Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 20 de 712
1.
BMC Prim Care ; 25(1): 159, 2024 May 09.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38724909

BACKGROUND: Healthcare costs are rising worldwide. At the same time, a considerable proportion of care does not benefit or may even be harmful to patients. We aimed to explore attitudes towards low-value care and identify the most important barriers to the de-implementation of low-value care use in primary care in high-income countries. METHODS: Between May and June 2022, we email surveyed primary care physicians in six high-income countries (Austria, Finland, Greece, Italy, Japan, and Sweden). Physician respondents were eligible if they had worked in primary care during the previous 24 months. The survey included four sections with categorized questions on (1) background information, (2) familiarity with Choosing Wisely recommendations, (3) attitudes towards overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and (4) barriers to de-implementation, as well as a section with open-ended questions on interventions and possible facilitators for de-implementation. We used descriptive statistics to present the results. RESULTS: Of the 16,935 primary care physicians, 1,731 answered (response rate 10.2%), 1,505 had worked in primary care practice in the last 24 months and were included in the analysis. Of the respondents, 53% had read Choosing Wisely recommendations. Of the respondents, 52% perceived overdiagnosis and 50% overtreatment as at least a problem to some extent in their own practice. Corresponding figures were 85% and 81% when they were asked regarding their country's healthcare. Respondents considered patient expectations (85% answered either moderate or major importance), patient's requests for treatments and tests (83%), fear of medical error (81%), workload/lack of time (81%), and fear of underdiagnosis or undertreatment (79%) as the most important barriers for de-implementation. Attitudes and perceptions of barriers differed significantly between countries. CONCLUSIONS: More than 80% of primary care physicians consider overtreatment and overdiagnosis as a problem in their country's healthcare but fewer (around 50%) in their own practice. Lack of time, fear of error, and patient pressures are common barriers to de-implementation in high-income countries and should be acknowledged when planning future healthcare. Due to the wide variety of barriers to de-implementation and differences in their importance in different contexts, understanding local barriers is crucial when planning de-implementation strategies.


Attitude of Health Personnel , Medical Overuse , Physicians, Primary Care , Humans , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/psychology , Male , Female , Medical Overuse/statistics & numerical data , Medical Overuse/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , Middle Aged , Adult , Developed Countries , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(5): e2411076, 2024 May 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38743424

Importance: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis is underused. Identifying potentially modifiable factors to address barriers in HCC surveillance is critical to improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinician-level factors contributing to underuse of HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included primary care clinicians (PCCs) and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians at 5 safety-net health systems in the US. Clinicians were surveyed from March 15 to September 15, 2023, to assess knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, perceived barriers, and COVID-19-related disruptions in HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Data were analyzed from October to November 2023. Main Outcome and Measures: HCC surveillance knowledge was assessed with 6 questions querying the respondent's ability to correctly identify appropriate use of HCC surveillance. Attitudes, perceived barriers, and beliefs regarding HCC surveillance and perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions with HCC surveillance were assessed with a series of statements using a 4-point Likert scale and compared PCCs and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. Results: Overall, 347 of 1362 clinicians responded to the survey (25.5% response rate), among whom 142 of 237 (59.9%) were PCCs, 48 of 237 (20.3%) gastroenterology and hepatology, 190 of 236 (80.5%) were doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathic medicine, and 46 of 236 (19.5%) were advanced practice clinicians. On HCC knowledge assessment, 144 of 270 (53.3%) scored 5 or more of 6 questions correctly, 37 of 48 (77.1%) among gastroenterology and hepatology vs 65 of 142 (45.8%) among PCCs (P < .001). Those with higher HCC knowledge scores were less likely to report barriers to HCC surveillance. PCCs were more likely to report inadequate time to discuss HCC surveillance (37 of 139 [26.6%] vs 2 of 48 [4.2%]; P = .001), difficulty identifying patients with cirrhosis (82 of 141 [58.2%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001), and were not up-to-date with HCC surveillance guidelines (87 of 139 [62.6%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001) compared with gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. While most acknowledged delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, 62 of 136 PCCs (45.6%) and 27 of 45 gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians (60.0%) reported that patients with cirrhosis could currently complete HCC surveillance without delays. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, important gaps in knowledge and perceived barriers to HCC surveillance were identified. Effective delivery of HCC education to PCCs and health system-level interventions must be pursued in parallel to address the complex barriers affecting suboptimal HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis.


