COVID-19 vaccine short-term adverse events in the real-life family practice in Krakow, Poland.

BACKGROUND: In manufacturers' trials, vaccination against COVID-19 proved to be safe and effective. The officially reported frequency of vaccine adverse events (VAEs) in Poland is lower than that declared by the manufacturers. The anti-vaccination activists questioned the trustworthiness of official data. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to explore the real-life prevalence of VAEs in general practice settings and the factors that may influence it. METHODS: In this pragmatic, mixed prospective and retrospective study, patients vaccinated against COVID-19 between May and October 2021 in three GP practices in Krakow, Poland, were enrolled. Their demographic (age, sex, level of education) and clinical data (weight and height, smoking status, history of allergies, COVID-19 and chronic diseases) were collected. Then, they were interviewed about VAEs they experienced. RESULTS: Out of 1530 patients invited to participate, 1051 (69%) agreed and were eligible for analyses. Only 8.8% did not report any VAE. Pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported reaction (800, 76.2%). The most prevalent systemic ones were excessive fatigue/lethargy (527, 50.6%), sleep/circadian rhythm disturbances (433, 41.6%) and headache (399, 38.3%). Fifty required medical assistance - 39 experienced presyncope (3.7%) and 11 loss of consciousness (1.1%). Only two others were hospitalised. Females, younger adults, those with higher education and with a history of COVID-19 reported systemic VAEs more frequently, while those who were older and obese were less likely to report local reactions. CONCLUSION: Although more than 90% of patients vaccinated against COVID-19 in general practice settings may experience VAEs, in short-term observation, the vast majority are localised and mild.

Do Polish primary care physicians meet the expectations of their patients? An analysis of Polish QUALICOPC data.

BACKGROUND: Meeting the expectations of patients is one of the most crucial criteria when assessing the quality of a healthcare system. This study aimed to compare the expectations and experiences of patients of primary care in Poland and to identify key patient characteristics affecting these outlooks. METHODS: The study was performed within the framework of the international Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study. In Poland, a nationally representative sample of 2218 patients were recruited to take part in the study. As a study tool, we used data from two of four QUALICOPC questionnaires: "Patient Experience" and "Patient Values". RESULTS: Patients' expectations were fulfilled in all study areas: accessibility, continuity, quality of care, and equity. We observed that the highest-met expectations indexes were in the area of quality of care, while the lowest, but still with a positive value, were in the area of accessibility. Patient-doctor communication was the aspect most valued by study participants. Elements of the patient's own level of engagement during the consultation were ranked as less essential. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing patient experiences to their values allows us to identify areas for improvement that are prioritized by patients. Accessibility is recognized as the most important area by Polish patients, simultaneously showing the highest level of patient-perceived improvement potential. Interpersonal care is another domain, in which the needs of patients are satisfied but are also relatively high. Strong clinician-patient relationships seem to be a priority in patients' expectations. The continuous efforts in interpersonal communication skills training for primary care physicians should be upgraded.

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.

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.

What do older people value when they visit their general practitioner? A qualitative study.

Older patients see their general practitioners (GPs) relatively often and so recognition of their preferences can lead to improvement of quality of care in general practice. This study aimed to identify which aspects of GPs' behaviour are the most important for older people in their assessment of the quality of their visits and to explore the application of Jung's taxonomy differentiating task and affective behaviour in this context. A qualitative approach to generating data was chosen. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a sample of 30 patients aged 65 and older using GP services in two demographically diverse big cities in Poland. Participants were interviewed in 2010 according to a pre-determined topic guide. This research showed that older people assess both 'task performance' and 'affective performance' behaviours of general practitioners. There were nearly twice as many patient comments concerning affective performance behaviour relative to task performance behaviour. Older people expect that their physicians will be demonstrably friendly, kind, able to joke and have enough time for the consultation.

The strength of primary care in Europe: an international comparative study.

BACKGROUND: A suitable definition of primary care to capture the variety of prevailing international organisation and service-delivery models is lacking. AIM: Evaluation of strength of primary care in Europe. DESIGN AND SETTING: International comparative cross-sectional study performed in 2009-2010, involving 27 EU member states, plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey. METHOD: Outcome measures covered three dimensions of primary care structure: primary care governance, economic conditions of primary care, and primary care workforce development; and four dimensions of primary care service-delivery process: accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care. The primary care dimensions were operationalised by a total of 77 indicators for which data were collected in 31 countries. Data sources included national and international literature, governmental publications, statistical databases, and experts' consultations. RESULTS: Countries with relatively strong primary care are Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK. Countries either have many primary care policies and regulations in place, combined with good financial coverage and resources, and adequate primary care workforce conditions, or have consistently only few of these primary care structures in place. There is no correlation between the access, continuity, coordination, and comprehensiveness of primary care of countries. CONCLUSION: Variation is shown in the strength of primary care across Europe, indicating a discrepancy in the responsibility given to primary care in national and international policy initiatives and the needed investments in primary care to solve, for example, future shortages of workforce. Countries are consistent in their primary care focus on all important structure dimensions. Countries need to improve their primary care information infrastructure to facilitate primary care performance management.

The development of academic family medicine in central and eastern Europe since 1990.

