Communication between family physicians and oncologists: qualitative results of an exploratory study.

OBJECTIVE: To study communication between family physicians (FPs) and oncologists, and to look at the factors that may influence FP involvement in cancer care. DESIGN: This survey design uses a qualitative methodology, where the data are analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. SETTING: This was a multisite study using 14 focus groups of FPs, followed by structured telephone interviews with 116 FPs in 6 different Canadian provinces. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Interview questions were used to explore the actual and desired roles of FPs in cancer care, and the quality of communication with oncologists with reference to a particular cancer patient in the FPs' practice. RESULTS: Physicians providing cancer care must consider complex psychosocial and biomedical factors, more so than with other chronic diseases, and so written communication alone is inadequate. Family physicians require face-to-face and/or telephone communication with the oncologist to negotiate their respective roles, and to discuss the patient's prognosis and the effectiveness of proposed treatments. Family physicians expressed a desire to become more involved in all stages of cancer care in both the biomedical and psychosocial aspects, and to help better define their roles throughout the illness trajectory. CONCLUSION: These results suggest opportunities to improve the communication, coordination and comprehensiveness of shared cancer care provided by family physicians and oncologists in different clinical settings.

Physician, heal thyself. Developing a hospital-based physician well-being committee.

This article describes the development of a physician well-being committee at the Sir Mortimer B. Davis-Jewish General Hospital. It discusses the issue of physician stress, outlines the committee's mandate, and describes the various activities and services that were implemented.

Physician characteristics and the recognition of depression and anxiety in primary care.

We examined physician characteristics associated with the recognition of depression and anxiety in primary care. Fifty-five physicians treating a total of 600 patients completed measures of psychosocial orientation, psychological mindedness, self-rating of sensitivity to hidden emotions, and a video test of sensitivity to nonverbal communication. Patients were classified as cases of psychiatric distress based on the CES-D scale and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Physician recognition was determined by notation of any psychosocial diagnosis in the medical charts over the ensuing 12 months. Of 192 patients scoring 16 or above on the CES-D, 44% (83) were recognized as psychiatrically distressed. Three findings were central to this study: 1) Physicians who are more sensitive to nonverbal expressions of emotion made more psychiatric or psychosocial assessment of their patients and appeared to be over-inclusive in their judgments of psychosocial problems; 2) Physicians who tended to blame depressed patients for causing, exaggerating, or prolonging their depression made fewer psychosocial assessments and were less accurate in detecting psychiatric distress; 3) False positive labeling of patients who had no evidence of psychiatric distress was rare. Surprisingly, more severe medical illness increased the likelihood of labeling and accurate recognition. Physician factors that increased recognition may indicate a greater willingness to formulate a psychiatric diagnosis and an ability notice nonverbal signs of distress.

Urban family physicians and the care of cancer patients.

Members in the Department of Family Medicine of a university teaching hospital were surveyed to find out their involvement in caring for cancer patients. Respondents indicated that many cancer patients were followed, but few cancer support services in the hospital and the community were used. The desire to take on new cancer patients was lacking, yet an interest in continuing medical education existed. Feedback from the department will help guide our Education Committee to develop continuing medical education programs for family physicians caring for cancer patients.

Somatization and the recognition of depression and anxiety in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the effect of patients' style of clinical presentation on primary care physicians' recognition of depression and anxiety. METHOD: The subjects were 685 patients attending family medicine clinics on self-initiated visits. They completed structured interviews assessing presenting complaints, self-report measures of symptoms and hypochondriacal worry, the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Physician recognition was determined by notation of any psychiatric condition in the medical chart over the ensuing 12 months. RESULTS: The authors identified three progressively more persistent forms of somatic presentations, labeled "initial," "facultative," and "true" somatization. Of 215 patients with CES-D scores of 16 or higher, 80% made somatized presentations; of 75 patients with DIS-diagnosed major depression or anxiety disorder, 76% made somatic presentations. Among patients with DIS major depression or anxiety disorder, somatization reduced physician recognition from 77%, for psychosocial presenters, to 22%, for true somatizers. The same pattern was found for patients with high CES-D scores. In logistic regression models education, seriousness of concurrent medical illness, hypochondriacal worry, and number of lifetime medically unexplained symptoms each increased the likelihood of recognition, while somatized presentations decreased the rate of recognition. CONCLUSIONS: While physician recognition of psychiatric distress in primary care varied widely with different criteria for recognition, the same pattern of reduction of recognition with increasing level of somatization was found for all criteria. In contrast, hypochondriacal worry and medically unexplained somatic symptoms increased the rate of recognition.

Comparing Psychotherapies for Primary Care: Differences between short-term supportive and insight-oriented psychotherapies.

Most family physicians state that they "do psychotherapy" and yet are often unclear as to whether they are using a supportive or an insight-oriented approach. This paper discusses short-term psychotherapy with an emphasis on the theoretical differences between these two approaches, as well as suggestions for learning them.

Using our north for military flight training.

The Native people of Northern Quebec/Labrador Peninsula face a growing conflict over the use of their traditional homeland for military flight training. The low-level flight training that supports a recent revision of NATO contingency plans for war in Europe causes social disruption and physical destruction. Current and proposed training at Goose Bay, Labrador, raises serious environmental and human-rights questions. A host of medical and psychological problems can be expected to follow in populations subject to the disruption and damage caused by low-level flight programs in their area. It is not possible for individuals to develop "coping strategies" adequate to meet the stress caused by stressors of this type.

Coronary rehabilitation.

This paper describes a team approach to coronary rehabilitation in a tertiary care hospital and the unique role of the family physician in a shared, multi-disciplinary service for in- and out-patients. Primary care physicians facilitate and supplement the work of the coronary-unit team in establishing an optimal rehabilitative program for MI patients and their families.

Mammography in screening for breast cancer: a viewpoint.

Controversy exists over the usefulness of mammographic screening for breast cancer. A discussion of the risk-benefit analysis and high risk women profile help the family physician in making a decision about who should be screened with mammography. Although earlier clinical trials show no benefit, and possible risks, of screening women under age 50, current techniques of mammography subject women to far less radiation and presumably far less risk. Based on this evidence, there is merit in screening women aged 40-49 with mammography every two to three years.