COVID-19 , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/epidemiology , Liver Neoplasms/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Male , Female , SARS-CoV-2 , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology , Adult , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Liver Cirrhosis/epidemiology , Attitude of Health Personnel , Clinical Competence/statistics & numerical data
3.
J Am Board Fam Med ; 37(2): 321-323, 2024.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38740479

BACKGROUND: Primary care clinicians do not adhere to national and international guidelines recommending pulmonary function testing (PFTs) in patients with suspected asthma. Little is known about why that occurs. Our objective was to assess clinician focused barriers to ordering PFTs. METHODS: An internet-based 11-item survey of primary care clinicians at a large safety-net institution was conducted between August 2021 and November 2021. This survey assessed barriers and possible electronic health record (EHR) solutions to ordering PFTs. One of the survey questions contained an open-ended question about barriers which was analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 59% (117/200). The top 3 reported barriers included beliefs that testing will not change management, distance to testing site, and the physical effort it takes to complete testing. Clinicians were in favor of an EHR intervention to prompt them to order PFTs. Responses to the open-ended question also conveyed that objective testing does not change management. DISCUSSION: PFTs improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce inappropriate therapies. Of the barriers we identified, the most modifiable is to educate clinicians about how PFTs can change management. That in conjunction with an EHR prompt, which clinicians approved of, may lead to guideline congruent and improved quality in asthma care.


Asthma , Guideline Adherence , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Primary Health Care , Respiratory Function Tests , Humans , Asthma/diagnosis , Asthma/physiopathology , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Male , Female , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Attitude of Health Personnel , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged
4.
Alzheimers Dement ; 20(5): 3671-3678, 2024 May.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38506275

INTRODUCTION: Distance to physicians may explain some of the disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (AD/ADRD) outcomes. METHODS: We generated round trip distance between residences of decedents with AD/ADRD and the nearest neurologist and primary care physician in Washington State. RESULTS: The overall mean distance to the nearest neurologist and primary care physician was 17 and 4 miles, respectively. Non-Hispanic American Indian and/or Alaska Native and Hispanic decedents would have had to travel 1.12 and 1.07 times farther, respectively, to reach the nearest neurologist compared to non-Hispanic White people. Decedents in micropolitan, small town, and rural areas would have had to travel 2.12 to 4.01 times farther to reach the nearest neurologist and 1.14 to 3.32 times farther to reach the nearest primary care physician than those in metropolitan areas. DISCUSSION: These results underscore the critical need to identify strategies to improve access to specialists and primary care physicians to improve AD/ADRD outcomes. HIGHLIGHTS: Distance to neurologists and primary care physicians among decedents with AD/ADRD American Indian and/or Alaska Native decedents lived further away from neurologists Hispanic decedents lived further away from neurologists Non-metropolitan decedents lived further away from neurologists and primary care Decrease distance to physicians to improve dementia outcomes.


Alzheimer Disease , Dementia , Health Services Accessibility , Rural Population , Humans , Washington , Alzheimer Disease/ethnology , Male , Female , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Dementia/ethnology , Aged , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Neurologists/statistics & numerical data , Aged, 80 and over
5.
Fam Med ; 56(5): 280-285, 2024 May.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38506699

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the persistent primary care physician shortage over 2 decades of allopathic medical school expansion, some medical schools are absent a department of family medicine; these schools are designated as "target" schools. These absences are important because evidence has demonstrated the association between structured exposure to family medicine during medical school and the proportion of students who ultimately select a career in family medicine. In this study, we aimed to address part of this gap by defining and characterizing the current landscape of US allopathic target schools. METHODS: We identified allopathic target schools by reviewing all Liaison Committee of Medical Education (LCME) accredited institutions for the presence of a family medicine department. To compare these schools in terms of family medicine representation and outcomes, we curated descriptive data from publicly available websites, previously published family medicine match results, and school rankings for primary care. RESULTS: We identified 12 target schools (8.7% of all US allopathic accredited medical schools) with considerable heterogeneity in opportunities for family medicine engagement, leadership, and training. Target schools with greater family medicine representation had increased outcomes for family medicine workforce and primary care opportunities. CONCLUSION: With growing primary care workforce gaps, target schools have a responsibility to enhance family medicine presence and representation at their institutions. We provide recommendations at the institutional, specialty, and national level to increase family medicine representation at target schools, with the goal that all schools eventually establish a department of family medicine.


