Implementation of Enhanced Recovery Protocols for Gastrointestinal Surgery in Children: Practical Tools From Key Stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: We explored patient, caregiver, and provider recommendations for development of a tool kit to implement enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) for pediatric patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. ERPs are widely used for adults to decrease hospital length of stay, hospital costs, and complications while hastening patient recovery after surgery. With limited data available for ERPs among pediatric populations informed modification of adult ERPs is needed to facilitate successful implementation for pediatric surgery. METHODS: Using a qualitative research design, semistructured interviews were conducted with hospital-based teams including surgeons, anesthesiologists, gastroenterologists, nursing, and physician assistants. Four in-person focus groups were held at two pediatric hospitals with patients and caregivers. Codes were developed and applied to interview and focus groups transcripts for structural content analysis. Thematic analysis guided by the Active Implementation Framework, included recommendations that informed ERP implementation tool kit development. RESULTS: Key components of the ERP tool kit included the need for a structured and systematic approach, leadership support from key champions, and buy-in from surgical partners and hospital management. Providers identified the need for multimodal educational materials on ERP elements for staff and patients; use of uniform checklists, care sets and an electronic repository to collect outcome data for quality assurance assessment. Patients and caregivers endorsed expansion of the team to include child-life specialists, nutritionists, and patient-parent supporters to help navigate the surgical experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to leverage key input from patients, caregivers, and providers to identify practical components for an ERP implementation tool kit for children undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

Pediatric Patient and Caregiver Agreement on Perioperative Expectations and Self-Reported Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Alignment between pediatric patients and caregiver perspectives on patient-reported outcome (PRO) data is contingent upon context. We aimed to assess agreement between patient and caregiver responses to a series of perioperative domains. METHODS: Agreement between pediatric patients and caregiver responses to preoperative and postoperative surveys about surgery preparedness, perioperative expectations, PRO Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures for overall health and pain, and reaching milestones gathered as part of an ongoing clinical trial for children undergoing gastrointestinal surgery, was evaluated. Gwet's AC and Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated, as appropriate, to assess agreement. RESULTS: Of 209 enrolled patients, 65 (31.1%) dyads completed all three surveys and were included. For the domains of education, expectations, and comprehension, patients and caregivers had good agreement with Gwet AC1 with values of 0.80, 0.61, and 0.64, respectively. For milestones, patients and caregivers had very good agreement (Gwet AC1 of 0.95). Milestones measured whether patients achieved certain goals within a prespecified time, including enteral intake (Gwet AC1 0.91 and 0.92 respectively), transition to oral pain medication (Gwet AC1 0.94), ambulation (Gwet AC1 1.00), and return of bowel function (Gwet AC1 0.97). There was moderate to strong agreement between patients and caregivers on PROMIS pain questions (Spearman's correlation: 0.71 preoperatively and 0.51 postoperatively). On PROMIS global health questions, there was strong agreement (0.69 preoperatively and 0.65 postoperatively). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patient and caregiver agreement on perioperative survey items ranged from moderate to strong. Caregivers' responses may be acceptable when some patient-level responses are not available.

Age- and Sex-Specific Needs for Children Undergoing Inflammatory Bowel Disease Surgery: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) is extending to pediatric surgical populations, such as patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Given the variation in age- and sex-specific characteristics of pediatric IBD patients, it is important to understand the unique needs of subgroups, such as male versus female or preadolescent versus older patients, when implementing ERPs. We gathered clinician, patient, and caregiver perspectives on age- and sex-specific needs for children undergoing IBD surgery. METHODS: We used semistructured interviews and focus groups to assess ERP needs and perceived differences in needs between preadolescent (10-13 y), older (14-19 y), male, and female IBD patients. Participants included clinicians, patients who had recent IBD surgery, and patients' caregivers. RESULTS: Forty-eight clinicians, six patients, and eight caregivers participated. Three broad categories of themes emerged: concerns, needs, and experiences related to the (1) surgical care process; (2) continuum of IBD care; and (3) suggestions to make surgical care more patient centered. With regard to surgical care processes, stakeholders reported different communication needs for preadolescent and older children. Key themes about the continuum of IBD care were the need (1) for support from child life specialists and (b) to address young women's health issues. Suggestions to make surgical care more patient centered included providing older children with patient experiences that reflect their perspective as young adults. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the need to adopt a patient-centered approach for ERP use that actively addresses age- and sex-specific factors while engaging patients and caregivers as partners with clinicians to improve surgical care for children with IBD.

