Experiences with implementing advance care planning (ACP-GP) in Belgian general practice in the context of a cluster RCT: a process evaluation using the RE-AIM framework.

BACKGROUND: General practice is often recommended as an ideal setting to initiate advance care planning (ACP), but uptake of ACP in this setting is low. ACP-GP is a complex intervention to facilitate ACP for patients with chronic, life-limiting illness in Belgian general practice. It aims to increase patient ACP engagement and general practitioner (GP) ACP self-efficacy. In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, the intervention was not superior to control in increasing these outcomes. A parallel process evaluation aimed to enhance understanding of how the intervention was implemented, and which factors might have influenced trial results. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods process evaluation following the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Data sources include recruitment and implementation monitoring, questionnaires for patients and GPs, and semi-structured (focus group) interviews with patients and GPs. Questionnaire data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data were first analyzed inductively; themes were then assigned deductively to RE-AIM dimensions. RESULTS: Thirty-five GPs and 95 patients were recruited to the trial; GP reach was low. Sixteen GPs and 46 patients provided questionnaire data at 3 months post-baseline; qualitative data were transcribed for 14 GPs and 11 patients. Adoption of intervention components was moderate to good, with the exception of the documentation template for GPs. Interviews revealed varying patient attitudes towards ACP, but patients nonetheless emphasized that conversations made them feel reassured. GPs especially valued a positive framing of ACP. When adopted, the intervention was well-implemented and participant satisfaction was high. However, intention for maintenance was moderate, with GPs raising questions of how to sustainably implement ACP conversations in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the complex ACP-GP intervention in general practice is feasible, and can be successful. However, the implementation process is challenging and the sustainability is suboptimal. Our findings will guide future research and recommendations for facilitating and implementing ACP in general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12995230; prospectively registered on 19/06/2020.

The costs, barriers and enablers of providing PGY2 placements in general practice in Aotearoa New Zealand: a mixed-methods study.

Introduction Few mandatory community-based attachments for postgraduate year two doctors (PGY2s) in Aotearoa New Zealand are hosted in general practices, due to space, time and remuneration barriers. Aim This study aimed to explore the costs, barriers and enablers to general practices of hosting PGY2s. Methods A cost analysis for four general practices beginning to host PGY2s was undertaken, including time spent supervising and supporting PGY2s, revenue impact including subsidies and cost of providing clinical space. Interviews with these practices and seven experienced PGY2 host practices were conducted and analysed thematically. Results The estimated mean cost of hosting PGY2s excluding room cost was NZ$4907 per 13-week placement (range $890-$9183), increasing to $13 727 per placement (range $5750-$24 715) when room rental was included. Four themes were identified: working within a small business model; a new learning environment for PGY2s; providing positive experiences for the PGY2s; the relationship between practices and district hospitals that employed the PGY2s, including job sizing. Discussion Tension exists between the small business model of general practice and providing positive experiences for PGY2s in a new learning environment. Guidance and support structures for PGY2 hosting should be developed nationally, and communication and cooperation between practices and employing hospitals needs improvement. Out-of-hours work should be included in community-based attachments so PGY2s' remuneration is consistent. General practice teams are willing to be part of creating a sustainable workforce. However, the time taken to host and costs of providing training in primary care are barriers. There is urgent need to increase funding to general practices for hosting PGY2s.

[General practice and occupational medicine: a dynamic exchange?] / Médecine générale, médecine du travail : quelle dynamique d'échange ?

GENERAL PRACTICE AND OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE: A DYNAMIC EXCHANGE? Occupational physicians and general practitioners have different roles but share the common goal of maintaining and promoting the health of the population. Their collaboration is necessary, and both practitioners and employees are generally in favor of it. This collaboration is particularly necessary in several situations: the discovery of a pathology by the occupational physician, the need for temporary incapacity, or difficulties in maintaining employment. Especially in the case of musculoskeletal disorders and mental suffering at work. The pre-reinstatement visit is an important tool for achieving this collaboration. There are also several ways of improving these exchanges, such as the introduction of joint training courses.

MÉDECINE GÉNÉRALE, MÉDECINE DU TRAVAIL : QUELLE DYNAMIQUE D'ÉCHANGE ? Le médecin du travail et le médecin généraliste ont des places et des rôles différents mais pour objectif commun de maintenir et promouvoir la santé de la population. Leur nécessaire collaboration, à laquelle les praticiens comme les salariés se disent globalement favorables, est pourtant insuffisamment constatée sur le terrain. Cette collaboration est nécessaire dans plusieurs situations : découverte d'une pathologie par le médecin du travail, nécessité d'une inaptitude temporaire ou encore difficultés de maintien en emploi. C'est particulièrement le cas pour les situations de troubles musculo-squelettiques et de souffrance psychique au travail. La visite de préreprise est un outil important pour permettre cette collaboration. Il existe également plusieurs pistes d'amélioration de ces échanges, comme la mise en place de formations communes.

