To neutrally offer or strongly recommend? General practitioners' perspectives on screening for gestational diabetes according to the national guideline in Norway.

OBJECTIVE: To explore general practitioners' experiences and reflections on how the current Norwegian guideline for screening for gestational diabetes affects their clinical practice. DESIGN: A qualitive study in which data were collected through semi-structured focus group interviews and analyzed thematically. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Five focus groups conducted in 2020 among GPs in Norway; three interviews took place face-to-face and two were held digitally. The total number of participants was 31. RESULTS: GPs acknowledged the potential benefits of more extensive screening, but had concerns about the medicalization of pregnancy, stating that some women experienced considerable anxiety. The GPs expressed doubts about the guideline's evidence base but differed in how they interpreted what the guideline was asking them to do. Some offered eligible women the opportunity to be screened, while other set up a screening appointment without consulting the women first. For some, fear of incrimination made them recommend screening without being convinced that it was the right thing for the patient. CONCLUSIONS: It is unclear whether the guideline for gestational diabetes requires GPs to recommend screening to pregnant women or if they should provide neutral information about the availability of screening. This ambiguity should be addressed, and the guideline evaluated against the core principles of general practice.

The Norwegian guideline for gestational diabetes (2017) increased the proportion of pregnant women eligible for screening and spurred considerable debate.The GPs in this study expressed concerns about the lack of evidence and the consequences of screening more women for gestational diabetes.It is unclear to GPs whether they are required to recommend screening to pregnant women or just inform them of its availability.The guideline should be evaluated to better account for the benefits, burdens and costs of screening and any subsequent treatment.

Gatekeeping and referral of patients holding private health insurance: a survey among general practitioners in Norway.

OBJECTIVE: Private health insurance is becoming more common in Norway. The aim of this study was to investigate GPs' opinions on private health insurance, and their experiences from consultations where health insurance can affect decisions about referring. DESIGN: A web based cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Norwegian general practice. SUBJECTS: All GPs in Norway were in 2019 invited to participate in an online survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The GPs' opinions and experiences regarding health insurance were reported as proportions. Multiple logistic regression was used to test associations between how frequently GPs refer patients without further considerations and variables concerning their characteristics, opinions, and experiences. RESULTS: Of 1,309 GPs (response rate 27%), 93% stated that private health insurance raises the risk of overtreatment and 90% considered such insurance to contribute to inequality in health. Frequently being pressured to refer in the absence of a medical indication was reported by 42%. Moreover, 28% often or always chose to refer patients without further consideration, and this was associated with perceptions of pressure with an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 3.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.73-5.29, and unpleasant reactions from patients following refusals (AOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.14-2.33). CONCLUSION: Although most participating GPs associated private health insurance with overtreatment and inequality in health, more than one in four choose to refer without further consideration. GPs' experience of pressure to refer and negative reactions from patients when they consider referrals not to be medically indicated, raises the risk of medical overuse for patients holding private health insurance.

Although most GPs had negative opinions regarding private health insurance, more than one quarter frequently referred insurance holders without further considerations.Perceived pressure and negative reactions from patients were associated with accommodating requests rather than acting as a gatekeeper.Private health insurance challenges the gatekeeping role of GPs in Norway and raises the risk of medical overuse.

Norwegian general practitioners' perceptions of their depression care - a national survey.