A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Clinician Education Modules on Reducing Surgical Opioid Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we developed online interactive clinician education modules highlighting best practices to minimize opioid prescribing at discharge after surgery. The modules were implemented as part of a multicomponent quality improvement initiative across a six-hospital health system. This article describes the development and evaluation of this educational intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinician education modules targeting surgical prescribers, nurses, and pharmacists were developed and implemented by an interdisciplinary team. Clinicians were invited to participate in an evaluation survey after completing the modules. Survey items assessed clinicians' rating of the module and intention to change clinical practice because of the module. Quantitative and qualitative survey responses were analyzed by the study team. RESULTS: A total of 2119 clinicians completed the module and 1831 of these clinicians (86.4%) completed the survey. Of clinicians completing the survey, 65.6% reported that they intend to change clinical practice after completing the module. Intended changes were related to increased knowledge and awareness, provider empowerment, opioid prescribing practices, nonopioid prescribing practices, and patient education. Many clinicians who indicated they do not intend to change practice reported that their clinical practices were already in line with module recommendations. Some clinicians did not perceive the module to be relevant to their role. CONCLUSIONS: Module completion was associated with the intention to improve clinical practice in areas related to provider empowerment, opioid prescribing, nonopioid prescribing, and patient education. Evaluation data will inform future module improvements. There is an opportunity to ensure that all clinicians, including those who are not prescribers, recognize their role in opioid stewardship.

Job satisfaction of general practitioners: a cross-sectional survey in 34 countries.

BACKGROUND: Job satisfaction of general practitioners (GPs) is important because of the consequences of low satisfaction for GPs, their patients and the health system, such as higher turnover, health problems for the physicians themselves, less satisfied patients, poor clinical outcomes and suboptimal health care delivery. In this study, we aim to explain differences in the job satisfaction of GPs within and between countries. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data, collected between 2010 and 2012 on 7379 GPs in 34 (mostly European) countries, as well as data on country and health system characteristics from public databases. Job satisfaction is measured through a composite score of six items about self-reported job experience. Operationalisation of the theoretical constructs includes variables, such as the range of services GPs provide, working hours, employment status, and feedback from colleagues. Data were analysed using linear multilevel regression analysis, with countries and GPs as levels. We developed hypotheses on the basis of the Social Production Function Theory, assuming that GPs 'produce' job satisfaction through stimulating work that provides a certain level of comfort, adds to their social status and provides behavioural confirmation. RESULTS: Job satisfaction varies between GPs and countries, with high satisfaction in Denmark and Canada (on average 2.97 and 2.77 on a scale from 1-4, respectively) and low job satisfaction in Spain (mean 2.15) and Hungary (mean 2.17). One-third of the total variance is situated on the country level, indicating large differences between countries, and countries with a higher GDP per capita have more satisfied GPs. Health system characteristics are not related to GP job satisfaction. At the GP and practice level, performing technical procedures and providing preventive care, feedback from colleagues, and patient satisfaction are positively related to GP job satisfaction and working more hours is negatively related GP job satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Overall and in terms of our theoretical approach, we found that GPs are able to 'produce' work-related well-being through activities and resources related to stimulation, comfort and behavioural confirmation, but not to status.

Primary prevention of prescription opioid diversion: a systematic review of medication disposal interventions.

