Examiner and simulated patient ratings of empathy in medical student final year clinical examination: are they useful?

BACKGROUND: Many medical schools state that empathy is important and have curricular learning outcomes covering its teaching. It is thought to be useful in team-working, good bedside manner, patient perspective taking, and improved patient care. Given this, one might expect it to be measured in assessment processes. Despite this, there is relatively little literature exploring how measures of empathy in final clinical examinations in medical school map onto other examination scores. Little is known about simulated patient (actors) rating of empathy in examinations in terms of inter-rater reliability compared with clinical assessors or correlation with overall examination results. METHODS: Examiners in final year clinical assessments in one UK medical school rated 133 students on five constructs in Objective Structured Long Examination Record (OSLER) with real patients: gathering information, physical examination, problem solving, managing the diagnosis, and relationship with the patient. Scores were based on a standardized well-established penalty point system. In separate Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) stations, different examiners used the same penalty point system to score performance in both interactional and procedural stations. In the four interaction-based OSCE stations, examiners and simulated patient actors also independently rated empathy of the students. RESULTS: The OSLER score, based on penalty points, had a correlation of -0.38 with independent ratings of empathy from the interactional OSCE stations. The intra-class correlation (a measure of inter-rater reliability) between the observing clinical tutor and ratings from simulated patients was 0.645 with very similar means. There was a significant difference between the empathy scores of the 94 students passing the first part of the sequential examination, based on combined OSCE and OSLER scores (which did not include the empathy scores), and 39 students with sufficient penalty points to trigger attendance for the second part (Cohen's d = 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that empathy ratings are related to clinical performance as measured by independent examiners. Simulated patient actors are able to give clinically meaningful assessment scores. This gives preliminary evidence that such empathy ratings could be useful for formative learning, and bolsters the call for more research to test whether they are robust enough to be used summatively.

Workplace Stress, Presenteeism, Absenteeism, and Resilience Amongst University Staff and Students in the COVID-19 Lockdown.

Background: This study explored how the COVID-19 outbreak and arrangements such as remote working and furlough affect work or study stress levels and functioning in staff and students at the University of York, UK. Methods: An invitation to participate in an online survey was sent to all University of York staff and students in May-June 2020. We measured stress levels [VAS-scale, Perceived Stress Questionnaire (PSQ)], mental health [anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9)], physical health (PHQ-15, chronic medical conditions checklist), presenteeism, and absenteeism levels (iPCQ). We explored demographic and other characteristics as factors which may contribute to resilience and vulnerability for the impact of COVID-19 on stress. Results: One thousand and fifty five staff and nine hundred and twenty five students completed the survey. Ninety-eight per cent of staff and seventy-eight per cent of students worked or studied remotely. 7% of staff and 10% of students reported sickness absence. 26% of staff and 40% of the students experienced presenteeism. 22-24% of staff reported clinical-level anxiety and depression scores, and 37.2 and 46.5% of students. Staff experienced high stress levels due to COVID-19 (66.2%, labeled vulnerable) and 33.8% experienced low stress levels (labeled resilient). Students were 71.7% resilient vs. 28.3% non-resilient. Predictors of vulnerability in staff were having children [OR = 2.23; CI (95) = 1.63-3.04] and social isolation [OR = 1.97; CI (95) = 1.39-2.79] and in students, being female [OR = 1.62; CI (95) = 1.14-2.28], having children [OR = 2.04; CI (95) = 1.11-3.72], and social isolation [OR = 1.78; CI (95) = 1.25-2.52]. Resilience was predicted by exercise in staff [OR = 0.83; CI (95) = 0.73-0.94] and in students [OR = 0.85; CI (95) = 0.75-0.97]. Discussion: University staff and students reported high psychological distress, presenteeism and absenteeism. However, 33.8% of staff and 71.7% of the students were resilient. Amongst others, female gender, having children, and having to self-isolate contributed to vulnerability. Exercise contributed to resilience. Conclusion: Resilience occurred much more often in students than in staff, although psychological distress was much higher in students. This suggests that predictors of resilience may differ from psychological distress per se. Hence, interventions to improve resilience should not only address psychological distress but may also address other factors.

