Development of quality indicators for hypertension, extractable from the electronic health record of the general practitioner: a rand-modified Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension, a chronic medical condition affecting millions of people worldwide, is a leading cause of cardiovascular diseases. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to reduce the burden of the disease, with general practitioners playing a vital role. Therefore, it is crucial that GPs provide high-quality care that is standardized and based on the most recent European guidelines. Quality indicators (QIs) can be used to assess the performance, outcomes, or processes of healthcare delivery and are critical in helping healthcare professionals identify areas of improvement and measure progress towards achieving desired health outcomes. However, QIs to evaluate the care of patients with hypertension in general practice have been studied to a limited extent. The aim of our study is to define quality indicators for hypertension in general practice that are extractable from the electronic health record (EHR) and can be used to evaluate and improve the quality of care for hypertensive patients in the general practice setting. METHODS: We used a Rand-modified Delphi procedure. We extracted recommendations from European guidelines and assembled them into an online questionnaire. An initial scoring based on the SMART principle and extractability from the EHR was performed by panel members, these results were analyzed using a Median Likert score, prioritization and degree of consensus. A consensus meeting was set up in which all the recommendations were discussed, followed by a final validation round. RESULTS: Our study extracted 115 recommendations. After analysis of the online questionnaire round and a consensus meeting round, 37 recommendations were accepted and 75 were excluded. Of these 37 recommendations, 9 were slightly modified and 4 were combined into 2 recommendations, resulting in a list of 35 recommendations. All recommendations of the final set were translated to QIs, made up of 7 QIs on screening, 6 QIs on diagnosis, 11 QIs on treatment, 5 QIs on outcome and 6 QIs on follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study resulted in a set of 35 QIs for hypertension in general practice. These QIs, tailored to the Belgian EHR, provide a robust foundation for automated audit and feedback and could substantially benefit other countries if adapted to their systems.

Proactive advance care planning conversations in general practice: a quality improvement project.

Advance care planning (ACP) is a process of discussion, reflection and communication, enabling planning for future medical treatment. Despite evidence of benefits of ACP to patients, families and the healthcare system, many die without an opportunity for such conversations, particularly those living with progressive non-malignant conditions. The Royal College of General Practitioners and Marie Curie Daffodil Standards launched in 2020 provide primary care with a structure for improving end-of-life care, including delivery of ACP. Proactive identification of patients is integral to the approach.We report on a quality improvement project which aimed to assess the take-up rate and acceptability in general practice of a timely and personalised ACP conversation using a 'What matters to you' (WMTY) framework, and to ensure that different diagnostic and demographic groups were included.Patients without previous ACP and potentially in the last year of life were offered an ACP conversation; a survey sought feedback.81% accepted the offer and in most cases, future care guidance was documented using the recognised format in Gloucestershire for recording ACP conversations, the Recommended Summary for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) plan. Clinician and patient satisfaction was high.We concluded that an ACP discussion using a 'WMTY' format was highly acceptable to most. With recognised enablers in place and known barriers minimised, valuable personalised conversations occurred. Reframing the conversation to focus on how someone wants to live, while including their priorities for death, could alter how such conversations are perceived by clinicians and the public. It could remove negative associations (such as linking these conversations with an imminent death), which may increase motivation for all to initiate discussions.ACP conversations are evidenced best practice and could become routine in general practice with adjustments to practice processes and clinician education; the Daffodil Standards facilitate continued quality improvement.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case-finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests-a cross-validation study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine the discriminative validity of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition (BASIC) case-finding instrument in a general practice (GP) setting and compare it with other widely used brief cognitive instruments. METHODS: Patients aged ≥70 years were prospectively recruited from 14 Danish GP clinics. Participants were classified as having either normal cognition (n = 154) or cognitive impairment (n = 101) based on neuropsychological test performance, reported instrumental activities of daily living, and concern regarding memory decline. Comparisons involved the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS), the Mini-Cog, the 6-item Clock Drawing Test (CDT-6) and the BASIC Questionnaire (BASIC-Q). RESULTS: BASIC demonstrated good overall classification accuracy with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.92), a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.62-0.80) and a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.79-0.91). Pairwise comparisons of the AUCs of BASIC, MMSE, MoCA and RUDAS produced non-significant results, but BASIC had significantly higher classification accuracy than Mini-Cog, BASIC-Q and CDT-6. Depending on the pretest probability of cognitive impairment, the positive predictive validity of BASIC varied from 0.83 to 0.36, and the negative predictive validity from 0.97 to 0.76. CONCLUSIONS: BASIC demonstrated good discriminative validity in a GP setting. The classification accuracy of BASIC is equivalent to more complex, time-consuming instruments, such as the MMSE, MoCA and RUDAS, and higher than very brief instruments, such as the CDT-6, Mini-Cog and BASIC-Q.