Background: In the U.S., 50-75% of nonmedical users of prescription opioids obtain their pills through diversion by friends or relatives. Increasing disposal of unused opioid prescriptions is a fundamental primary prevention strategy in combatting the opioid epidemic.Objectives: To identify interventions for disposal of unused opioid pills and assess the evidence of their effectiveness on disposal-related outcomes.Methods: A search of four electronic databases was conducted (October 2019). We included all empirical studies, systematic literature reviews, and meta-analyses about study medication disposal interventions in the U.S. Studies of disposal interventions that did not include opioids were excluded. We abstracted data for the selected articles to describe the study design, and outcomes. Further, we assessed the quality of each study using the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tools.Results: We identified 25 articles that met our inclusion criteria. None of the 13 studies on drug take-back events or the two studies on donation boxes could draw conclusions about their effectiveness. Although studies on educational interventions found positive effects on knowledge acquisition, they did not find differences in disposal rates. Two randomized controlled trials on drug disposal bags found higher opioid disposal rates in their intervention arms compared to the control arms (57.1% vs 28.6% and 33.3%, p = .01; and 85.7% vs 64.9%, p = .03).Conclusions: Peer-reviewed publications on opioid disposal interventions are limited and either do not address effectiveness or have conflicting findings. Future research should address these limitations and further evaluate implementation and cost-effectiveness.

The association between the workload of general practitioners and patient experiences with care: results of a cross-sectional study in 33 countries.

BACKGROUND: The workload of general practitioners (GPs) and dissatisfaction with work have been increasing in various Western countries over the past decades. In this study, we evaluate the relation between the workload of GPs and patients' experiences with care. METHODS: We collected data through a cross-sectional survey among 7031 GPs and 67,873 patients in 33 countries. Dependent variables are the patient experiences on doctor-patient communication, accessibility, continuity, and comprehensiveness of care. Independent variables concern the workload measured as the GP-reported work hours per week, average consultation times, job satisfaction (an indicator of subjective workload), and the difference between the workload measures of every GP and the average in their own country. Finally, we evaluated interaction effects between workload measures and what patients find important in a country and the presence of a patient-list system. Relationships were determined through multilevel regression models. RESULTS: Patients of GPs who are happier with their work were found to experience better communication, continuity, access, and comprehensiveness. When GPs are more satisfied compared to others in their country, patients also experience better quality. When GPs work more hours per week, patients also experience better quality of care, but not in the area of accessibility. A longer consultation time, also when compared to the national average, is only related to more comprehensive care. There are no differences in the relationships between countries with and without a patient list system and in countries where patients find the different quality aspects more important. CONCLUSIONS: Patients experience better care when their GP has more work hours, longer consultation times, and especially, a higher job satisfaction.

Communication between general practitioners and medical specialists in the referral process: a cross-sectional survey in 34 countries.

BACKGROUND: The communication of relevant patient information between general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists is important in order to avoid fragmentation of care thus achieving a higher quality of care and ensuring physicians' and patients' satisfaction. However, this communication is often not carried out properly. The objective of this study is to assess whether communication between GPs and medical specialists in the referral process is associated with the organisation of primary care within a country, the characteristics of the GPs, and the characteristics of the primary care practices themselves. METHODS: An analysis of a cross-sectional survey among GPs in 34 countries was conducted. The odds ratios of the features that were expected to relate to higher rates of referral letters sent and communications fed back to GPs were calculated using ordered logistic multilevel models. RESULTS: A total of 7183 GPs from 34 countries were surveyed. Variations between countries in referral letters sent and feedback communication received did occur. Little of the variance between countries could be explained. GPs stated that they send more referral letters, and receive more feedback communications from medical specialists, in countries where they act as gatekeepers, and when, in general, they interact more with specialists. GPs reported higher use of referral letters when they had a secretary and/or a nurse in their practice, used health information technologies, and had greater job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences in communication between GPs and medical specialists. These differences can partly be explained by characteristics of the country, the GP and the primary care practice. Further studies should also take the organisation of secondary care into account.

Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) Initiative: An Analysis of Implementation Barriers.

BACKGROUND: The United States is in the midst of an opioid epidemic. In response, our institution developed the Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) initiative. MOPiS is a multicomponent intervention including: (1) patient education on opioid safety and pain management expectations; (2) clinician education on safe opioid prescribing; (3) prescribing data feedback; (4) patient risk screening to assess for addictive behavior; and (5) optimizations to the electronic health record (EHR). We conducted a preintervention formative evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 22 semistructured interviews with key stakeholders (surgeons, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators) at six hospitals within a single health care system. Interviewees were asked about perceived barriers and facilitators to the components of the intervention. Responses were analyzed to identify common themes using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: We identified common themes of potential implementation barriers and classified them under 12 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and three intervention domains. Time and resource constraints (needs and resources), the modality of educational material (design quality and packaging), and prescribers' concern for patient satisfaction scores (external policy and incentives) were identified as the most significant structural barriers. Resident physicians, pharmacists, and pain specialists were identified as potential key facilitating actors to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: We identified specific barriers to successful implementation of an opioid reduction initiative in a surgical setting. In our MOPiS initiative, a preintervention formative evaluation enabled the design of strategies that will overcome implementation barriers specific to the components of our initiative.

Patients' perception of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care: a cross-sectional survey in 34 countries.

BACKGROUND: Poor communication between general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists can lead to poorer quality, and continuity, of care. Our study aims to assess patients' perceptions of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care in 34 countries. It will analyse, too, whether this communication is associated with the organisation of primary care within a country, and with the characteristics of GPs and their patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among patients in 34 countries. Following a GP consultation, patients were asked two questions. Did they take to understand that their GP had informed medical specialists about their illness upon referral? And, secondly, did their GP know the results of the treatment by a medical specialist? We used multi-response logistic multilevel models to investigate the association of factors related to primary care, the GP, and the patient, with the patients' perceptions of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care. RESULTS: In total, 61,931 patients completed the questionnaire. We found large differences between countries, in both the patients' perceptions of information shared by GPs with medical specialists, and the patients' perceptions of the GPs' awareness of the results of treatment by medical specialists. Patients whose GPs stated that they 'seldom or never' send referral letters, also less frequently perceived that their GP communicated with their medical specialists about their illness. Patients with GPs indicating they 'seldom or never' receive feedback from medical specialists, indicated less frequently that their GP would know the results of treatment by a medical specialist. Moreover, patients with a personal doctor perceived higher rates of communication in both directions at the interface between primary and secondary care. CONCLUSION: Generally, patients perceive there to be high rates of communication at the interface between primary and secondary care, but there are large differences between countries. Policies aimed at stimulating personal doctor arrangements could, potentially, enhance the continuity of care between primary and secondary care.

Can you recommend me a good GP? Describing social differences in patient satisfaction within 31 countries.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore social differences in patient satisfaction of their general practitioner (GP) according to patient's gender, education, household income and ethnicity in Europe. DESIGN: By using multilevel logistic modelling the impact of socioeconomic indicators (i.e. gender, education, household income and ethnicity) on patient satisfaction is estimated. In each model the authors controlled for indicators of person-focused care and strength of the primary care system. SETTING: Primary care in 31 European countries. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who were sitting in the waiting room of the GP were asked to participate. They filled in the questionnaire after the consultation with the GP. INTERVENTION: Describing social differences in patient satisfaction among European primary care patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Patient satisfaction. RESULTS: This study confirms previous research and reveals high levels of satisfaction with primary care in Europe. On average, 92.1% of the respondents would recommend their GP to their family or relatives. Variance in patient satisfaction is mostly explained at patient level, ~75% of the variance can be assigned to patient characteristics. Likewise, women, low-income groups and first generation migrants are less satisfied with their GP. Lastly, all indicators of person-focused care are positively associated with patient satisfaction, showing that the more person-focused the care, the higher the satisfaction among the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the high satisfaction rates in Europe, patient satisfaction is still determined by patients' socioeconomic status (gender and household income), migration background and the degree of person-centred care. Therefore, policymakers and health professionals should target these population groups in order to improve the satisfaction rates in their country.