Time intervals from first symptom to diagnosis for head and neck cancers: An analysis of linked patient reports and medical records from the UK.

BACKGROUND: England has significantly higher mortality risks due to Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) compared with other European countries. Early diagnosis is important as it is likely to increase early-stage diagnosis and improve survival and better quality of life. This study sought to improve understanding of the intervals from first symptom recognition to diagnosis for HNC and investigate associations between patient-reported symptoms and socio-demographic factors. METHODS: People within 3 months of diagnosis, completed a researcher-administered questionnaire and data were extracted from primary and secondary care clinical records. RESULTS: Eighty (mean age 62.9 [SD 11.7] years; 66% men) were interviewed. The appraisal interval was longer than a month for 39% of participants and the help-seeking interval was longer than a week for 44%. The median diagnostic interval was 92 (IQR; 34-172) days. Appraisal intervals of > 1 month were associated with male gender, ulceration and persistent throat pain. The only symptom that associated with a help-seeking interval of > 1 week was ulceration. Participants who reported red/white patches in the mouth and ulceration were associated with a reduced likelihood of a diagnostic interval of > 3 months. A higher proportion of participants with a diagnostic interval of > 3 months were diagnosed with advanced disease (78%) than those with an interval < 3 months (68%). CONCLUSION: These data improve understanding of the intervals from first symptom recognition to HNC diagnosis and provide preliminary evidence to identify targets to reduce overall time to diagnosis.

Prevalence, symptom burden, and natural history of deep vein thrombosis in people with advanced cancer in specialist palliative care units (HIDDen): a prospective longitudinal observational study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of deep venous thrombosis in patients with advanced cancer is unconfirmed and it is unknown whether current international thromboprophylaxis guidance is applicable to this population. We aimed to determine prevalence and predictors of femoral deep vein thrombosis in patients admitted to specialist palliative care units (SPCUs). METHODS: We did this prospective longitudinal observational study in five SPCUs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland (four hospices and one palliative care unit). Consecutive adults with cancer underwent bilateral femoral vein ultrasonography on admission and weekly until death or discharge for a maximum of 3 weeks. Data were collected on performance status, attributable symptoms, and variables known to be associated with venous thromboembolism. Patients with a short estimated prognosis (<5 days) were ineligible. The primary endpoint of the study was the prevalence of femoral deep vein thrombosis within 48 h of SPCU admission, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97567719. FINDINGS: Between June 20, 2016, and Oct 16, 2017, 343 participants were enrolled (mean age 68·2 years [SD 12·8; range 25-102]; 179 [52%] male; mean Australian-modified Karnofsky performance status 49 [SD 16·6; range 20-90]). Of 273 patients with evaluable scans, 92 (34%, 95% CI 28-40) had femoral deep vein thrombosis. Four participants with a scan showing no deep vein thrombosis on admission developed a deep vein thrombosis on repeat scanning over 21 days. Previous venous thromboembolism (p=0·014), being bedbound in the past 12 weeks for any reason (p=0·003), and lower limb oedema (p=0·009) independently predicted deep vein thrombosis. Serum albumin concentration (p=0·43), thromboprophylaxis (p=0·17), and survival (p=0·45) were unrelated to deep vein thrombosis. INTERPRETATION: About a third of patients with advanced cancer admitted to SPCUs had a femoral deep vein thrombosis. Deep vein thrombosis was not associated with thromboprophylaxis, survival, or symptoms other than leg oedema. These findings are consistent with venous thromboembolism being a manifestation of advanced disease rather than a cause of premature death. Thromboprophylaxis for SPCU inpatients with poor performance status seems to be of little benefit. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (Research for Patient Benefit programme).

Identifying patients with a cancer diagnosis using general practice medical records and Cancer Registry data.