Career Choice , Family Practice , Schools, Medical , Family Practice/education , Humans , United States , Primary Health Care , Physicians, Primary Care/supply & distribution , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data
6.
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) ; 64(3): 102055, 2024.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38401838

BACKGROUND: Primary care physician (PCP) shortages are expected to increase. The Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program uses a team-based care (TBC) approach to redistribute some patient care responsibilities from PCPs to pharmacists for patients with diagnosed hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This evaluation analyzed whether the Michigan Medicine Hypertension Pharmacists' Program increased the availability of hypertension management services and described facilitators that addressed barriers to program sustainability and replicability. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study that used a mixed methods approach. We examined the availability of hypertension management services using the number of pharmacists' referrals of patients to other services and the number of PCP appointments. We analyzed qualitative interviews with program staff and site-level quantitative data to examine the program's impact on the availability of services, the impact of TBC that engaged pharmacists, and program barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Patients who visited a pharmacist had fewer PCP visits over 3- and 6-month periods compared to a matched comparison group that did not see a pharmacist and were 1.35 times more likely to receive a referral to a specialist within a 3-month period. Support from leaders and physicians, shared electronic health record access, and financial backing emerged as leading factors for program sustainability and replicability. CONCLUSION: Adding pharmacists to the care team reduced the number of PCP appointments per patient while increasing the availability of hypertension management services; this may in turn improve PCPs' availability. Similar models may be sustainable and replicable by relying on organizational buy-in, accessible infrastructure, and financing.


Hypertension , Patient Care Team , Pharmacists , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Retrospective Studies , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Michigan , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Professional Role , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Male , Female , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data
7.
Nurs Res ; 73(3): 248-254, 2024.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38329959

BACKGROUND: Co-management encompasses the dyadic process between two healthcare providers. The Provider Co-Management Index (PCMI) was initially developed as a 20-item instrument across three theory-informed subscales. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to establish construct validity of the PCMI with a sample of primary care providers through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants randomly selected from the IQVIA database across New York State. Mail surveys were used to acquire a minimum of 300 responses for split sample factor analyses. The first subsample (derivation sample) was used to explore factorial structure by conducting an exploratory factor analysis. A second (validation) sample was used to confirm the emerged factorial structure using confirmatory factor analysis. We performed iterative analysis and calculated good fit indices to determine the best-fit model. RESULTS: There were 333 responses included in the analysis. Cronbach's alpha was high for a three-item per dimension scale within a one-factor model. The instrument was named PCMI-9 to indicate the shorter version length. DISCUSSION: This study established the construct validity of an instrument that scales the co-management of patients by two providers. The final instrument includes nine items on a single factor using a 4-point, Likert-type scale. Additional research is needed to establish discriminant validity.


Primary Health Care , Psychometrics , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , Female , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Adult , New York , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care/standards , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Psychometrics/instrumentation , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Nurse Practitioners/statistics & numerical data , Nurse Practitioners/standards , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/standards , Physicians, Primary Care/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/psychology
8.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 106(9): 760-766, 2024 May 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38386720