Informing primary care reform in Greece: patient expectations and experiences (the QUALICOPC study).

BACKGROUND: Primary health care is the cornerstone of a high quality health care system. Greece has been actively attempting to reform health care services in order to improve heath outcomes and reduce health care spending. Patient-centered approaches to health care delivery have been increasingly acknowledged for their value informing quality improvement activities. This paper reports the quality of primary health care services in Greece as perceived by patients and aspects of health care delivery that are valued by patients. METHODS: This study was conducted as part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study. A cross-sectional sample of patients were recruited from general practitioner's offices in Greece and surveyed. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care: accessibility; continuity and coordination; comprehensiveness; patient activation; and doctor-patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. Comparisons were made between patients with and without chronic disease. RESULTS: The sample included 220 general practitioners from both public and private sector. A total of 1964 patients that completed the experience questionnaire and 219 patients that completed the patient values questionnaire were analyzed. Patients overall report a positive experiences with the general practice they visited. Several gaps were identified in particular in terms of wait times for appointments, general practitioner access to patient medical history, delivery of preventative services, patient involvement in decision-making. Patients with chronic disease report better experience than respondents without a chronic condition, however these patient groups report the same values in terms of qualities of the primary care system that are important to them. CONCLUSIONS: Data gathered may be used to improve the quality of primary health care services in Greece through an increased focus on patient-centered approaches. Our study has identified several gaps as well as factors within the primary care health system that patient's perceive as most important which can be used to prioritize quality improvement activities, especially within the austerity period. Study findings may also have application to other countries with similar context and infrastructure.

Experiences of adult patients using primary care services in Poland - a cross-sectional study in QUALICOPC study framework.

BACKGROUND: Patients as real healthcare system users are important observers of primary care and are able to provide reliable information about the quality of care. The aim of this study was to explore the patients' experiences and their level of satisfaction with the process and outcomes of care provided by primary care physicians in Poland and to identify the characteristics of the patients, their physicians, and facilities associated with patient satisfaction. METHODS: The study is based on data from the Polish part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study. In Poland, a nationally representative sample of 220 PC physicians and 1980 of their patients were recruited to take part in the study. As a study tool we used 3 out of 4 QUALICOPC questionnaires: "Patient Experience", "PC Physician" and "Fieldworker" questionnaires. RESULTS: The areas of the best quality perceived by Polish PC patients are: equity, accessibility of care and quality of service. Coordination and comprehensiveness of care are evaluated relatively worse. The patients' and their physicians' characteristics have a limited influence on patient satisfaction and experiences with Polish primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Primary health care in Poland is of good overall quality as perceived by the patients. Study participants were at most satisfied with accessibility and equity of care and less satisfied with coordination and comprehensiveness of care. Longer patient-doctor relationship and older age of patients were found as the most influential determinants of higher satisfaction. However, variables used in this study poorly explain the overall level of satisfaction. Further research is needed to identify the other determinants of patient satisfaction in the Polish population. Rural practices deserve additional attention due to highest proportions of both extremely satisfied and dissatisfied patients.