BACKGROUND: The medical records of patients with cancer need to accurately record diagnoses for professionals to provide quality care. Aims. (i) To develop a methodology which identifies medical records of patients with a cancer diagnosis. (ii) To describe the effectiveness of search strategies to identify all patients in primary care with a cancer diagnosis compared with a diagnosis identified by a Cancer Registry. METHODS: The design of the study was a retrospective analysis of primary care medical records. Five general practices were recruited in the UK. The completeness and correctness of searches were measured and compared both within the practices and compared with a diagnosis identified by a Cancer Registry. RESULTS: One in five of all primary care patients with cancer was not identified when a search for all patients with cancer was conducted using electronic codes for malignancy. One in five patient records with an electronic code for a malignancy that was confirmed by registration with the Cancer Registry actually lacked the necessary documentation to verify the cancer type, date of diagnosis or any other aspect of the malignant condition. Overall, electronic codes for cancer in these medical records have a poor level of completeness (29.4%) and correctness (65.6%) when compared with the Cancer Registry. CONCLUSIONS: The electronic codes in five general practices were not able to identify all patients on the practice lists with a cancer diagnosis. Practices will only be able to comply with guidelines and meet quality targets if they can identify all of their current patients with a cancer diagnosis and will require information from a Cancer Registry in order to do this.

Psychometric Properties of the Needs Assessment Tool-Progressive Disease Cancer in U.K. Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of patients' needs for care is a critical step in achieving patient-centered cancer care. Tools can be used to assess needs and inform care planning. The Needs Assessment Tool:Progressive Disease-Cancer (NAT:PD-C) is an Australian oncology clinic tool for assessment by clinicians of patients' and carers' palliative care needs. This has not been validated in the U.K. primary care setting. AIM: The aim of this study was to test the psychometric properties and acceptability of a U.K. primary care adapted NAT:PD-C. DESIGN: Reliability: NAT:PD-C-guided video-recorded consultations were viewed, rated, and rerated by clinicians. Weighted Fleiss' kappa and prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa statistics were used. Construct: During a consultation, general medical practitioners (GPs) used NAT:PD-C, patient measures (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale; Research Utilisation Group Activities of Daily Living; Palliative care Outcome Score; Australian Karnofsky Performance Scale), and carer measures (Carer Strain Index; Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool). Kendall's Tau-b was used. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: GPs, nurses, patients, and carers were recruited from primary care practices. RESULTS: Reliability: All patients' well-being items and four of five items in the carer/family ability to care section showed adequate interrater reliability. There was moderate test-retest reliability for five of six in the patients' well-being section and five of five in the carer/family ability to care section. Construct: There was at least fair agreement for five of six of patients' well-being items; high for daily living (Kendall's Tau-b = 0.57, P < 0.001). The NAT:PD-C has adequate carer construct validity (five of eight) with strong agreement for two of eight patients. Over three-quarters of GPs considered the NAT:PD-C to have high acceptability. CONCLUSION: The NAT PD-C is reliable, valid, and acceptable in the UK primary care setting. Effectiveness in reducing patient and carer unmet needs and issues regarding implementation are yet to be evaluated.

Stage, survival and delays in lung, colorectal, prostate and ovarian cancer: comparison between diagnostic routes.

BACKGROUND: Very few studies have reported cancer outcomes of patients referred through different routes, despite the prominence of current UK cancer urgent referral guidance. AIM: This study aimed to compare outcomes of cancer patients referred through the urgent referral guidance with those who were not, with respect to stage at diagnosis, survival, and delays in diagnosis. DESIGN OF STUDY: Analysis of hospital records. SETTING: One hospital trust in England. METHOD: The records of 889 patients diagnosed in 2000-2001 with one of four types of cancer were analysed: 409 with lung cancer; 239 with colorectal cancer; 146 with prostate cancer; and 95 with ovarian cancer. Outcome measures were diagnostic stage, survival, referral and secondary care delays. RESULTS: For lung cancer, urgent referrals had more advanced TNM (tumor, node, metastasis) stage than patients diagnosed through other routes (P = 0.035) and poorer survival (P = 0.020). There was no difference in stage or survival for the other cancers. For each cancer, a higher proportion of urgent referrals was seen within 2 weeks. Secondary care delays for lung and colorectal cancer were shorter for inter-specialty referrals. CONCLUSION: For patients with lung cancer, the guidance appears to be prioritising those in the more advanced stages of disease. This was not the case for the other three cancers. Referral delays were shorter for patients urgently referred, as is the intention of the guidance. The avoidance of delays in outpatient diagnostics probably accounts for shorter secondary care delays for inter-specialty referrals.