Association between regulator inspection and ratings on primary care prescribing: an observational study in England 2014 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare regulators in many countries undertake inspections of healthcare providers and publish inspection outcomes with the intention of improving quality of care. Comprehensive inspections of general practices in England by the Care Quality Commission began for the first time in 2014. It is assumed that inspection and rating will raise standards and improve care, but the presence and extent of any improvements is unknown. We aim to determine if practice inspection ratings are associated with past performance on prescribing indicators and if prescribing behaviour changes following inspection. METHODS: Longitudinal study using a dataset of 6771 general practices in England. Practice inspection date and score was linked with monthly practice-level data on prescribing indicators relating to antibiotics, hypnotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The sample covers practices receiving their first inspection between September 2014 and December 2018. Regression analysis and the differential timing of inspections is used to identify the impact on prescribing. RESULTS: Better-rated practices had better prescribing in the period before inspections began. In the six months following inspections, no overall change in prescribing was observed. However, the differences between the best and worse rated practices were reduced but not fully. The same is also true when taking a longer-term view. There is little evidence that practices responded in anticipation of inspection or reacted differently once the ratings were made public. CONCLUSION: While some of the observed historic variation in prescribing behaviour has been lessened by the process of inspection and ratings, we find this change is small and appears to come from both improvements among lower-rated practices and deteriorations among higher-rated practices. While inspection and rating no doubt had other impacts, these prescribing indicators were largely unchanged.

Highlighting efficiency and redundancy in the Royal Australian College of General Practice standards for accreditation.

Objectives Accreditation to standards developed by the Royal Australian College of General Practice provides assurance to the community of the quality and safety of general practices in Australia. The objective of this study was to conduct an empirical evaluation of the 5th edition standards. Minimal empirically driven evaluation of the standards has been conducted since their publication in 2020. Methods Data encompass consecutive Australian general practice accreditation assessments between December 2020 and July 2022 recorded from a single accrediting agency. Met and not met compliance (binary) scores for 124 indicators evaluated at the site visit were recorded. A subset of indicators derived from a selection of existing and consistently non-conformant indicators within each criterion was generated. Concordance between the indicator subset and the criterion was assessed to determine the predictive ability of the indicator subset in distinguishing practices who are conformant to the entire criterion. Results A total of 757 general practices were included in the analysis. On average, 113.69 (s.d. = 8.16) of 124 indicators were evaluated as conformant at the site visit. In total, 52 (42%) indicators were required to obtain a true positive conformity rate above 95% for all criterions of the standards. For criterion 1 (General Practice 1) conformity to the entire criterion (nine indicators; >95% true positive rate) could be obtained by including 2/9 indicators (C1-1a and C1-2a). Conclusion Our results identified that indicator non-conformity was driven by a small proportion of indicators and identifying a subset of these consistently non-conformant indicators predicted a true positive rate above 95% at the criterion level.

The impact of self-assessment and surveyor assessment on site visit performance under the National General Practice Accreditation scheme.

Objective There is a need to undertake more proactive and in-depth analyses of general practice accreditation processes. Two areas that have been highlighted as areas of potential inconsistency are the self-assessment and surveyor assessment of indicators. Methods The data encompass 757 accreditation visits made between December 2020 and July 2022. A mixed-effect multilevel logistic regression model determined the association between attempt of the self-assessment and indicator conformity from the surveyor assessment. Furthermore, we present a contrast of the rate of indicator conformity between surveyors as an approximation of the inter-assessor consistency from the site visit. Results Two hundred and seventy-seven (37%) practices did not attempt or accurately report conformity to any indicators at the self-assessment. Association between attempting the self-assessment and the rate of indicator non-conformity at the site visit failed to reach statistical significance (OR = 0.90 [95% CI = 1.14-0.72], P = 0.28). A small number of surveyors (N = 9/34) demonstrated statistically significant differences in the rate of indicator conformity compared to the mean of all surveyors. Conclusions Attempt of the self-assessment did not predict indicator conformity at the site visit overall. Appropriate levels of consistency of indicator assessment between surveyors at the site visit were identified.

