Evaluating the Digital Health Experience for Patients in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The digital health divide for socioeconomic disadvantage describes a pattern in which patients considered socioeconomically disadvantaged, who are already marginalized through reduced access to face-to-face health care, are additionally hindered through less access to patient-initiated digital health. A comprehensive understanding of how patients with socioeconomic disadvantage access and experience digital health is essential for improving the digital health divide. Primary care patients, especially those with chronic disease, have experience of the stages of initial help seeking and self-management of their health, which renders them a key demographic for research on patient-initiated digital health access. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to provide comprehensive primary mixed methods data on the patient experience of barriers to digital health access, with a focus on the digital health divide. METHODS: We applied an exploratory mixed methods design to ensure that our survey was primarily shaped by the experiences of our interviewees. First, we qualitatively explored the experience of digital health for 19 patients with socioeconomic disadvantage and chronic disease and second, we quantitatively measured some of these findings by designing and administering a survey to 487 Australian general practice patients from 24 general practices. RESULTS: In our qualitative first phase, the key barriers found to accessing digital health included (1) strong patient preference for human-based health services; (2) low trust in digital health services; (3) high financial costs of necessary tools, maintenance, and repairs; (4) poor publicly available internet access options; (5) reduced capacity to engage due to increased life pressures; and (6) low self-efficacy and confidence in using digital health. In our quantitative second phase, 31% (151/487) of the survey participants were found to have never used a form of digital health, while 10.7% (52/487) were low- to medium-frequency users and 48.5% (236/487) were high-frequency users. High-frequency users were more likely to be interested in digital health and had higher self-efficacy. Low-frequency users were more likely to report difficulty affording the financial costs needed for digital access. CONCLUSIONS: While general digital interest, financial cost, and digital health literacy and empowerment are clear factors in digital health access in a broad primary care population, the digital health divide is also facilitated in part by a stepped series of complex and cumulative barriers. Genuinely improving digital health access for 1 cohort or even 1 person requires a series of multiple different interventions tailored to specific sequential barriers. Within primary care, patient-centered care that continues to recognize the complex individual needs of, and barriers facing, each patient should be part of addressing the digital health divide.

What makes a good general practice consultation: an exploratory pilot study with people from a low socioeconomic background.

BACKGROUND: Whilst patients from low socioeconomic (SES) backgrounds are at increased risk of developing chronic health conditions, typically managed within general practice, they report less positive consultation experiences with general practitioners (GP). To our knowledge, existing research does not provide an in-depth understanding of GP conducts contribute to positive consultations. AIM: To identify the factors that patients from low SES backgrounds perceive as essential for creating good consultation experiences. DESIGN & SETTING: This qualitative research was performed in Melbourne GP clinics. METHOD: We used an appreciative inquiry approach, focused on positive consultation experiences, previously shown to be helpful for researching sensitive topics. Nine patients with low SES backgrounds who reported positive consultation experiences, undertook a semi-structured qualitative interview whilst watching the video-recording of their GP consultation. Four different GPs were captured in the recordings. Inductive thematic coding was performed by two researchers. RESULTS: Four categories were developed relating to: (1) the doctor's demeanour and the patient's feelings, (2) the therapeutic relationship, (3) the doctor's therapeutic skill set and (4) communication techniques. In each interview, the discussion about the video-recorded consultation often triggered reflections about previous consultations with the respective GP. CONCLUSION: For patients from low SES groups, positive consultation experiences were underpinned by perceived continuity of care with a specific GP who consistently showed good communication skills and key interpersonal characteristics. This research is a small step towards increasing our understanding of the experience of individuals with low SES backgrounds in primary care and the existing health inequities within this.

What next for behaviour change professional development in general practice? insights from an environmental scan and workshops.

BACKGROUND: A key role of general practice professionals (i.e., general practitioners [GPs], and general practice nurses [GPNs]) is to support patients to change behaviours. Traditional approaches to assisting patients with, and learning about, behaviour change have modest outcomes. AIM: To explore behaviour change with GPs and GPNs and the availability of related professional development (PD) opportunities. DESIGN & SETTING: Multi-methods study comprising an environmental scan survey of behaviour change tools and PD opportunities, and online workshops with Australian GPs and GPNs. METHOD: Survey data were analysed using qualitative content analysis, informing the design of the workshops. Workshop data included: observation, note-taking, and collaborative reflection, which were analysed thematically and synthesised with survey data. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Survey responses (n=18) and two virtual workshops (W1 n=30, W2 n=8). There was diversity in awareness of existing behaviour change tools and resources. Preferences for future tools and PD opportunities related to specific aspects of its design, content, activities, and delivery. Three themes developed from the workshop data relating to relationships, continuity, and context. In the absence of tools and resources, GPs and GPNs in our study discussed behaviour change as something that occurs best through a patient-centred alliance that is continuing, respectful, grounded in trust and an understanding of their patient, and prioritises patient autonomy. Future general practice behaviour change PD should support clinicians to 'assist' patients and recognise the social and contextual influences on behaviour.