GP workforce sustainability to maximise effective and equitable patient care: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances?

BACKGROUND: UK general practice has been described as being in crisis. A shortage and exodus of GPs is an urgent and challenging problem, attracting significant media attention, widespread public debate, and policy action. AIM: Our review aims to examine which aspects of the healthcare system affect GP workforce sustainability, how, why, and for whom. METHOD: A realist review is an interpretive, theory-driven approach to evidence synthesis, that brings together data from quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods research, and the wider grey literature (e.g., policy documentation). Using this data allows us to examine a diverse range of evidence with a clear focus on understanding factors which support (or hinder) GP workforce sustainability, how these are shaped by contexts, and the mechanisms that underpin them. We identify important individual and system-level contexts that may be amenable to change. RESULTS: We present our emerging findings in the form of a programme theory which explores human connection with patients, colleagues, and across organisations, gaining intellectual enrichment and learning systems comprising socially-situated knowledge. Relational continuity is key across these, supporting GP workforce sustainability. Challenges include standardisation, alienation and professional loneliness, inflexible organisation, and restrictive technologies. CONCLUSION: Our research generates new knowledge about the interdependencies between contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes. The findings can inform strategies and interventions intended to support, facilitate, and assist the GP workforce in delivering equitable and effective patient care. We identify critical gaps in knowledge and prioritise the expectations for scope and nature of future GP work and retention strategies.

Rural generalist medicine: a developing approach to health care in rural and island Japan.

INTRODUCTION: Despite universal health coverage and high life expectancy, Japan faces challenges in health care that include providing care for the world's oldest population, increasing healthcare costs, physician maldistribution and an entrenched medical workforce and training system. Primary health care has typically been practised by specialists in other fields, and general medicine has only been certified as an accredited specialty since 2018. There are continued challenges to develop an awareness and acceptance of the primary health medical workforce in Japan. The impact of these challenges is highest in rural and island areas of Japan, with nearly 50% of rural and remote populations considered 'elderly'. Concurrently, these areas are experiencing physician shortages as medical graduates gravitate to urban areas and choose medical specialties more commonly practised in cities. This study aimed to understand the views on the role of rural generalist medicine (RGM) in contributing to solutions for rural and island health care in Japan. METHODS: This was a descriptive qualitative study. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews with 16 participants, including Rural Generalist Program Japan (RGPJ) registrars and supervisors, the RGPJ director, government officials, rural health experts and academics. Interviews were of 35-50 minutes duration and conducted between May and July 2019. Some interviews were conducted in person at the WONCA Asia-Pacific Conference in Kyoto, some onsite in hospital settings and some were videoconferenced. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. All transcripts were analysed through an inductive thematic process based on the grouping of codes. RESULTS: From the interview analysis, six main themes were identified: (1) key issues facing rural and island health in Japan; (2) participant background; (3) local demography and population; (4) identity, perception and role of RGM; (5) RGPJ experience; and (6) suggested reforms and recommendations. DISCUSSION: The RGPJ was generally considered to be a positive step toward reshaping the medical workforce to address the geographic inequities in Japan. While improvements to the program were suggested by participants, it was also generally agreed that a more systematic, national approach to RGM was needed in Japan. Key findings from this study are relevant to this goal. This includes considering the drivers to participating in the RGPJ for future recruitment strategies and the need for an idiosyncratic Japanese model of RGM, with agreed advanced skills and supervision models. Also important are the issues raised by participants on the need to improve community acceptance and branding of rural generalist doctors to support primary care in rural and island areas. CONCLUSION: The RGPJ represents an effort to bolster the national rural medical workforce in Japan. Discussions from participants in this study indicate strong support to continue research, exploration and expansion of a national RGM model that is contextualised for Japanese conditions and that is branded and promoted to build community support for the role of the rural generalist.