BACKGROUND: The General Practitioner (GP) is often the first professional contact for patients with depression. Depression care constitutes a substantial part of GPs' workload. OBJECTIVE: To assess how GPs experience their patients' expectations and their own provision of depression care; further, how their depression care was associated with doctor- and practice-characteristics. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire study about depression care in general practice among the GPs in the Norwegian Physician Survey of 2021. RESULTS: Of the 221 responding GPs, 50% were female and 70% agreed to have constant time pressure due to workload. The GPs believed that patients with depression were interested in their professional assessment (87.2%) and saw them as providers of talking therapy (76,9%). Still, 77,8% of the GPs thought the patients expected a referral. Talking therapy was commonly provided (79.6%) along with consultations of more than 30 min (80.4%). The youngest age group and GPs with shorter patient lists spent more time. Most GPs (92.3%) considered their help to be of great benefit for depressed patients. However, one-fourth of the GPs did not feel competent in providing talking therapy, less frequently reported by the GPs aged 40-54 years. CONCLUSIONS: Talking therapy is commonly provided by GPs. However, there is a need to investigate what GP talking therapy implies, and to strengthen GP skills in this regard. Overall, the GPs experience their depression care to be useful for their patients, and do not de-prioritize this although they experience workload pressure.

To reveal disease or to promote function - that is the question.

Medicine faces challenges that indicate that it may not be sustainable. A descriptive disease concept is apt to what philosopher of science Ian Hacking called "looping effects", which can explain why health care is faced with insatiable demands. Diseases are not only indifferent objects with an objective existence in the biology of individuals. They are often interactive identities that have attractive properties. We suggest a shift in medical practice where descriptive perspectives are complemented with functional perspectives to enable clinicians better to help people from merging with dysfunctional disease identities.

Stakeholder views on work participation for workers with depression and intersectoral collaboration in depression care: a focus group study with a salutogenic perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how stakeholders in depression care view intersectoral collaboration and work participation for workers with depression. DESIGN: Focus group study applying reflexive thematic analysis using a salutogenic perspective. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: We conducted seven focus group interviews in six different regions in Norway with 39 participants (28 women); three groups consisted of general practitioners (GPs), two of psychologists and psychiatrists and two of social welfare workers and employers (of which one group also included GPs). RESULTS: Stakeholders considered work participation salutary for most workers with depression, given the right conditions (e.g. manageable work accommodations and accepting and inclusive workplaces). They also highlighted work as an integral source of meaningfulness to many workers with depression. Early collaborative efforts and encouraging sick-listed workers to stay connected to the workplace were considered important to avoid long and passive sickness absences. Furthermore, stakeholders' views illuminated why intersectoral collaboration matters in depression care; individual stakeholders have limited information about a worker's situation, but through collaboration and shared insight, especially in in-person collaborative meetings, they (and the worker) can gain a shared understanding of the situation, thereby enabling more optimal support. Ensuring adequate information flow for optimal and timely follow-up of workers was also emphasized. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders highlighted the salutary properties of work participation for workers with depression under the right conditions. Intersectoral collaboration could support these conditions by sharing insight and knowledge, building a shared understanding of the worker's situation, assuring proper information flow, and ensuring early and timely follow-up of the worker.

Discovering strengths in patients with medically unexplained symptoms - a focus group study with general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: When patients suffer medically unexplained symptoms, consultations can be difficult and frustrating for both patient and GP. Acknowledging the patient as a co-subject can be particularly important when the symptoms remain unexplained. One way of seeing the patient as a co-subject is by recognizing any among their strong sides. OBJECTIVES: To explore GPs' experiences with discovering strengths in their patients with medically unexplained symptoms and elicit GPs' reflections on how this might be useful. METHODS: Four focus-groups with 17 GPs in Norway. Verbatim transcripts from the interviews were analyzed by systematic text condensation. RESULTS: Recollecting patients' strengths was quiet challenging to the GPs. Gradually they nevertheless shared a range of examples, and many participants had experienced that knowing patients' strong sides could make consultations less demanding, and sometimes enable the GP to provide better help. Identifying strengths in patients with unexplained symptoms required a deliberate effort on the GPs' behalf, and this seemed to be a result of a strong focus on biomedical disease and loss of function. CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging patients' strong sides can bolster GPs' ability to help patients with medically unexplained symptoms. However, the epistemic disadvantage of generalist expertise makes this hard to achieve. It is difficult for GPs to integrate person-centered perspectives with biomedical knowledge due to the privileged position of the latter. This seems to indicate a need for system-level innovations to increase the status of person-centered clinical work. Key pointsMUS is challenging for both patients and GPs mainly because of the incongruence between symptoms and the dominating biomedical model.GPs' focus on pathology and loss of function can prevent them from discovering patients' strengths.Awareness of patients' strengths can make consultations less demanding for GPs and enable them to provide better help.A conscious effort is needed to discover patients' strengths.

