.22-81.51). CONCLUSIONS: UK GPs support primary care-based LTBI treatment, provided they are given appropriate training, specialist support, staffing and financing

I Believe, Therefore I Do

Item does not contain fulltex

Protocol for the 'e-Nudge trial' : a randomised controlled trial of electronic feedback to reduce the cardiovascular risk of individuals in general practice [ISRCTN64828380]

Background: Cardiovascular disease (including coronary heart disease and stroke) is a major cause of death and disability in the United Kingdom, and is to a large extent preventable, by lifestyle modification and drug therapy. The recent standardisation of electronic codes for cardiovascular risk variables through the United Kingdom's new General Practice contract provides an opportunity for the application of risk algorithms to identify high risk individuals. This randomised controlled trial will test the benefits of an automated system of alert messages and practice searches to identify those at highest risk of cardiovascular disease in primary care databases. Design: Patients over 50 years old in practice databases will be randomised to the intervention group that will receive the alert messages and searches, and a control group who will continue to receive usual care. In addition to those at high estimated risk, potentially high risk patients will be identified who have insufficient data to allow a risk estimate to be made. Further groups identified will be those with possible undiagnosed diabetes, based either on elevated past recorded blood glucose measurements, or an absence of recent blood glucose measurement in those with established cardiovascular disease. Outcome measures: The intervention will be applied for two years, and outcome data will be collected for a further year. The primary outcome measure will be the annual rate of cardiovascular events in the intervention and control arms of the study. Secondary measures include the proportion of patients at high estimated cardiovascular risk, the proportion of patients with missing data for a risk estimate, and the proportion with undefined diabetes status at the end of the trial

Barriers to the provision of smoking cessation assistance:A qualitative study among Romanian family physicians

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation is the most effective intervention to prevent and slow down the progression of several respiratory and other diseases and improve patient outcomes. Romania has legislation and a national tobacco control programme in line with the World Health Organization Framework for Tobacco Control. However, few smokers are advised to quit by their family physicians (FPs). AIM: To identify and explore the perceived barriers that prevent Romanian FPs from engaging in smoking cessation with patients. METHODS: A qualitative study was undertaken. A total of 41 FPs were recruited purposively from Bucharest and rural areas within 600 km of the city. Ten FPs took part in a focus group and 31 participated in semistructured interviews. Analysis was descriptive, inductive and themed, according to the barriers experienced. RESULTS: Five main barriers were identified: limited perceived role for FPs; lack of time during consultations; past experience and presence of disincentives; patients' inability to afford medication; and lack of training in smoking cessation skills. Overarching these specific barriers were key themes of a medical and societal hierarchy, which undermined the FP role, stretched resources and constrained care. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the barriers described by the Romanian FPs reflected universally recognised challenges to the provision of smoking cessation advice. The context of a relatively hierarchical health-care system and limitations of time and resources exacerbated many of the problems and created new barriers that will need to be addressed if Romania is to achieve the aims of its National Programme Against Tobacco Consumption

Estimated time spent on preventive services by primary care physicians

10.1186/1472-6963-8-245BMC Health Services Research8

Eligibility for interventions, co-occurrence and risk factors for unhealthy behaviours in patients consulting for routine primary care: results from the Pre-Empt study

Smoking, excessive drinking, lack of exercise and a poor diet remain key causes of premature morbidity and mortality globally, yet it is not clear what proportion of patients attending for routine primary care are eligible for interventions about these behaviours, the extent to which they co-occur within individuals, and which individuals are at greatest risk for multiple unhealthy behaviours. The aim of the trial was to examine 'intervention eligibility' and co-occurrence of the 'big four' risky health behaviours - lack of exercise, smoking, an unhealthy diet and excessive drinking - in a primary care population. Data were collected from adult patients consulting routinely in general practice across South Wales as part of the Pre-Empt study; a cluster randomised controlled trial. After giving consent, participants completed screening instruments, which included the following to assess eligibility for an intervention based on set thresholds: AUDIT-C (for alcohol), HSI (for smoking), IPAQ (for exercise) and a subset of DINE (for diet). The intervention following screening was based on which combination of risky behaviours the patient had. Descriptive statistics, χ2 tests for association and ordinal regressions were undertaken. Two thousand sixty seven patients were screened: mean age of 48.6 years, 61.9 % female and 42.8 % in a managerial or professional occupation. In terms of numbers of risky behaviours screened eligible for, two was the most common (43.6 %), with diet and exercise (27.2 %) being the most common combination. Insufficient exercise was the most common single risky behaviour (12.0 %). 21.8 % of patients would have been eligible for an intervention for three behaviours and 5.9 % for all four behaviours. Just 4.5 % of patients did not identify any risky behaviours. Women, older age groups and those in managerial or professional occupations were more likely to exhibit all four risky behaviours. Very few patients consulting for routine primary care screen ineligible for interventions about common unhealthy behaviours, and most engage in more than one of the major common unhealthy behaviours. Clinicians should be particularly alert to opportunities to engaging younger, non professional men and those with multi-morbidity about risky health behaviour. ISRCTN22495456. BACKGROUND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION TRIAL REGISTRATIO

Sins of Omission

Little is known about the relative incidence of serious errors of omission versus errors of commission. Objective : To identify the most common substantive medical errors identified by medical record review. Design : Retrospective cohort study. Setting : Twelve Veterans Affairs health care systems in 2 regions. Participants : Stratified random sample of 621 patients receiving care over a 2-year period. Main Outcome Measure : Classification of reported quality problems. Methods : Trained physicians reviewed the full inpatient and outpatient record and described quality problems, which were then classified as errors of omission versus commission. Results : Eighty-two percent of patients had at least 1 error reported over a 13-month period. The average number of errors reported per case was 4.7 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 4.4, 5.0). Overall, 95.7% (95% CI: 94.9%, 96.4%) of errors were identified as being problems with underuse. Inadequate care for people with chronic illnesses was particularly common. Among errors of omission, obtaining insufficient information from histories and physicals (25.3%), inadequacies in diagnostic testing (33.9%), and patients not receiving needed medications (20.7%) were all common. Out of the 2,917 errors identified, only 27 were rated as being highly serious, and 26 (96%) of these were errors of omission. Conclusions : While preventing iatrogenic injury resulting from medical errors is a critically important part of quality improvement, we found that the overwhelming majority of substantive medical errors identifiable from the medical record were related to people getting too little medical care, especially for those with chronic medical conditions.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74567/1/j.1525-1497.2005.0152.x.pd