Tailoring communication practices to support effective delivery of telehealth in general practice.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented increase in telehealth use due to COVID-19 has changed general practitioners' (GP) and patients' engagement in healthcare. There is limited specific advice for effective communication when using telehealth. Examining telehealth use in practice in conjunction with perspectives on telehealth as they relate to communication allows opportunities to produce evidence-based guidance for optimal use of telehealth, while also offering practitioners the opportunity to reflect on elements of their communicative practice common to both styles of consultation. The objective of this research was to develop evidence-based resources to support effective, person-centred communication when GPs and patients use telehealth. This included examination of interactional practices of recorded telehealth consultations, exploration of GP and patient perspectives relating to telehealth, and identifying priorities for guidance informed by these analyses as well as participant co-design. METHODS: This study involved recording telehealth consultations (n = 42), conducting patient surveys (n = 153), and interviewing patients (n = 9) and GPs (n = 15). These were examined using interaction analytic methods, quantitative analysis, and thematic analyses, to create a robust, integrated picture of telehealth practice and perspectives. The process of research translation involved a co-design approach, engaging with providers, patients, and policy makers to facilitate development of evidence-based principles that focus on supporting effective communication when using telehealth. RESULTS: Three key themes relating to communication in telehealth were identified across the different analyses. These were relationship building, conversational flow, and safety netting. The draft best practice principles drawn from these themes were modified based on co-design feedback into five Best Practice Principles for Communication between GPs and Patients using Telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is supported through relationship building and attention to conversational flow in telehealth consultations, which in turn allows for safety netting to occur. In telehealth, GPs and patients recognise that not being co-present changes the consultation and use both intuitive and strategic interactional adjustments to support their exchange. The mixed-method examination of experiences through both a detailed analysis of telehealth consultations in practice and comparative exploration of GP and patient perspectives enabled the identification of principles that can support effective communication when using telehealth. Co-design helped ensure these principles are ready for implementation into practice.

Infection prevention and control in Dutch general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and its implications for pandemic preparedness and seasonal respiratory epidemics: a qualitative study on lessons learned.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a re-evaluation of infection prevention and control (IPC) in general practices, highlighting the need for comprehensive IPC implementation. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences and perspectives regarding IPC in general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its implications for post-pandemic IPC implementation. METHODS: This qualitative study involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews during two time periods: (1) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2019-February 2020), involving 14 general practitioners (GPs) and medical assistants; and (2) during the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2022-February 2023), including 22 GPs and medical assistants. Data analysis included thematic analysis that addressed multiple system levels. RESULTS: Findings indicated a shift towards comprehensive IPC implementation and organisation during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. Since the Omicron variant, some general practices maintained a broad set of IPC measures, while others released most measures. HCWs' future expectations on post-pandemic IPC implementation varied: some anticipated reduced implementation due to the desire to return to the pre-pandemic standard, while others expected IPC to be structurally scaled up during seasonal respiratory epidemics. Main contextual challenges included patient cooperation, staff shortages (due to infection), shortages of IPC materials/equipment, and frequently changing and ambiguous guidelines. Key lessons learned were enhanced preparedness (e.g., personal protective equipment supply), and a new perspective on care organisation (e.g., digital care). Main recommendations reported by HCWs were to strengthen regional collaboration within primary care, and between primary care, public health, and secondary care. CONCLUSION: HCWs' experiences, perspectives and recommendations provide insights to enhance preparedness for future epidemics and pandemics, and sustain IPC in general practices. For IPC improvement strategies, adopting an integrated system-based approach that encompasses actions across multiple levels and engages multiple stakeholders is recommended.

Advancing integrated paediatric care in Australian general practices: Qualitative insights from the SC4C GP-paediatrician model of care.

The Strengthening Care for Children (SC4C) is a general practitioner (GP)-paediatrician integrated model of care that consists of co-consulting sessions and case discussions in the general practice setting, with email and telephone support provided by paediatricians to GPs during weekdays. This model was implemented in 21 general practices in Australia (11 Victoria and 10 New South Wales). Our study aimed to identify the factors moderating the implementation of SC4C from the perspectives of GPs, general practice personnel, paediatricians and families. We conducted a qualitative study as part of the mixed-methods implementation evaluation of the SC4C trial. We collected data through virtual and in-person focus groups at the general practices and phone, virtual and in-person interviews. Data was analysed using an iterative hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis. Twenty-one focus groups and thirty-seven interviews were conducted. Overall, participants found SC4C acceptable and suitable for general practices, with GPs willing to learn and expand their paediatric care role. GPs cited improved confidence and knowledge due to the model. Paediatricians reported an enhanced understanding of the general practice context and the strain under which GPs work. GPs and paediatricians reported that this model allowed them to build trust-based relationships with a common goal of improving care for children. Additionally, they felt some aspects, including the lack of remuneration and the work and effort required to deliver the model, need to be considered for the long-term success of the model. Families expressed their satisfaction with the shared knowledge and quality of care jointly delivered by GPs and paediatricians and highlighted that this model of care provides easy access to specialty services without out-of-pocket costs. Future research should focus on finding strategies to ensure the long-term Implementation of this model of care with a particular focus on the individual stressors in general practices.