Patient experiences with depression care in general practice: a qualitative questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate patient experiences and preferences regarding depression care in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative study based on free-text responses in a web-based survey in 2017. Participants were recruited by open invitation on the web page of a Norwegian patient organization for mental health. The survey consisted of four open-ended questions concerning depression care provided by general practitioners (GPs), including positive and negative experiences, and suggestions for improvement. The responses were analysed by Template Analysis. SUBJECTS: 250 persons completed the web-based survey, 86% were women. RESULTS: The analysis revealed five themes: The informants appreciated help from their GP; they wanted to be met by the GP with a listening, accepting, understanding and respectful attitude; they wanted to be involved in decisions regarding their treatment, including antidepressants which they thought should not be prescribed without follow-up; when referred to secondary mental care they found it wrong to have to find and contact a caregiver themselves; and they thought sickness certification should be individualised to be helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in Norway appreciate the depression care they receive from their GP. It is important for patients to be involved in decision-making regarding their treatment.KEY POINTSDepression is common, and GPs are often patients' first point of contact when they seek help. • Patients who feel depressed appreciate help from their GP. • Patients prefer an empathetic GP who listens attentively and acknowledges their problems. • Individualised follow-up is essential when prescribing antidepressants, making a referral, or issuing a sickness absence certificate.

Conditions for gatekeeping when GPs consider patient requests unreasonable: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Requests from patients that are regarded by GPs as unreasonable are a source of conflict between GPs and patients. This makes gatekeeping challenging, as GPs negotiate a struggle between maintaining the doctor-patient relationship, protecting patients from the harms of medical overuse and acting as stewards of limited health care resources. More knowledge of how GPs can succeed in these difficult consultations is needed. OBJECTIVE: To explore Norwegian GPs' perceptions of conditions that can promote their ability to act as gatekeepers when facing patient requests which they consider 'unreasonable'. METHODS: A qualitative study based on three focus groups with Norwegian GPs conducted in 2019, exploring consultations in which the patient made a seemingly unreasonable request, but the GP was able to navigate the consultation in a clinically appropriate manner. Thematic cross-case analysis of verbatim transcripts from the focus groups was carried out using Systematic Text Condensation. RESULTS: The analysis revealed three major themes among the conditions that the GPs considered helpful when faced with an 'unreasonable' patient request: (i) professional communication skills; (ii) a long-term perspective; (iii) acknowledgement and support of GPs' gatekeeping role among peers and from authorities. CONCLUSION: Professional communication skills and relational continuity need to be prioritized for GPs to maintain their role as gatekeepers. However, support for the gatekeeping role within the profession as well as from society is also required.

Trends in treatment for patients with depression in general practice in Norway, 2009-2015: nationwide registry-based cohort study (The Norwegian GP-DEP Study).