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal consultations constitute a growing portion of primary care physician (PCP) referrals. Optimizing communication between PCPs and orthopaedists can potentially reduce time spent in the electronic medical record (EMR) as well as physician burnout. Little is known about the preferences of PCPs regarding communication from orthopaedic surgeons. Hence, the present study investigated, across a large health network, the preferences of PCPs regarding communication from orthopaedists. METHODS: A total of 175 PCPs across 15 practices within our health network were surveyed. These providers universally utilized Epic as their EMR platform. Five-point, labeled Likert scales were utilized to assess the PCP-perceived importance of communication from orthopaedists in specific clinical scenarios. PCPs were further asked to report their preferred method of communication in each scenario and their overall interest in communication from orthopaedists. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine whether any PCP characteristics were associated with the preferred method of communication and the overall PCP interest in communication from orthopaedists. RESULTS: A total of 107 PCPs (61.1%) responded to the survey. PCPs most commonly rated communication from orthopaedists as highly important in the scenario of an orthopaedist needing information from the PCP. In this scenario, PCPs preferred to receive an Epic Staff Message. Scenarios involving a recommendation for surgery, hospitalization, or a major clinical change were also rated as highly important. In these scenarios, an Epic CC'd Chart rather than a Staff Message was preferred. Increased after-hours EMR use was associated with diminished odds of having a high interest in communication from orthopaedists (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48 to 0.88; p = 0.005). Ninety-three PCPs (86.9%) reported spending 1 to 1.5 hours or more per day in Epic after normal clinical hours, and 27 (25.2%) spent >3 hours per day. Forty-six PCPs (43.0%) reported experiencing ≥1 symptom of burnout. CONCLUSIONS: There were distinct preferences among PCPs regarding clinical communication from orthopaedic surgeons. There was also evidence of substantial burnout and after-hours work effort by PCPs. These results may help to optimize communication between PCPs and orthopaedists while reducing the amount of time that PCPs spend in the EMR.


Attitude of Health Personnel , Communication , Orthopedic Surgeons , Physicians, Primary Care , Humans , Physicians, Primary Care/psychology , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Orthopedic Surgeons/psychology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Adult , Surveys and Questionnaires , Interprofessional Relations , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Electronic Health Records
9.
Ann Ig ; 36(4): 392-404, 2024.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38299732

Background: Ongoing shortages in primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians and increasing healthcare needs due to ageing of the population represent a great challenge for healthcare providers, managers, and policymakers. To support planning of primary healthcare resource allocation we analyzed the geographic distribution of primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians across Italian regions, accounting for area-specific number and age of the population. Additionally, we estimated the number of primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians expected to retire over the next 25 years, with a focus on the next five years. Study design: Ecological study. Methods: We gathered the list of Italian general practitioners and primary care paediatricians and combined them with the data from the National Federation of Medical Doctors, Surgeons and Dentists. Using data from the National Institutes of Statistics, we calculated the average number of patients per doctor for each region using the number of residents above and under 14 years of age for general practitioners and primary care paediatricians respectively. We also calculated the number of residents over-65 and over-75 years of age per general practitioner, as elderly patients typically have higher healthcare needs. Results: On average the number of patients per general practitioner was 1,447 (SD: 190), while for paediatricians it was 1,139 (SD: 241), with six regions above the threshold of 1,500 patients per general practitioner and only one region under the threshold of 880 patients per paediatrician. We estimated that on average 2,228 general practitioners and 444 paediatricians are going to retire each year for the next five years, reaching more than 70% among the current workforce for some southern regions. The number of elderly patients per general practitioner varies substantially between regions, with two regions having >15% more patients aged over 65 years compared to the expected number. Conclusions: over 65 years compared to the expected number. Conclusions. The study highlighted that some regions do not currently have the required primary care workforce, and the expec-ted retirements and the ageing of the population will exacerbate the pressure on the already over-stretched healthcare services. A response from healthcare administrations and policymakers is urgently required to allow equitable access to quality primary care across the country.


Physicians, Primary Care , Retirement , Italy , Humans , Retirement/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Physicians, Primary Care/supply & distribution , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , General Practitioners/supply & distribution , General Practitioners/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Pediatricians/statistics & numerical data , Pediatricians/supply & distribution , Male , Female , Aging , Health Services Needs and Demand/statistics & numerical data
10.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(4): e236687, 2023 04 03.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37058307