Patients' experience of accessing healthcare for obesity in Peninsular Malaysia: a qualitative descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' experiences accessing healthcare for obesity and their perceived behaviour changes following the care. DESIGN: Using a descriptive qualitative research approach informed by Levesque's framework of access to healthcare, we conducted phone interviews in the Malaysian language, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed inductively using a reflexive thematic analysis approach. SETTING: Primary care clinics in five states in Peninsular Malaysia. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with obesity receiving face-to-face care for obesity from healthcare providers in Peninsular Malaysia. RESULTS: We interviewed 22 participants aged 24-62, with the majority being female (77%), Malay (95%), married (73%) and with tertiary education (82%). Most participants attended obesity management services at public primary care clinics. We identified five themes: (1) moving from perceiving the need to seeking obesity care is a non-linear process for patients, (2) providers' words can inspire patients to change, (3) patients' needs and preferences are not adequately addressed in current obesity care, (4) over-focusing on weight by patients and healthcare providers can lead to self-blame and loss of hope for patients and (5) obesity healthcare can have consequences beyond weight loss. CONCLUSION: Patients lack the self-regulatory skills to continue their lifestyle changes and struggle with self-blame and hopelessness. Over-focusing on weight by patients and obesity healthcare increase patients' self-stigmatisation. While provider-initiated weight discussions and engaging and personalised consultation provide the initial step towards weight management, obesity healthcare could be enhanced by behavioural support and patient education on the complexity of obesity. Further considerations could be given to shifting from a weight-centric to a more holistic health-centred approach in obesity healthcare.

Beyond the challenge to research integrity: imposter participation in incentivised qualitative research and its impact on community engagement.

Participant recruitment for qualitative research often offers incentives (honoraria; financial compensation) to increase participation and to recognise lived expertise and time involved in research. While not necessarily a new concern for survey and other quantitative based research, 'spam', 'bot', and other inauthentic forms of research participation has rarely been an apparent issue for qualitative research, given it often involves levels of interaction with potential participants prior to the conduct of in-depth interviews and other methods of data generation. This is no longer the case. A troubling new occurrence has meant that recruitment calls for qualitative research with incentives on public-facing social media have attracted 'imposter' expressions of interest and research participation. In this commentary, we explore this challenge that goes beyond research integrity. In particular, we consider the risks of employing strategies to screen for legitimate participants and the importance of building trust and maintaining community engagement.

At the edge of chaos: a prospective multiple case study in Australian general practices adapting to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: The rapid onset and progressive course of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged primary care practices to generate rapid solutions to unique circumstances, creating a natural experiment of effectiveness, resilience, financial stability and governance across primary care models. We aimed to characterise how practices in Melbourne, Australia modified clinical and organisational routines in response to the pandemic in 2020-2021 and identify factors that influenced these changes. DESIGN: Prospective, qualitative, participatory case study design using constant comparative data analysis, conducted between April 2020 and February 2021. Participant general practitioner (GP) investigators were involved in study design, recruitment of other participants, data collection and analysis. Data analysis included investigator diaries, structured practice observation, documents and interviews. SETTING: The cases were six Melbourne practices of varying size and organisational model. PARTICIPANTS: GP investigators approached potential participants. Practice healthcare workers were interviewed by social scientists on three occasions, and provided feedback on presentations of preliminary findings. RESULTS: We conducted 58 interviews with 26 practice healthcare workers including practice owners, practice managers, GPs, receptionists and nurses; and six interviews with GP investigators. Data saturation was achieved within each practice and across the sample. The pandemic generated changes to triage, clinical care, infection control and organisational routines, particularly around telehealth. While collaboration and trust increased within several practices, others fragmented, leaving staff isolated and demoralised. Financial and organisational stability, collaborative problem solving, creative leadership and communication (internally and within the broader healthcare sector) were major influences on practice ability to negotiate the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the complex influences on primary care practices, and reinforces the strengths of clinician participation in research design, conduct and analysis. Two implications are: telehealth, triage and infection management innovations are likely to continue; the existing payment system provides inadequate support to primary care in a global pandemic.