Buprenorphine versus dihydrocodeine for opiate detoxification in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many drug users present to primary care requesting detoxification from illicit opiates. There are a number of detoxification agents but no recommended drug of choice. The purpose of this study is to compare buprenorphine with dihydrocodeine for detoxification from illicit opiates in primary care. METHODS: Open label randomised controlled trial in NHS Primary Care (General Practices), Leeds, UK. Sixty consenting adults using illicit opiates received either daily sublingual buprenorphine or daily oral dihydrocodeine. Reducing regimens for both interventions were at the discretion of prescribing doctor within a standard regimen of not more than 15 days. Primary outcome was abstinence from illicit opiates at final prescription as indicated by a urine sample. Secondary outcomes during detoxification period and at three and six months post detoxification were recorded. RESULTS: Only 23% completed the prescribed course of detoxification medication and gave a urine sample on collection of their final prescription. Risk of non-completion of detoxification was reduced if allocated buprenorphine (68% vs 88%, RR 0.58 CI 0.35-0.96, p = 0.065). A higher proportion of people allocated to buprenorphine provided a clean urine sample compared with those who received dihydrocodeine (21% vs 3%, RR 2.06 CI 1.33-3.21, p = 0.028). People allocated to buprenorphine had fewer visits to professional carers during detoxification and more were abstinent at three months (10 vs 4, RR 1.55 CI 0.96-2.52) and six months post detoxification (7 vs 3, RR 1.45 CI 0.84-2.49). CONCLUSION: Informative randomised trials evaluating routine care within the primary care setting are possible amongst drug using populations. This small study generates unique data on commonly used treatment regimens.

Communication between South Asian patients and GPs: comparative study using the Roter Interactional Analysis System.

BACKGROUND: The UK South Asian population has poorer health outcomes. Little is known about their process of care in general practice, or in particular the process of communication with GPs. AIM: To compare the ways in which white and South Asian patients communicate with white GPs. DESIGN OF STUDY: Observational study of video-recorded consultations using the Roter Interactional Analysis System (RIAS). SETTING: West Yorkshire, UK. METHOD: One hundred and eighty-three consultations with 11 GPs in West Yorkshire, UK were video-recorded and analysed. RESULTS: Main outcome measures were consultation length, verbal domination, 16 individual abridged RIAS categories, and three composite RIAS categories; with comparisons between white patients, South Asian patients fluent in English and South Asian patients nonfluent in English. South Asians fluent in English had the shortest consultations and South Asians non-fluent in English the longest consultations (one-way ANOVA F = 7.173, P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in verbal domination scores between the three groups. White patients had more affective (emotional) consultations than South Asian patients, and played a more active role in their consultations, as did their GPs. GPs spent less time giving information to South Asian patients who were not fluent in English and more time asking questions. GPs spent less time giving information to South Asian patients fluent in English compared with white patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings were expected between patients fluent and non-fluent in English but do demonstrate their nature. The differences between white patients and South Asian patients fluent in English warrant further explanation. How much of this was due to systematic differences in behaviour by the GPs, or was in response to patients' differing needs and expectations is unknown. These differences may contribute to differences in health outcomes.

Urgent GP referrals for suspected lung, colorectal, prostate and ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: The UK urgent cancer referral guidance was introduced between 1999-2000. There is a dearth of literature relating to the effectiveness in detecting cancer of urgent suspected cancer referrals and general practitioners' compliance with the guidance. AIMS: This paper aims to determine the diagnostic yield from urgent referrals for suspected colorectal, lung, ovarian and prostate cancer, and the proportion of patients with cancer who were urgently referred. Secondary aims are to determine the association of these findings with age, ethnicity, sex and marital status, and to determine the proportions of patients who fulfilled the urgent referral criteria. DESIGN: Detailed notes analysis of all urgent referrals and all cancer diagnoses. SETTING: One hospital trust in England. METHOD: Data regarding all urgent referrals and all cancer diagnoses were obtained from one hospital trust over a 2-year period. Data analysis was undertaken to determine, diagnostic yields and their association with sociodemographic factors, trends over time and fulfilment of the guidance. RESULTS: The percentages of urgent referrals diagnosed with cancer were colorectal 11%, lung 42%, ovarian 20%, and prostate 50%. The percentages of patients with cancer referred urgently were colorectal 21%, lung 23%, ovarian 24%, and prostate 32%. Patients who were urgently referred without cancer were younger than those with cancer for all but prostate. There were no significant differences by sex, marital status or ethnicity. For patients with cancer there were no differences for any sociodemographic factors in whether or not they were referred urgently. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive power of the referral guidance as a marker for cancer is low, resulting in significant numbers of patients being urgently referred without cancer. A large majority of patients not diagnosed with cancer through the urgent referral route did fulfil the criteria for urgent referral, suggesting that with more widespread use of the guidance the diagnostic yields will be higher. This has implications for patients, on hospital diagnostic systems, and for patients presenting through other pathways.