BACKGROUND: Depression is highly prevalent, but knowledge is scarce as to whether increased public awareness and strengthened government focus on mental health have changed how general practitioners (GPs) help their depressed patients. This study aimed to examine national time trends in GP depression care and whether trends varied regarding patient gender, age, and comorbidity. METHODS: Nationwide registry-based cohort study, Norway. The study population comprised all residents aged 20 years or older with new depression diagnoses recorded in general practice, 2009-2015. We linked reimbursement claims data from all consultations in general practice for depression with information on demographics and antidepressant medication. The outcome was type(s) of GP depression care during 12 months from the date of diagnosis: (long) consultation, talking therapy, antidepressant drug treatment, sickness absence certification, and referral to secondary mental health care. Covariates were patient gender, age, and comorbidity. The data are presented as frequencies and tested with generalized linear models. RESULTS: We included 365,947 new depression diagnoses. Mean patient age was 44 years (SD = 16), 61.9 % were women, 41.2 % had comorbidity. From 2009 to 2015, proportions of patients receiving talking therapy (42.3-63.4 %), long consultations (56.4-71.8 %), and referral to secondary care (16.6-21.6 %) increased, while those receiving drug treatment (31.3-25.9 %) and sick-listing (58.1-50 %) decreased. The trends were different for gender (women had a greater increase in talking therapy and a smaller decrease in sick-listing, compared to men), age (working-aged patients had a smaller increase in talking therapy, a greater increase in long consultations, and a smaller decrease in antidepressant drug use, compared to older patients) and comorbidity (patients with mental comorbidity had a smaller increase in talking therapy and a greater increase in long consultations, compared to those with no comorbidity and somatic comorbidity). CONCLUSIONS: The observed time trends in GP depression care towards increased provision of psychological treatment and less drug treatment and sick-listing were in the desired direction according to Norwegian health care policy. However, the large and persistent differences in treatment rates between working-aged and older patients needs further investigation.

Shame in medical clerkship: "You just feel like dirt under someone's shoe".

INTRODUCTION: This study explores how senior medical students' experience and react to shame during clinical placements by asking them to reflect on (1) manifestations of shame experiences, (2) situations and social interactions that give rise to shame, and (3) perceived effects of shame on learning and professional identity development. METHODS: In this interpretive study, the authors recruited 16 senior medical students from two classes at a Norwegian medical school. In three focus group interviews, participants were invited to reflect on their experiences of shame. The data were analyzed using systematic text condensation, producing rich descriptions about students' shame experiences. RESULTS: All participants had a range of shame experiences, with strong emotional, physical, and cognitive reactions. Shame was triggered by a range of clinician behaviours interpreted as disinterest, disrespect, humiliation, or breaches of professionalism. Shame during clinical training caused loss of confidence and motivation, worries about professional competence, lack of engagement in learning, and distancing from shame-associated specialties. No positive effects of shame were reported. DISCUSSION: Shame reactions in medical students were triggered by clinician behaviour that left students feeling unwanted, rejected, or burdensome, and by humiliating teaching situations. Shame had deleterious effects on motivation, learning, and professional identity development. This study has implications for learners, educators, and clinicians, and it may contribute to increased understanding of the importance of supportive learning environments and supervisors' social skills within the context of medical education.

Patient-reported depression treatment and future treatment preferences: an observational study in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Depression is prevalent in general practice, but few studies have explored patient-reported depression care. AIM: To investigate patient-reported treatment received for depression and future treatment preferences among adult patients visiting their GP, and to evaluate the associations with sex, age and educational level. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in general practices in Norway from 2016 to 2017. METHODS: Altogether, 2335 consecutive patients (response rate, 89.2%) in the GPs' waiting rooms answered a questionnaire about their received depression treatment and treatment preferences in case of future depression. RESULTS: The study population (N = 2239) had a mean age of 48.6 ± 17.7 years (range 18-91), 60.1% were women. Of the 770 patients reporting to have received depression treatment, 39.1% were treated exclusively by their GP while 52.5% also were referred to a psychologist/psychiatrist. Older age was positively associated with medication and negatively associated with referrals to psychologist/psychiatrist. People with high education had lower odds for receiving medication (odds ratios [OR], 0.49; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.30-0.80) compared to those with low education. If future depression, 81.6% of the respondents would discuss this with their GP, 60.9% would prefer talking therapy with their GP, 22.5% medication, and 52.9% referral to psychologist or psychiatrist. CONCLUSION: One-third of the patients attending their GPs had consulted with them at some time concerning depression the case of future depression, most patients preferred talking therapy with the GP. This finding warrants increased research focus on the GP's role in depression care.

The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners.