Importance: Studies have suggested that greater primary care physician (PCP) availability is associated with better population health and that a diverse health workforce can improve care experience measures. However, it is unclear whether greater Black representation within the PCP workforce is associated with improved health outcomes among Black individuals. Objective: To assess county-level Black PCP workforce representation and its association with mortality-related outcomes in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated the association of Black PCP workforce representation with survival outcomes at 3 time points (from January 1 to December 31 each in 2009, 2014, and 2019) for US counties. County-level representation was defined as the ratio of the proportion of PCPs who identifed as Black divided by the proportion of the population who identified as Black. Analyses focused on between- and within-county influences of Black PCP representation and treated Black PCP representation as a time-varying covariate. Analysis of between-county influences examined whether, on average, counties with increased Black representation exhibited improved survival outcomes. Analysis of within-county influences assessed whether counties with higher-than-usual Black PCP representation exhibited enhanced survival outcomes during a given year of heightened workforce diversity. Data analyses were performed on June 23, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using mixed-effects growth models, the impact of Black PCP representation on life expectancy and all-cause mortality for Black individuals and on mortality rate disparities between Black and White individuals was assessed. Results: A combined sample of 1618 US counties was identified based on whether at least 1 Black PCP operated within a county during 1 or more time points (2009, 2014, and 2019). Black PCPs operated in 1198 counties in 2009, 1260 counties in 2014, and 1308 counties in 2019-less than half of all 3142 Census-defined US counties as of 2014. Between-county influence results indicated that greater Black workforce representation was associated with higher life expectancy and was inversely associated with all-cause Black mortality and mortality rate disparities between Black and White individuals. In adjusted mixed-effects growth models, a 10% increase in Black PCP representation was associated with a higher life expectancy of 30.61 days (95% CI, 19.13-42.44 days). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that greater Black PCP workforce representation is associated with better population health measures for Black individuals, although there was a dearth of US counties with at least 1 Black PCP during each study time point. Investments to build a more representative PCP workforce nationally may be important for improving population health.


Black or African American , Life Expectancy , Mortality , Physicians, Primary Care , Population Health , Workforce , Humans , Cohort Studies , Life Expectancy/ethnology , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Workforce/statistics & numerical data , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , Mortality/ethnology , United States/epidemiology , Population Health/statistics & numerical data
11.
Health Serv Res ; 58(2): 264-270, 2023 04.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36527443

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether primary care physician (PCP) comprehensiveness is associated with Medicare beneficiaries' overall rating of care from their PCP and staff. DATA SOURCES: We linked Medicare claims with survey data from Medicare beneficiaries attributed to Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) physicians and practices. STUDY DESIGN: We performed regression analyses of the associations between two claims-based measures of PCP comprehensiveness in 2017 and beneficiaries' rating of care from their PCP and practice staff in 2018. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The analytic sample included 6228 beneficiaries cared for by 3898 PCPs. Regressions controlled for beneficiary, physician, practice, and market characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Beneficiaries with more comprehensive PCPs rated care from their PCP and practice staff higher than did those with less comprehensive PCPs. For each comprehensiveness measure, beneficiaries whose PCP was in the 75th percentile were more likely than beneficiaries whose PCP was in the 25th percentile to rate their care highly (2 percentage point difference, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with more comprehensive PCPs rate overall care from their PCPs and staff higher than those with less comprehensive PCPs.


Medicare , Physicians, Primary Care , Quality of Health Care , Comprehensive Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/standards , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Aged , Primary Health Care/standards , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data
13.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr ; 147(1-02): e1-e12, 2022 Jan.
Article De | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34794181

BACKGROUND: General practitioners are considered to be well suited when it comes to addressing the information and care needs of family caregivers. The aim of the present study is to examine how general practitioners assess their possibilities to support caregivers, what priorities they set and to what extent they experience challenges. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: In the course of an online survey with a postal cover letter, a total of 3,556 GPs in in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate were interviewed between February and June 2021. Due to the exploratory approach of the study, only a descriptive data analysis was carried out. RESULTS: 68 % of the GPs surveyed often deal with family caregivers in everyday practice; 77 % consider the GP's office to be well suited as the primary point of contact for family caregivers and care coordination. Often it is caregiving relatives who ask the GP about the issue of care (89 %). Frequent contents concern a deterioration in the care situation (75 %) and a change in the need for care (84 %); consultations in the initial phase of care are less common (40 %). There are differences between urban and rural doctors in the perception of the needs of caregivers and the setting of priorities. Rural doctors give more weight to proactive and psychosocial care, whereas doctors in urban regions rely on the specialist and support network. GPs experience various challenges while supporting caregivers, including the timely organization of suitable relief offers (87 %), the referral to suitable offers of help (79 %) or the early identification of informal caregivers (59 %). DISCUSSION: GPs can play a central role in supporting family caregivers. A crucial prerequisite for this is that family caregivers are recognized and involved at an early stage. Consistent references to offers of help make it easier for family caregivers to organize care and to receive (psychosocial) support. In addition, it is important that GPs take into account the needs, desires and stresses of both caregivers and those being cared for.