Comparing importance and performance from a patient perspective in English general practice: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience and satisfaction are important indicators of quality in health care. Little is known about where to prioritize efforts to improve patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: To investigate patient satisfaction with primary care, as part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe study in England, identifying areas where improvements could be made from patients' perspectives. METHODS: We conducted a questionnaire survey of general practice patients in three English regions. Patient Values questionnaires assessed what patients thought was important, and Patient Experience questionnaires rated performance of primary care. Fifteen attributes of care were compared using Importance Performance Analysis, a method that simultaneously represents data on importance and performance of a service, enabling identification of its strengths and weaknesses. RESULTS: Patients rated both 'relational' and 'functional' aspects of care as important. Satisfaction with general practice could be improved by concentrating on specific aspects of access (ensuring that patients know how to access out-of-hours services and find it easy to get an appointment), and one aspect of empowerment (after their visit, patients feel able to cope better with their health problem/illness). However, for other attributes (e.g. proximity of the practice to a patient's house or, a short waiting time when contacting the practice), investing additional resources is not likely to increase patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Attributes needing most improvement concerned access to primary care and patient empowerment. More research is needed to identify how to improve access without generating unnecessary additional demand or compromising continuity of care.

Quality of primary health care in Poland from the perspective of the physicians providing it.

BACKGROUND: Primary care (PC) allows patients to address most of their health needs and is essential for high quality healthcare systems. The aim of the study was to analyze the insight of nine core dimensions of Polish PC system: "Economic conditions", "Workforce", "Accessibility", "Comprehensiveness", "Continuity", "Coordination", "Quality of care", "Efficiency" and "Equity" and to identify the characteristics of the providing physicians that influence their perception of the quality of care. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted as part of an international QUALICOPC project. In Poland a nationally representative sample of 220 PC physicians was selected from the database of Polish National Health Fund by a stratified random sampling procedure. The research tool was a standardized 64-item questionnaire. Each of the respondents' answers were assigned a numerical value ranging from-1 (extremely negative) to +1 (extremely positive). The quality indicators were calculated as an arithmetic mean of variables representing particular PC dimensions. RESULTS: The mean scores for the majority of the dimensions had negative values. Accessibility of care was perceived as the best dimension, while the economic conditions were evaluated most negatively. Only a small part of variation in quality evaluation could be explained by physicians' characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The negative evaluation of primary care reflects the growing crisis in the health care system in Poland. There is an urgent need to apply complex recovery measures to improve the quality of primary care.

Two decades of change in European general practice service profiles: conditions associated with the developments in 28 countries between 1993 and 2012.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence regarding the benefits of strong primary care has influenced health policy and practice. This study focuses on changes in the breadth of services provided by general practitioners (GPs) in Europe between 1993 and 2012 and offers possible explanations for these changes. DESIGN: Data on the breadth of service profiles were used from two cross-sectional surveys in 28 countries: the 1993 European GP Task Profile study (6321 GPs) and the 2012 QUALICOPC study (6044 GPs). GPs' involvement in four areas of clinical activity (first contact care, treatment of diseases, medical procedures, and prevention) was established using ecometric analyses. The changes were measured by the relative increase in the breadth of service profiles. Associations between changes and national-level conditions were examined though regression analyses. Data on the national conditions were used from various other public databases including the World Databank and the PHAMEU (Primary Health care Activity Monitor) database. SETTING: A total of 28 European countries. SUBJECTS: GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Changes in the breadth of GP service profiles. RESULTS: A general trend of increased involvement of European GPs in treatment of diseases and decreased involvement in preventive activities was observed. Conditions at the national level were associated with changes in the involvement of GPs in first contact care, treatment of diseases and, to a limited extent, prevention. Especially in countries with stronger growth of health care expenditures between 1993 and 2012 the service profiles have expanded. In countries where family values are more dominant the breadth in service profiles decreased. A stronger professional status of GPs was positively associated with the change in first contact care. CONCLUSIONS: GPs in former communist countries and Turkey have increased their involvement in the provision of services. Developments in Western Europe were less evident. The developments in the service profiles could only to a very limited extent be explained by national conditions. A main driver of reform seems to be the changes in health care expenditure, which may indicate a notion of urgency because there may be a pressure to curb the rising expenditures. KEY POINTS: Broad GP service profiles are an indicator of strong primary care in a country. It is expected that developments in the breadth of GP service profiles are influenced by various national conditions related to the urgency to reform, politics, and means. Between 1993 and 2012 the involvement of GPs in European countries in treatment of diseases increased and their involvement preventive activities decreased. The national conditions were found to be associated with changes in GPs' involvement as first contact of care, treatment of diseases, and, to a limited extent, prevention. More specifically, in countries with a stronger growth in health care expenditures, service profiles of European GPs have expanded more in the past decades.