Key items for reports of primary care research: an international Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Reporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research. DESIGN: Delphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group. SETTING: International online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Interdisciplinary PC researchers and research users. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses. RESULTS: 98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items). CONCLUSION: Our Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research.

Building a practice-based research network for healthcare integration: a protocol paper for a mixed-method project.

INTRODUCTION: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are sustained collaborations between healthcare professionals, researchers and members of the community that develop, conduct and report on research relevant to local needs. While PBRNs have traditionally been focused towards primary care practices and their patients, there has been increasing interest in how they may help facilitate healthcare integration. Yet, little is known on the ways in which PBRNs can best integrate with the broader healthcare system, in particular Advanced Health Research and Translation Centres. The overall project aim is to build a sustainable collaboration between a PBRN and an Advanced Health Research and Translation Centre to generate a research platform suitable for planning, undertaking and translating research to improve care across the healthcare continuum. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use a developmental evaluation design. Our iterative approach will be informed by a programme logic model and consists of: preparation work (pre-implementation assessment, literature review, community and stakeholder engagement), adaptation and building for a sustainable collaboration (strategy for recruitment and sustainment of members) and planning for network action (designing and implementing priority initiatives, monitoring and follow-up). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project was approved by the Monash Health ethics committee (ERM Reference Number: 76281; Monash Health Ref: RES-21-0000-392L) and the Monash University Human Research ethics committee (Reference Number: 29786). Dissemination will take place via various channels, including relevant national and international committees and conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media. Continuous dissemination to and communication with all participants in this project as well as other relevant stakeholders will help strengthen and sustain the network.

Who is at the centre of what? A scoping review of the conceptualisation of 'centredness' in healthcare.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify the core elements of centredness in healthcare literature. Our overall research question is: How has centredness been represented within the health literature published between 1990 and 2019? METHODS: A scoping review across five databases (Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase (Ovid) and Scopus; August 2019) to identify all peer-reviewed literature published since 1990 that focused on the concept of centredness in any healthcare discipline or setting. Screening occurred in duplicate by a multidisciplinary, multinational team. The team met regularly to iteratively develop and refine a coding template that was used in analysis and discuss the interpretations of centredness reported in the literature. RESULTS: A total of 23 006 title and abstracts, and 499 full-text articles were screened. A total of 159 articles were included in the review. Most articles were from the USA, and nursing was the disciplinary perspective most represented. We identified nine elements of centredness: Sharing power; Sharing responsibility; Therapeutic relationship/bond/alliance; Patient as a person; Biopsychosocial; Provider as a person; Co-ordinated care; Access; Continuity of care. There was little variation in the concept of centredness no matter the preceding word (eg, patient-/person-/client-), healthcare setting or disciplinary lens. Improving health outcomes was the most common justification for pursuing centredness as a concept, and respect was the predominant driving value of the research efforts. The patient perspective was rarely included in the papers (15% of papers). CONCLUSIONS: Centredness is consistently conceptualised, regardless of the preceding word, disciplinary lens or nation of origin. Further research should focus on centring the patient perspective and prioritise research that considers more diverse cultural perspectives.

Defining collective capability in Australian evaluations that are conducted by, for and with Indigenous peoples for health programmes, policies and services: a concept analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Indigenist evaluation is emergent in Australia; the premise of which is that evaluations are undertaken for Indigenous, by Indigenous and with Indigenous people. This provides opportunities to develop new models and approaches. Exploring a collective capability approach could be one way to inform an Indigenist evaluation methodology. Collective capability suggests that a base of skills and knowledges exist, and when these assets come together, empowerment and agency emerge. However, collective capability requires defining as it is not common terminology in population health or evaluation. Our aim is to define the concept of collective capability in Indigenist evaluation in Australia from an Australian Indigenous standpoint. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A modified Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis will be used to define collective capability in an Australian Indigenous evaluation context, and to systematically review and synthesise the literature. Approximately 20 qualitative interviews with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge holders will clarify the meaning of collective capability and inform appropriate search strategy terms with a consensus process then used to code the literature. We will then systematically collate, synthesise and analyse the literature to identify exemplars or models of collective capability from the literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has approval from the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Ethics Committee, approval no. EO239-20210114. All knowledge holders will provide written consent to participate in the research. This protocol provides a process to developing a concept, and will form the basis of a new framework and assessment tool for Indigenist evaluation practice. The concept analysis will establish definitions, characteristics and attributes of collective capability. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal, conference presentations, the project advisory group, the Thiitu Tharrmay reference group and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community partners supporting the project.