Introduction: Little is known about the indications general practitioners (GPs) perceive as relevant for performing gynaecological examinations (GEs), how GPs master the GE and associated procedures, and how they handle the sensitive nature of GEs. Methods: In 2015, 70 medical students at the University of Bergen distributed a questionnaire to all 175 GPs in the practices they visited. The questions covered practical routines related to GEs, insertion of intrauterine device, frequency of GEs in different clinical settings and use of assisting personnel. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and multiple logistic regressions adjusting for age, gender, specialization and localization. Results: Ninety male and 61 female GPs (87% of invited GPs) responded to the questionnaire. A minority (8%) usually had other staff present during GEs. Compared with female colleagues, male GPs performed bimanual palpation significantly less often in connection with routine Pap smear (AOR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.6)). Twenty-eight percent of the GPs stated that they often/always omitted the GE if the patient was anxious about GE and 35% when the patient asked for referral to a gynaecologist. Omission was more frequent among male GPs. When the GP decided to refer to a gynaecologist based on the patient's symptoms, more male than female GPs omitted GE (AOR 2.5 (95% CI 1.1-5.4)). Conclusion: Male gender of the GP may be associated with barriers to medical evaluation of pelvic symptoms in women, potentially leading to substandard care. Possibly, however, male GPs' reluctance to perform the GE may also limit unnecessary bimanual palpation in asymptomatic women.

Dilemmas of medical overuse in general practice - A focus group study.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain first-hand in-depth accounts of overtesting amongst GPs in Norway, as well as the GPs' perspectives on drivers of overtesting and strategies that can prevent overtesting. DESIGN AND SETTING: Four focus groups with GPs were conducted. All participants were asked to share examples of unnecessary testing from their everyday general practice, to identify the driving forces involved in these examples and discuss any measures that might prevent excessive testing. All authors collaborated on the analysis, conducted as systematic text condensation, using critical incident technique. RESULTS: This study reveals two main positions regarding overtesting in general practice. In the categorical position there is no such thing as overtesting and GPs are obliged to perform extensive investigations on the suspicion that any person can carry a fatal disease, no matter how minor or absent their symptoms are. In contrast, in the dilemmatic position, the GPs acknowledge that investigations can cause significant harm, but still feel pressured to discover disease at the earliest opportunity and to meet patients' demands. The GPs' strategies for resolving this dilemma are often demanding and not always successful, but sharing uncertainty and fallibility with patients and colleagues appears to be the most promising strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that GPs in Norway experience a strong pressure to discover any instance of disease and to meet patients' demands for investigations. One way of preventing the harm that accrues from overtesting is openly sharing uncertainty and fallibility with patients and colleagues.

Trustingly bewildered. How first-year medical students make sense of their learning experience in a traditional, preclinical curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Traditional preclinical curricula based on memorization of scientific facts constitute learning environments which may negatively influence both factual understanding and professional identity development in medical students. Little is known of how students themselves experience and interpret such educational milieus. OBJECTIVE: To investigate first-year medical students' view of the physician role, and their perception of the relevance and quality of teaching in a science-based preclinical curriculum. DESIGN: Focus group interviews with thematic text analysis. RESULTS: Students portrayed the good physician as communicative, humble, and open, combining biomedical knowledge and moral strength. When asked how medical school supported the development of such characteristics, two partly contradictory discourses emerged. The critical discourse identified decontextualized knowledge, poor pedagogy, lack of critical thinking, and contact with faculty. Students who voiced critical comments also articulated trust that the system would provide the competence they needed, that basic biological knowledge is needed before clinical practice, and that being on your own conveys freedom and responsibility, and helps you grow up. CONCLUSION: Trust in the educational system, within a substandard learning environment, created cognitive dissonance that students resolved through rationalization, whereby they negated that factual overload and lack of relevance, reflection, and personal feedback was problematic. The cost of this mechanism is possibly that inferior teaching is perceived as normal, necessary, and good enough. If so, these future physicians' ability to critically evaluate and create quality in medical education and practice, may be weakened.