Non-dispensing pharmacists integrated into general practices as a new interprofessional model: a qualitative evaluation of general practitioners' experiences and views.

BACKGROUND: A new interprofessional model incorporating non-dispensing pharmacists in general practice teams can improve the quality of pharmaceutical care. However, results of the model are dependent on the context. Understanding when, why and how the model works may increase chances of successful broader implementation in other general practices. Earlier theories suggested that the results of the model are achieved by bringing pharmacotherapeutic knowledge into general practices. This mechanism may not be enough for successful implementation of the model. We wanted to understand better how establishing new interprofessional models in existing healthcare organisations takes place. METHODS: An interview study, with a realist informed evaluation was conducted. This qualitative study was part of the Pharmacotherapy Optimisation through Integration of a Non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care Teams (POINT) project. We invited the general practitioners of the 9 general practices who (had) worked closely with a non-dispensing pharmacist for an interview. Interview data were analysed through discussions about the coding with the research team where themes were developed over time. RESULTS: We interviewed 2 general practitioners in each general practice (18 interviews in total). In a context where general practitioners acknowledge the need for improvement and are willing to work with a non-dispensing pharmacist as a new team member, the following mechanisms are triggered. Non-dispensing pharmacists add new knowledge to current general practice. Through everyday talk (discursive actions) both general practitioners and non-dispensing pharmacists evolve in what they consider appropriate, legitimate and imaginable in their work situations. They align their professional identities. CONCLUSIONS: Not only the addition of new knowledge of non-dispensing pharmacist to the general practice team is crucial for the success of this interprofessional healthcare model, but also alignment of the general practitioners' and non-dispensing pharmacists' professional identities. This is essentially different from traditional pharmaceutical care models, in which pharmacists and GPs work in separate organisations. To induce the process of identity alignment, general practitioners need to acknowledge the need to improve the quality of pharmaceutical care interprofessionally. By acknowledging the aspect of interprofessionality, both general practitioners and non-dispensing pharmacists will explore and reflect on what they consider appropriate, legitimate and imaginable in carrying out their professional roles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The POINT project was pre-registered in The Netherlands National Trial Register, with Trial registration number NTR-4389.

Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care. AIM: To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices. METHOD: Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD. CONCLUSION: The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Strategies that facilitate the delivery of exceptionally good patient care in general practice: a qualitative study with patients and primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, proactive strengths-based approaches to improving quality of care have been advocated. The positive deviance approach seeks to identify and learn from those who perform exceptionally well. Central to this approach is the identification of the specific strategies, behaviours, tools and contextual strategies used by those positive deviants to perform exceptionally well. This study aimed to: identify and collate the specific strategies, behaviours, processes and tools used to support the delivery of exceptionally good care in general practice; and to abstract the identified strategies into an existing framework pertaining to excellence in general practice; the Identifying and Disseminating the Exceptional to Achieve Learning (IDEAL) framework. METHODS: This study comprised a secondary analysis of data collected during semi-structured interviews with 33 purposively sampled patients, general practitioners, practice nurses, and practice managers. Discussions explored the key factors and strategies that support the delivery of exceptional care across five levels of the primary care system; the patient, provider, team, practice, and external environment. For analysis, a summative content analysis approach was undertaken whereby data were inductively analysed and summated to identify the key strategies used to achieve the delivery of exceptionally good general practice care, which were subsequently abstracted as a new level of the IDEAL framework. RESULTS: In total, 222 individual factors contributing to exceptional care delivery were collated and abstracted into the framework. These included specific behaviours (e.g., patients providing useful feedback and personal history to the provider), structures (e.g., using technology effectively to support care delivery (e.g., electronic referrals & prescriptions)), processes (e.g., being proactive in managing patient flow and investigating consistently delayed wait times), and contextual factors (e.g., valuing and respecting contributions of every team member). CONCLUSION: The addition of concrete and contextual strategies to the IDEAL framework has enhanced its practicality and usefulness for supporting improvement in general practices. Now, a multi-level systems approach is needed to embed these strategies and create an environment where excellence is supported. The refined framework should be developed into a learning tool to support teams in general practice to measure, reflect and improve care within their practice.

Becoming a general practice supervisor: A longitudinal multi-case study exploring key supportive factors.