How do general practices respond to a pandemic? Protocol for a prospective qualitative study of six Australian practices.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed healthcare systems worldwide. Primary care providers have been at the forefront of the pandemic response and have needed to rapidly adjust processes and routines around service delivery. The pandemic provides a unique opportunity to understand how general practices prepare for and respond to public health emergencies. We will follow a range of general practices to characterise the changes to, and factors influencing, modifications to clinical and organisational routines within Australian general practices amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective case study of multiple general practices using a participatory approach for design, data collection and analysis. The study is informed by the sociological concept of routines and will be set in six general practices in Melbourne, Australia during the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic. General practitioners associated with the Monash University Department of General Practice will act as investigators who will shape the project and contribute to the data collection and analysis. The data will include investigator diaries, an observation template and interviews with practice staff and investigators. Data will first be analysed by two external researchers using a constant comparative approach and then later refined at regular investigator meetings. Cross-case analysis will explain the implementation, uptake and sustainability of routine changes that followed the commencement of the pandemic. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by Monash University (23950) Human Research Ethics Committees. Practice reports will be made available to all participating practices both during the data analysis process and at the end of the study. Further dissemination will occur via publications and presentations to practice staff and medical practitioners.

Exploring the therapeutic alliance in Belgian family medicine and its association with doctor-patient characteristics: a cross-sectional survey study.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-centred care is related to better health outcomes, greater patient satisfaction and reduced healthcare costs. One of the core components of patient-centred care, defined in the patient-centred clinical method, is enhancing the patient-doctor relationship. In this study, we aim to measure the therapeutic alliance in consultations between patients and family doctors in Belgium, and explore which patient, provider and practice characteristics are associated with the strength of the therapeutic alliance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study using the Working Alliance Inventory for General Practice (WAI-GP). The patients and family doctors completed a survey after the consultation. The survey consisted of the WAI-GP, demographics, consultation characteristics and variables related to the patient-doctor relationship. SETTING: Belgian primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Every third patient (both practice and house call visits) was invited to participate. 170 patient-doctor dyads from four practices were included. Total of 10 doctors (30% men, age range 24-63 years) and 170 patients (35.9% men, age range 18-92 years). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the WAI-GP score and its correlations with characteristics of the doctor (gender, age) and patients (gender, age, chronic disease, number of annual consultations). RESULTS: The median WAI-GP score reported after these consultations was 4.5±0.62. Higher WAI-GP scores were reported for consultations with male doctors and by older patients. In the subsample of patients with a chronic illness, higher WAI-GP scores were reported by patients who had more than 10 follow-up consultations per year. CONCLUSIONS: Consultation quality is an important aspect of healthcare, but attention is needed to understand how the WAI-GP performs in relation to variables that are beyond control, such as gender of the physician, age of the patient and variables related to building continuity of care. This has implications for the measurement of quality of healthcare.

What factors contribute to uncontrolled gout and hospital admission? A qualitative study of inpatients and their primary care practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To provide deeper insight into why patients are admitted to hospital with gout and discover potential targets for better disease control. DESIGN: Data from semi-structured interviews were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Eleven inpatients from a tertiary institution in the Australian Capital Territory of Australia and their respective general practitioners (GPs) were invited to participate in the semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Despite significant pain and disability that accompanied acute flares, patients continue to experience shame in seeking treatment and regarded gout as being not particularly important. Other barriers included patients' poor continuity of care with and lack of confidence in GPs, suboptimal management in outpatient and inpatient settings, poor understanding of disease and treatment, and misconceptions held by both patients and physicians leading to uncontrolled disease activity. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to optimal gout management including patient and health practitioner factors have produced a complex effect which has led to a cycle of treatment avoidance behaviours and recurrent hospitalisations for severe acute gout flares. These barriers could be addressed using a multipronged approach guided by the chronic care model which has been applied in a variety of other chronic diseases with improved patient and professional-level outcomes. Managing gout according to best practice for chronic disease is more likely to prevent recurrent hospitalisations and improve health outcomes in patients with gout.