Reasons for and consequences of missed appointments in general practice in the UK: questionnaire survey and prospective review of medical records.

BACKGROUND: Missed appointments are a common occurrence in primary care in the UK, yet little is known about the reasons for them, or the consequences of missing an appointment. This paper aims to determine the reasons for missed appointments and whether patients who miss an appointment subsequently consult their general practitioner (GP). Secondary aims are to compare psychological morbidity, and the previous appointments with GPs between subjects and a comparison group. METHODS: Postal questionnaire survey and prospective medical notes review of adult patients missing an appointment and the comparison group who attended appointments over a three week period in seven general practices in West Yorkshire. RESULTS: Of the 386 who missed appointments 122 (32%) responded. Of the 386 in the comparison group 223 (58%) responded, resulting in 23 case-control matched pairs with complete data collection. Over 40% of individuals who missed an appointment and participated said that they forgot the appointment and a quarter said that they tried very hard to cancel the appointment or that it was at an inconvenient time. A fifth reported family commitments or being too ill to attend. Over 90% of the patients who missed an appointment subsequently consulted within three months and of these nearly 60% consulted for the stated problem that was going to be presented in the missed consultation. The odds of missing an appointment decreased with increasing age and were greater among those who had missed at least one appointment in the previous 12 months. However, estimates for comparisons between those who missed appointments and the comparison group were imprecise due to the low response rate. CONCLUSION: Patients who miss appointments tend to cite practice factors and their own forgetfulness as the main reasons for doing so, and most attend within three months of a missed appointment. This study highlights a number of implications for future research. More work needs to be done to engage people who miss appointments into research in a meaningful way.

Open-access versus bookable appointment systems: survey of patients attending appointments with general practitioners.

Access to consultations with general practitioners (GPs) is an important health policy issue. One method of providing 24-hour access is through the provision of open-access surgeries. The study aimed to compare patients' perceptions of 'bookable' and 'non-bookable' (open-access) appointments. A cross-sectional survey design was used and recruited 834 patients in a general practice. There were statistically significant differences between the bookable and the non-bookable appointments for the questions on 'choice of doctor', 'whether able to see the doctor in the time they needed to', and 'convenience of the appointment'. More patients with bookable appointments saw their doctor of choice. One-fifth of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, did not feel that they were seen within the time they needed to be. Almost three-fifths of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, reported that it was either 'easy' or 'very easy' to make the appointment. Greater convenience was reported by those with bookable appointments. These findings support the hypothesis that within a single practice, there is scope for a combined appointment system in which patients can self-select, with equal satisfaction, the type of appointment that they prefer, dependent upon their own preferences or needs at the time.

Impact of the CSM advice on thioridazine on general practitioner prescribing behaviour in Leeds: time series analysis.

In December 2000, the Committee for Safety of Medicines (CSM) advised that thioridazine may prolong QT intervals risking arrhythmias. We investigated the impact on general practitioner prescribing of thioridazine using a time series analysis. Numbers of items and costs of antipsychotics and benzodiazepines prescribed in Leeds from May 1999 until April 2002 were collated. Post-advice, thioridazine prescriptions dropped by 810 items per month (95% confidence interval = 420 to 1200, P < 0.001) but others increased slightly in response. Costs mimicked these changes. Fresh criteria are proposed for appraising the quality of evidence needed to inform future urgent facsimile transmissions.