Prediction of general practice licensure/certification examination performance by a measure of 'questionable' activities in clinical practice: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: 'Low-value' clinical care and medical services are 'questionable' activities, being more likely to cause harm than good or with disproportionately low benefit relative to cost. This study examined the predictive ability of the QUestionable In Training Clinical Activities Index (QUIT-CAI) for general practice (GP) registrars' (trainees') performance in Australian GP Fellowship examinations (licensure/certification examinations for independent GP). METHODS: The study was nested in ReCEnT, an ongoing cohort study in which Australian GP registrars document their in-consultation clinical practice. Outcome factors in analyses were individual registrars' scores on the three Fellowship examinations ('AKT', 'KFP', and 'OSCE' examinations) and pass/fail rates during 2012-21. Analyses used univariable and multivariable regression (linear or logistic, as appropriate). The study factor in each analysis was 'QUIT-CAI score percentage'-the percentage of times a registrar performed a QUIT-CAI clinical activity when 'at risk' (i.e. when managing a problem where performing a QUIT-CAI activity was a plausible option). RESULTS: A total of 1265, 1145, and 553 registrars sat Applied Knowledge Test, Key Features Problem, and Objective Structured Clinical Exam examinations, respectively. On multivariable analysis, higher QUIT-CAI score percentages (more questionable activities) were significantly associated with poorer Applied Knowledge Test scores (P = .001), poorer Key Features Problem scores (P = .003), and poorer Objective Structured Clinical Exam scores (P = .005). QUIT-CAI score percentages predicted Royal Australian College of General Practitioner exam failure [odds ratio 1.06 (95% CI 1.00, 1.12) per 1% increase in QUIT-CAI, P = .043]. CONCLUSION: Performing questionable clinical activities predicted poorer performance in the summative Fellowship examinations, thereby validating these examinations as measures of actual clinical performance (by our measure of clinical performance, which is relevant for a licensure/certification examination).

Implementation of ask-advise-connect for smoking cessation in Dutch general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods evaluation using the CFIR framework.

BACKGROUND: The Ask-Advise-Connect (AAC) approach can help primary care providers to increase the number of people who attempt to quit smoking and enrol into cessation counselling. We implemented AAC in Dutch general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study we describe how AAC was received in Dutch general practice and assess which factors played a role in the implementation. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the implementation of AAC. Implementation took place between late 2020 and early 2022 among 106 Dutch primary care providers (general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses and doctor's assistants). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through four online questionnaires. A descriptive analysis was conducted on the quantitative data. The qualitative data (consisting of answers to open-ended questions) were inductively analysed using axial codes. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to structure and interpret findings. RESULTS: During the study, most participants felt motivated (84-92%) and able (80-94%) to apply AAC. At the end of the study, most participants reported that the AAC approach is easy to apply (89%) and provides advantages (74%). Routine implementation of the approach was, however, experienced to be difficult. More GPs (30-48%) experienced barriers in the implementation compared to practice nurses and doctor's assistants (7-9%). The qualitative analysis showed that especially external factors, such as a lack of time or priority to discuss smoking due to the COVID-19 pandemic, negatively influenced implementation of AAC. CONCLUSIONS: Although AAC was mostly positively received in Dutch general practice, implementation turned out to be challenging, especially for GPs. Lack of time to discuss smoking was a major barrier in the implementation. Future efforts should focus on providing additional implementation support to GPs, for example with the use of e-health.

Profiles of quality of outpatient care use, associated sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and adverse outcomes among patients with substance-related disorders.