INTRODUCTION: Supervision of trainees in the health care professions is recognised internationally as core to safe and effective patient care. A supervisor workforce in general practice (GP) is critical to the profession and to the communities where they work and can be demanding as general practitioners incorporate workplace-based education and support of their trainees into their daily consulting work. Little is known about how this is experienced by new supervisors; therefore, this research sought to understand factors that play a significant role in the first semester of becoming a supervisor. METHODS: An exploratory multi-case study design was used; new general practice supervisors were the unit of analysis. Four data sources were captured longitudinally: semi-structured interviews at the beginning and end of the semester, audio diaries throughout and a mid-semester focus group. Template analysis was used, sensitised by a community of practice theoretical framework. RESULTS: Seven new supervisors participated. Five interdependent key factors played a significant role in general practitioners becoming supervisors: (1) making meaning of the role, (2) reconciling multiple roles, (3) building a relationship with the trainee, (4) receiving support from the training practice and the training programme and (5) joining peer communities of new and experienced supervisors. CONCLUSION: Becoming a general practice supervisor is situated in the context of a workplace delivering clinical services, a training programme and personal life circumstances. It can be challenging and rewarding. Insufficient support may result in unintended attrition. Learning in this role is facilitated by enabling the new supervisor to find meaning in the role; structured allocation of time to engage effectively; a positive trainee-supervisor relationship; administrative support by practices; information, advice and remuneration from the training programme; and interactions with new and experienced supervisor peers.

Exploring whether primary care networks can contribute to the national goal of reducing health inequalities: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Significant health inequalities exist in England. Primary care networks (PCNs), comprised of GP practices, were introduced in England in 2019 with funding linked to membership. PCNs have been tasked with tackling health inequalities. AIM: To consider how the design and introduction of PCNs might influence their ability to tackle health inequalities. DESIGN AND SETTING: A sequential mixed-methods study of PCNs in England. METHOD: Linear regression of annual PCN-allocated funding per workload-weighted patient on income deprivation score from 2019-2023 was used. Qualitative interviews and observations of PCNs and PCN staff were undertaken across seven PCN sites in England (July 2020-March 2022). RESULTS: Across 1243 networks in 2019-2020, a 10% higher level of income deprivation resulted in £0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] = £0.25 to £0.37), 4.50%, less funding per weighted patient. In 2022-2023, the same difference in deprivation resulted in £0.16 (95% CI = £0.11 to £0.21), 0.60%, more funding. Qualitative interviews highlighted that, although there were requirements for PCNs to tackle health inequalities, the policy design, and PCN internal relationships and maturity, shaped and sometimes restricted how PCNs approached this task locally. CONCLUSION: Allocated PCN funding has become more pro-poor over time, suggesting that the need to account for deprivation within funding models is understood by policymakers. The following additional approaches have been highlighted that could support PCNs to tackle inequalities: better management support; encouragement and support to redistribute funding internally to support practices serving more deprived populations; and greater specificity in service requirements.

Implementing the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme in seven English Primary Care Networks: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS) provides funding to Primary Care Networks (PCNs) in England to recruit additional staff into specified roles. The intention was to support general practice by recruiting an extra 26 000 staff by 2024, increasing access and easing workload pressures. AIM: To explore the establishment of the ARRS as part of PCNs' development to understand their role in supporting general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A longitudinal, qualitative case study involving seven geographically dispersed PCNs across England. METHOD: Data were collected from July 2020 to March 2022, including 91 semi-structured interviews and 87 h of meeting observations. Transcripts were analysed using the framework approach. RESULTS: Implementation of the ARRS was variable across the study sites, but most shared similar experiences and concerns. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the introduction of the new roles, and significant variability was found in modes of employment. Cross-cutting issues included: the need for additional space to accommodate new staff; the inflexibility of aspects of the scheme, including reinvestment of unspent funds; and the need for support and oversight of employed staff. Perceived benefits of the ARRS include improved patient care and the potential to save GP time. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest the ARRS has potential to fulfil its objective of supporting and improving access to general practice. However, attention to operational requirements including appropriate funding, estates, and management of staff is important if this is to be realised, as is clarity for the scheme post-contract end in 2024.

Managing patient complaints to improve your practice.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patient complaints to regulators suggest practices need effective systems to manage and address patient concerns. Many patient complaints can often be dealt with at a practice level, but patients can have difficulty reporting negative experiences directly. OBJECTIVE: This article explores the benefits of having a system to accept and deal with patient feedback within a practice and identifies barriers preventing patients from raising their concerns directly. DISCUSSION: Managing patient complaints well at a practice level can prevent them escalating, as well as offering insights to reduce risk and improve patient care. Understanding factors that inhibit patients from raising concerns, or prevent staff from being able to accept and deal with complaints, allows an opportunity for practices to implement strategies to address these barriers and support patients and staff. Effective strategies include process improvements, as well as cultural changes and support for those managing a complaint process.