A collaborative process for developing a weight management toolkit for general practitioners in Australia-an intervention development study using the Knowledge To Action framework.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is commonly seen in the Australian general practice population; however, few resources are specifically targeted at GPs working with these patients. The National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) guideline for managing patients who are overweight and obese supports the involvement of a regular health professional. As 85 % of the population visit a GP annually, resources to support GPs working with this patient population are needed. This study describes the collaborative process used to develop an obesity management programme based on current Australian guidelines for GPs and their patients to be used in primary care. The Knowledge To Action framework was applied to develop a weight management toolkit for GPs based on current Australian guidelines. This draft was then reviewed by clinical GPs, GP registrars, consumer representatives and allied health professionals using focus groups and interviews. The participants gave feedback on the content, layout and acceptability of the documents. The feedback from the stakeholder groups was evaluated, and changes were incorporated into the final documents. A graphic designer was contracted to assist with the layout to improve useability and attractiveness of the documents. RESULTS: A total of 38 participants gave feedback on the draft weight management programme, and the research team amalgamated their responses to further improve the documents. The general response from GPs and consumer representatives was positive with most conveying their wish to try the programme themselves. CONCLUSIONS: "The Change Program" is a practical tool for Australian GPs to use with their patients who are overweight or obese. It was developed in collaboration with GPs, allied health professionals and consumer stakeholders based on current Australian guidelines. It is currently being piloted in five general practices.

Obesity management in Australian primary care: where has the general practitioner gone?

Obesity is a chronic condition with significant health and economic consequences that requires more effective management in Australia. General practitioners (GPs) currently act as care co-ordinators in line with national guidelines for overweight and obesity. Australian patients indicate that they would appreciate more involvement from their GP in the management of obesity, and this is in line with international findings. Not all patients have access to specialist obesity services or affordable allied health care because of location, cost and time, particularly in rural and remote areas where there is a greater prevalence of obesity. Empowering GPs to use their skills as expert generalists to manage obesity is an option that should be explored to improve access for all individuals. GPs will require evidence-based tools to assist them in structuring obesity management within their own general practice environment.

The role of the family doctor in the management of adults who are obese: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The role of family doctors in the management of obesity in primary care will become increasingly important as more of the adult population become overweight or obese. Having a solid understanding of the family doctor's role as a sole practitioner is important for supporting practitioners in providing patient care and for informing future research. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe a protocol for a scoping review that aims to examine and map the current research base for the role of the family doctor in managing adults who are overweight or obese. METHODS: This scoping review is based on the methodology as described by the Joanna Briggs Institute which involves final consultation with stakeholders. Two reviewers (ES, NE) will be responsible for the iterative development of a search strategy based on the basic initial search terms obesity, doctor and primary care. Black and grey literature will be searched to elucidate any manuscripts involving the family doctor in the management of adults who are overweight or obese. A customised data extraction tool will be used to collect relevant items from each manuscript. RESULTS: Data extraction will expose the role family doctors are playing in obesity management in all stages of research including recruitment, intervention or as a control group. By looking at a broad scope of manuscripts we will discover the family doctor's role as portrayed in research, in international guidelines and by peak bodies. We will also determine if there are any gaps in the research base. CONCLUSION: This protocol describes a scoping review that will illustrate the supporting international research for the role family doctors are playing in the management of adults who are overweight or obese. Scoping of the international literature will then be translated for Australian primary care.

The work of forensic physicians with police detainees in the Canberra City Watchhouse.

Forensic physicians provide both medical care and forensic consultations to detainees in police custody. There is a paucity of Australian data regarding characteristics of detainees and the type of work provided by forensic physicians in this setting. This retrospective audit of a clinical forensic service in Canberra, Australia will assist with service planning, future data collection and the training of forensic physicians.

Characteristics of sexual assaults in which adult victims report penetration by a foreign object.

This retrospective clinical audit reviews cases of adult sexual assault where the victim alleges that they were penetrated with a foreign object. These assaults were more likely to have positive genital and non-genital findings recorded by the clinician compared to assaults where no object was used. There is a suggestion that these assaults may be more violent with multiple assailants more common and an association with more use of threats and weapons. It is important to ask about the penetrative use of foreign objects in a sexual assault history and for clinicians to be aware of the greater possibility of injury in these cases.