BACKGROUND: This study identified patient profiles in terms of their quality of outpatient care use, associated sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and adverse outcomes based on frequent emergency department (ED) use, hospitalization, and death from medical causes. METHODS: A cohort of 18,215 patients with substance-related disorders (SRD) recruited in addiction treatment centers was investigated using Quebec (Canada) health administrative databases. A latent class analysis was produced, identifying three profiles of quality of outpatient care use, while multinomial and logistic regressions tested associations with patient characteristics and adverse outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Profile 1 patients (47% of the sample), labeled "Low outpatient service users", received low quality of care. They were mainly younger, materially and socially deprived men, some with a criminal history. They had more recent SRD, mainly polysubstance, and less mental disorders (MD) and chronic physical illnesses than other Profiles. Profile 2 patients (36%), labeled "Moderate outpatient service users", received high continuity and intensity of care by general practitioners (GP), while the diversity and regularity in their overall quality of outpatient service was moderate. Compared with Profile 1, they  were older, less likely to be unemployed or to live in semi-urban areas, and most had common MD and chronic physical illnesses. Profile 3 patients (17%), labeled "High outpatient service users", received more intensive psychiatric care and higher quality of outpatient care than other Profiles. Most Profile 3 patients lived alone or were single parents, and fewer lived in rural areas or had a history of homelessness, versus Profile 1 patients. They were strongly affected by MD, mostly serious MD and personality disorders. Compared with Profile 1, Profile 3 had more frequent ED use and hospitalizations, followed by Profile 2. No differences in death rates emerged among the profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent ED use and hospitalization were strongly related to patient clinical and sociodemographic profiles, and the quality of outpatient services received to the severity of their conditions. Outreach strategies more responsive to patient needs may include motivational interventions and prevention of risky behaviors for Profile 1 patients, collaborative GP-psychiatrist care for Profile 2 patients, and GP care and intensive specialized treatment for Profile 3 patients.

Effect of an Individualized Audit and Feedback Intervention on Rates of Musculoskeletal Diagnostic Imaging Requests by Australian General Practitioners: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Audit and feedback can improve professional practice, but few trials have evaluated its effectiveness in reducing potential overuse of musculoskeletal diagnostic imaging in general practice. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and feedback for reducing musculoskeletal imaging by high-requesting Australian general practitioners (GPs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This factorial cluster-randomized clinical trial included 2271 general practices with at least 1 GP who was in the top 20% of referrers for 11 imaging tests (of the lumbosacral or cervical spine, shoulder, hip, knee, and ankle/hind foot) and for at least 4 individual tests between January and December 2018. Only high-requesting GPs within participating practices were included. The trial was conducted between November 2019 and May 2021, with final follow-up on May 8, 2021. Interventions: Eligible practices were randomized in a 1:1:1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 4 different individualized written audit and feedback interventions (n = 3055 GPs) that varied factorially by (1) frequency of feedback (once vs twice) and (2) visual display (standard vs enhanced display highlighting highly requested tests) or to a control condition of no intervention (n = 764 GPs). Participants were not masked. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the overall rate of requests for the 11 targeted imaging tests per 1000 patient consultations over 12 months, assessed using routinely collected administrative data. Primary analyses included all randomized GPs who had at least 1 patient consultation during the study period and were performed by statisticians masked to group allocation. Results: A total of 3819 high-requesting GPs from 2271 practices were randomized, and 3660 GPs (95.8%; n = 727 control, n = 2933 intervention) were included in the primary analysis. Audit and feedback led to a statistically significant reduction in the overall rate of imaging requests per 1000 consultations compared with control over 12 months (adjusted mean, 27.7 [95% CI, 27.5-28.0] vs 30.4 [95% CI, 29.8-30.9], respectively; adjusted mean difference, -2.66 [95% CI, -3.24 to -2.07]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Australian general practitioners known to frequently request musculoskeletal diagnostic imaging, an individualized audit and feedback intervention, compared with no intervention, significantly decreased the rate of targeted musculoskeletal imaging tests ordered over 12 months. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12619001503112.

Integration of complementary and integrative medicine competencies in general practice postgraduate education - development of a novel competency catalogue in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and integrative medical procedures (CIM) play an important role in general practice (GP). Consequently, in some countries (e.g. USA, Australia) specific curricula for the integration of CIM competencies in GP postgraduate education exist. Although Germany is one of the countries where CIM is strongly integrated in general practice, no such catalogue exists up to date. The aim of this study was to define a set of CIM competencies that are seen as relevant and feasible for postgraduate education in the German general practice setting. METHODS: We used a multi-step, peer-based approach combining four different steps. Firstly, a survey among GP trainees (n = 138) was performed in order to assess needs and attitudes towards CIM. Then, existing competency-based CIM curricula were identified in international literature, translated into German and compared with the needs assessment from the survey. In a next step, we performed a survey among the CIM working group of the German Society for General Medicine and Family Medicine (DEGAM). As a last step, in a peer-based survey, GP trainers, GP trainees, and members of professional CIM associations (n = 131) evaluated a list of CIM competencies according to relevance and feasibility for general practice. RESULTS: Within this multistage process, a final catalogue of 16 competencies was defined, covering the following areas: Medical knowledge, patient care and communication, practice-based learning, professionalism, and competencies based on the German healthcare system. CONCLUSION: The final catalogue of CIM competencies is intended to serve for GP training complementing the German competency-based curriculum for general practice. These competencies cover basic skills and are not intended to replace existing additional qualifications awarded by the medical associations in specific CIM methods, such as acupuncture or manual medicine. Therefore, a list of relevant competencies on CIM is available in order to serve as add-on for postgraduate education in general practice in Germany.