BACKGROUND: Since the early 1990s former communist countries have been reforming their health care systems, emphasizing the key role of primary care and recognizing family medicine as a specialty and an academic discipline. This study assesses the level of academic development of the discipline characterised by education and research in central and eastern European (CEE) countries. METHODS: A key informants study, using a questionnaire developed on the basis of a systematic literature review and panel discussions, conducted in 11 central and eastern European countries and Russia. RESULTS: Family medicine in CEE countries is now formally recognized as a medical specialty and successfully introduced into medical training at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Almost all universities have FM/GP departments, but only a few of them are led by general practitioners. The specialist training programmes in all countries except Russia fulfil the recommendations of the European Parliament. Structured support for research in FM/GP is not always available. However specific scientific organisations function in almost all countries except Russia. Scientific conferences are regularly organised in all the countries, but peer-reviewed journals are published in only half of them. CONCLUSIONS: Family medicine has a relatively strong position in medical education in central and eastern Europe, but research in family practice is less developed. Although the position of the discipline at the universities is not very strong, most of the CEE countries can serve as an example of successful academic development for countries southern Europe, where family medicine is still not fully recognised.

Treatment of hypertension in central and eastern European countries: self-reported practice of primary care physicians.

OBJECTIVES: To describe self-reported hypertension treatment among primary care physicians in central and eastern Europe and to investigate international differences. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians with a questionnaire translated into various languages was carried out in nine central and eastern European countries. Three thousand physicians were randomly selected from the national registers. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-seven invited primary care physicians responded. For the patients with hypertension and low cardiovascular risk, 49% of physicians reported a treatment goal of less than 140/90 mmHg (69% in Slovenia, 20% in Latvia, P < 0.001). In patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus, blood pressure (BP) targets of less than 130/80 mmHg and less than 120/80 mmHg were reported by 47 and 48% of physicians, respectively, and significant differences between countries were revealed. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were the most common declared drugs used on a daily basis (over 90% of physicians in all countries). Various international differences were observed among the use of diuretics, ß-blockers and drugs from other classes. An immediate initiation of pharmacotherapy was declared by 24% of physicians at a SBP level of at least 180 mmHg and 20% at DBP level of at least 110 mmHg. CONCLUSION: In hypertension treatment, some decisions made by primary care physicians from central and eastern European countries are still done without any supporting evidence from clinical trials. They have declared lower treatment goals and the initiation of pharmacotherapy at lower BP levels than recommended in international guidelines. An innovative approach to continuous medical education should be introduced and the efforts to implement guidelines in everyday practice ought to continue.

Family medicine in post-communist Europe needs a boost. Exploring the position of family medicine in healthcare systems of Central and Eastern Europe and Russia.

BACKGROUND: The countries of Central and Eastern Europe have experienced a lot of changes at the end of the 20th century, including changes in the health care systems and especially in primary care. The aim of this paper is to systematically assess the position of family medicine in these countries, using the same methodology within all the countries. METHODS: A key informants survey in 11 Central and Eastern European countries and Russia using a questionnaire developed on the basis of systematic literature review. RESULTS: Formally, family medicine is accepted as a specialty in all the countries, although the levels of its implementation vary across the countries and the differences are important. In most countries, solo practice is the most predominant organisational form of family medicine. Family medicine is just one of many medical specialties (e.g. paediatrics and gynaecology) in primary health care. Full introduction of family medicine was successful only in Estonia. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the unification of the systems may have been the result of the EU request for adequate training that has pushed the policies towards higher standards of training for family medicine. The initial enthusiasm of implementing family medicine has decreased because there was no initiative that would support this movement. Internal and external stimuli might be needed to continue transition process.

The European primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators.

BACKGROUND: Scientific research has provided evidence on benefits of well developed primary care systems. The relevance of some of this research for the European situation is limited.There is currently a lack of up to date comprehensive and comparable information on variation in development of primary care, and a lack of knowledge of structures and strategies conducive to strengthening primary care in Europe. The EC funded project Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) aims to fill this gap by developing a Primary Care Monitoring System (PC Monitor) for application in 31 European countries. This article describes the development of the indicators of the PC Monitor, which will make it possible to create an alternative model for holistic analyses of primary care. METHODS: A systematic review of the primary care literature published between 2003 and July 2008 was carried out. This resulted in an overview of: (1) the dimensions of primary care and their relevance to outcomes at (primary) health system level; (2) essential features per dimension; (3) applied indicators to measure the features of primary care dimensions. The indicators were evaluated by the project team against criteria of relevance, precision, flexibility, and discriminating power. The resulting indicator set was evaluated on its suitability for Europe-wide comparison of primary care systems by a panel of primary care experts from various European countries (representing a variety of primary care systems). RESULTS: The developed PC Monitor approaches primary care in Europe as a multidimensional concept. It describes the key dimensions of primary care systems at three levels: structure, process, and outcome level. On structure level, it includes indicators for governance, economic conditions, and workforce development. On process level, indicators describe access, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care services. On outcome level, indicators reflect the quality, and efficiency of primary care. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized instrument for describing and comparing primary care systems has been developed based on scientific evidence and consensus among an international panel of experts, which will be tested to all configurations of primary care in Europe, intended for producing comparable information. Widespread use of the instrument has the potential to improve the understanding of primary care delivery in different national contexts and thus to create opportunities for better decision making.