Associations between migrancy, health and homelessness: a cross-sectional study.

There is limited awareness of the link between differing health problems and migrancy of homeless people. The present cross-sectional study sought to quantify the extent of migrancy of homeless people from their place of birth (PLOB) and evaluate whether a history of problematic drug use, alcohol misuse or enduring mental health problems were associated with migrancy from their PLOB. The work was conducted at an inner-city health centre for the homeless in the north of England. Place of birth was created as an entry on the computerised registration records. The PLOB was collected and recorded for each homeless person registering with the service over the study period. Information was also extracted regarding diagnoses of problematic illicit drug use, problematic alcohol use and enduring mental health problems for each homeless person. The study identified statistically significant differences for the migration of homeless people from their PLOB for age, problematic drug use and problematic alcohol use. Problematic alcohol use is independently associated with an increased likelihood of migration from the PLOB. Conversely, a history of illicit drug use is associated with a reduced possibility of migration from the PLOB when accessing primary healthcare services. There was no significant difference for migration from the PLOB for mental health. Not all homeless people migrate from their PLOB and health problems of drug use, mental health or alcohol use are independently associated with different patterns of migration. Understanding the migrancy of homeless people is important when planning and targeting appropriate health and social services to address their varying health, social and psychological needs.

Cancer patients consultation patterns in primary care and levels of psychological morbidity: findings from the Health Survey for England.

AIM: To determine the consultations patterns in general practice, for people with cancer and other chronic illnesses, and to assess the levels of psychological morbidity. METHODS: The following questions from the 1999 Health Survey for England were analysed: presence of a self-reported long-standing illness and its nature, numbers of contacts with general practitioner (GP) in the previous 2 weeks, contact with a GP in the previous year for anxiety/depression or a mental, nervous or emotional problem, presence of a self-reported long-standing illness of mental illness, anxiety or depression, and GHQ12 scores. For comparison purposes, data from respondents reporting having asthma, arthritis, diabetes, other long-standing illness, and no long-standing illness are presented. RESULTS: A third of respondents with cancer had contact with a GP in the last 2 weeks, which was slightly higher than the other illness group, however the pattern of attendances for those respondents who did consult were similar between groups. A quarter of people with cancer had spoken to a GP in the last year about being anxious/depressed, or about a mental, nervous or emotional problem. A third of cancer respondents reported high GHQ12 scores, but self-reported long-standing illness of 'mental illness/anxiety/depression' was low (4%). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that psychological morbidity may be unrecognised in some cancer patients. There is potential for these symptoms to be identified and treated in primary care, especially given the ongoing nature of the patient-doctor relationship and the easy access primary care affords.

Psychosocial care for cancer patients in primary care? Recognition of opportunities for cancer care.

The paper outlines psychosocial problems experienced by cancer patients and the current barriers to service delivery. New models of psychosocial service provision are put forward, emphasizing information, communication and technology aids in an attempt to improve co-ordination of care. The management of cancer patients has evolved greatly over the past decades, and patients are well placed to benefit from the experiences of primary care professionals in the delivery of chronic illness disease management strategies.

Abusive behaviour experienced by primary care receptionists: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Receptionists act as gatekeepers to GPs, and thus are often placed in situations of conflict. However, there is a lack of research in this area. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence and associations of verbal and physical abuse against primary care receptionists, both pre- and post-'zero tolerance'. METHODS: A postal questionnaire was designed, piloted and sent to all reception staff in 50 randomly selected general practices in Leeds. The primary purpose was to identify any verbal or physical abuse experienced in the 12 months prior to the survey and assess the association between abuse experienced and deprivation. RESULTS: Seventy percent of receptionists completed and returned the questionnaire. Over two-thirds of receptionists had experienced verbal abuse in the last year. During the same time period, 60% reported telephone abuse and 55% reported face to face abuse. The incidence of abuse was higher in the year prior to the study than in the preceding period. Practice deprivation was identified as a significant factor for verbal abuse (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Verbal abuse against receptionists is significantly associated with the level of deprivation of the practice area. There is no evidence that 'zero tolerance' led to a reduction in abuse experienced by primary care receptionists. All primary care receptionists should receive adequate training on managing abuse.