A mixed-methods study describing behavioral factors that influenced general practitioners' experiences using triage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, general practices were asked to expand triage and to reduce unnecessary face-to-face contact by prioritizing other consultation modes, e.g., online messaging, video, or telephone. The current study explores the potential barriers and facilitators general practitioners experienced to expanding triage systems and their attitudes towards triage during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A mixed-method study design was used in which a quantitative online survey was conducted along with qualitative interviews to gain a more nuanced appreciation for practitioners' experiences in the United Kingdom. The survey items were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework so they would capture 14 behavioral factors that may influence whether practitioners use triage systems. Items were responded to using seven-point Likert scales. A median score was calculated for each item. The responses of participants identifying as part-owners and non-owners (i.e., "partner" vs. "non-partner" practitioners) were compared. The semi-structured interviews were conducted remotely and examined using Braun and Clark's thematic analysis. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 204 participants (66% Female). Most participants (83%) reported triaging patients. The items with the highest median scores captured the 'Knowledge,' 'Skills,' 'Social/Professional role and identity,' and 'Beliefs about capabilities' domains. The items with the lowest median scores captured the 'Beliefs about consequences,' 'Goals,' and 'Emotions' domains. For 14 of the 17 items, partner scores were higher than non-partner scores. All the qualitative interview participants relied on a phone triage system. Six broad themes were discovered: patient accessibility, confusions around what triage is, uncertainty and risk, relationships between service providers, job satisfaction, and the potential for total digital triage. Suggestions arose to optimize triage, such as ensuring there is sufficient time to conduct triage accurately and providing practical training to use triage efficiently. CONCLUSIONS: Many general practitioners are engaging with expanded triage systems, though more support is needed to achieve total triage across practices. Non-partner practitioners likely require more support to use the triage systems that practices take up. Additionally, practical support should be made available to help all practitioners manage the new risks and uncertainties they are likely to experience during non-face-to-face consultations.

[COVID-19 in GP Practice and Emergency Rooms - Update 2021]. / Update 2021: COVID-19 aus Sicht der Praxen und Notaufnahmen.

COVID-19 continues to pose major challenges for GP practice and emergency rooms across Germany. Even if there is now a certain routine, the optimal treatment of patients is still difficult. This article provides an overview of the aspects of caring for COVID-19 patients in GP practice and emergency rooms and the changes since the beginning of the pandemic.

High adherence to recommended diabetes follow-up procedures by general practitioners is associated with lower estimated cardiovascular risk.

AIMS: To explore whether the general practitioners' (GPs') performance of recommended processes of care was associated with estimated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and poor glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A cross-sectional study from Norwegian general practice including 6015 people with type 2 diabetes <75 years old, without CVD and their 275 GPs. The GPs were split into quintiles based on each GP's average performance of six recommended processes of care. The quintiles were the exposure variable in multilevel regression models with 10-year risk of cardiovascular events estimated by NORRISK 2 (total and modifiable fraction) and poor glycaemic control (HbA1c >69 mmol/mol (>8.5%)) as outcome variables. RESULTS: The mean total and modifiable estimated 10-year CVD risk was 12.3% and 3.3%, respectively. Compared with patients of GPs in the highest-performing quintile, patients treated by GPs in the lowest quintile had an adjusted total and modifiable CVD risk that was 1.88 (95% CI 1.17-2.60) and 1.78 (1.14-2.41) percent point higher. This represents a relative mean difference of 16.6% higher total and 74.8% higher modifiable risk among patients of GPs in the lowest compared with the highest quintile. For patients with GPs in the lowest-performing quintile, the adjusted odds of poor glycaemic control was 1.77 (1.27-2.46) times higher than that for patients with a GP in the highest quintile. CONCLUSIONS: We found a pattern of lower CVD risk and better glycaemic control in patients of GPs performing more recommended diabetes processes of care.