Assessing the potential for improvement of primary care in 34 countries: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate patients' perceptions of improvement potential in primary care in 34 countries. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional survey of 69 201 patients who had just visited general practitioners at primary-care facilities. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care - accessibility/availability, continuity, comprehensiveness, patient involvement and doctor-patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. We calculated the potential for improvement by multiplying the proportion of negative patient experiences with the mean importance score in each country. Scores were divided into low, medium and high improvement potential. Pair-wise correlations were made between improvement scores and three dimensions of the structure of primary care - governance, economic conditions and workforce development. FINDINGS: In 26 countries, one or more features of primary care had medium or high improvement potentials. Comprehensiveness of care had medium to high improvement potential in 23 of 34 countries. In all countries, doctor-patient communication had low improvement potential. An overall stronger structure of primary care was correlated with a lower potential for improvement of continuity and comprehensiveness of care. In countries with stronger primary care governance patients perceived less potential to improve the continuity of care. Countries with better economic conditions for primary care had less potential for improvement of all features of person-focused care. CONCLUSION: In countries with a stronger primary care structure, patients perceived that primary care had less potential for improvement.

Comparison of patients' experiences in public and private primary care clinics in Malta.

Demographic changes, technological developments and rising expectations require the analysis of public-private primary care (PC) service provision to inform policy makers. We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional study using the dataset of the Maltese arm of the QUALICOPC Project to compare the PC patients' experiences provided by public-funded and private (independent) general practitioners in Malta. Seven hundred patients from 70 clinics completed a self-administered questionnaire. Direct logistic regression showed that patients visiting the private sector experienced better continuity of care with more difficulty in accessing out-of-hours care. Such findings help to improve (primary) healthcare service provision and resource allocation.

Primary health care teams put to the test a cross-sectional study from Austria within the QUALICOPC project.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary Primary Health Care Teams (PHCT) provide a comprehensive approach to address the social and health needs of communities. It was the aim of this analysis to assess the number of PHCT in Austria, a country with a weak PHC system, and to compare preventive activities, psychosocial care, and work satisfaction between GPs who work and those who do not work in PHCT. METHOD: Within the QUALICOPC study, data collection was performed between November 2011 and May 2012, utilizing a standardized questionnaire for GPs. A stratified sample of GPs from across Austria was invited. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and tests. RESULTS: Data from 171 GPs questionnaires were used for this analysis. Of these, 61.1 % (n = 113) had a mono-disciplinary office, 26.3 % (n = 45) worked in an office consisting of GP, receptionist and one additional primary care profession, and 7.6 % (n = 13) worked in a larger PHCT. GPs that worked in larger PHCT were younger and more involved in psychosocial and preventive care. No differences were found with regard to work satisfaction or workload. CONCLUSIONS: This study gives insight into the structures of PHC in Austria. The results indicate a low number of PHCT; however, the overall return rate in our sample was low with more male GPs, more GPs from urban areas and more GPs working in offices together with other physicians than the national average. Younger GPs demonstrate a greater tendency to implement this primary care practice model in their practices, which seems to be associated with an emphasis in psychosocial and preventive care. If Austria is to increase the number of PHC teams, the country should embrace the work of young GPs and should offer relevant support for PHCT. Future developments could be guided by considering effective models of good practice and governmental support as in other countries.