Attitude of Health Personnel , Caregivers , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Family , General Practitioners , Humans , Referral and Consultation
14.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 107(3): e1096-e1105, 2022 02 17.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34718629

CONTEXT: Little is known about provider specialties involved in thyroid cancer diagnosis and management. OBJECTIVE: Characterize providers involved in diagnosing and treating thyroid cancer. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We surveyed patients with differentiated thyroid cancer from the Georgia and Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries (N = 2632, 63% response rate). Patients identified their primary care physicians (PCPs), who were also surveyed (N = 162, 56% response rate). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Patient-reported provider involvement (endocrinologist, surgeon, PCP) at diagnosis and treatment; (2) PCP-reported involvement (more vs less) and comfort (more vs less) with discussing diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: Among thyroid cancer patients, 40.6% reported being informed of their diagnosis by their surgeon, 37.9% by their endocrinologist, and 13.5% by their PCP. Patients reported discussing their treatment with their surgeon (71.7%), endocrinologist (69.6%), and PCP (33.3%). Physician specialty involvement in diagnosis and treatment varied by patient race/ethnicity and age. For example, Hispanic patients (vs non-Hispanic White) were more likely to report their PCP informed them of their diagnosis (odds ratio [OR]: 1.68; 95% CI, 1.24-2.27). Patients ≥65 years (vs <45 years) were more likely to discuss treatment with their PCP (OR: 1.59; 95% CI, 1.22-2.08). Although 74% of PCPs reported discussing their patients' diagnosis and 62% their treatment, only 66% and 48%, respectively, were comfortable doing so. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs were involved in thyroid cancer diagnosis and treatment, and their involvement was greater among older patients and patients of minority race/ethnicity. This suggests an opportunity to leverage PCP involvement in thyroid cancer management to improve health and quality of care outcomes for vulnerable patients.


Healthcare Disparities , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/organization & administration , Quality Improvement , Thyroid Neoplasms/therapy , Adult , Cohort Studies , Endocrinologists/organization & administration , Endocrinologists/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Physicians, Primary Care/organization & administration , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/organization & administration , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , SEER Program/statistics & numerical data , Surgeons/organization & administration , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Thyroid Neoplasms/diagnosis , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data
15.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(10): e2127827, 2021 10 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34596670

Importance: Recognition of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is important to initiate timely evaluation for gastrointestinal tract cancer. Retrospective studies have reported delays in diagnostic evaluation of IDA as a common factor associated with delayed diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Objective: To assess how US primary care physicians (PCPs) approach testing for anemia, interpret iron laboratory studies, and refer patients with IDA for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study, conducted in August 2019, included members of the American College of Physicians Internal Medicine Insiders Panel, a nationally representative group of American College of Physicians membership, who self-identified as PCPs. Participants completed a vignette-based survey to assess practices related to screening for anemia, interpretation of laboratory-based iron studies, and appropriate diagnostic evaluation of IDA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive statistics based on survey responses were evaluated for frequency of anemia screening, correct interpretation of iron laboratory studies, and proportion of patients with new-onset IDA referred for gastrointestinal tract evaluation. Results: Of 631 PCPs who received an invitation to participate in the survey, 356 (56.4%) responded and 31 (4.9%) were excluded, for an adjusted eligible sample size of 600, yielding 325 completed surveys (response rate, 54.2%). Of the 325 participants who completed surveys, 180 (55.4%) were men; age of participants was not assessed. The mean (SD) duration of clinical experience was 19.8 (11.2) years (range, 1.0-45.0 years). A total of 250 participants (76.9%) screened at least some patients for anemia. Interpretation of iron studies was least accurate in a scenario of a borderline low ferritin level (40 ng/mL) with low transferrin saturation (2%); 86 participants (26.5%) incorrectly responded that this scenario did not indicate IDA, and 239 (73.5%) correctly identified this scenario as IDA. Of 312 participants, 170 (54.5%) recommended bidirectional endoscopy (upper endoscopy and colonoscopy) for new IDA for women aged 65 years; of 305 respondents, 168 (55.1%) recommended bidirectional endoscopy for men aged 65 years. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, US PCPs' self-reported testing practices for anemia suggest overuse of screening laboratory tests, misinterpretation of iron studies, and underuse of bidirectional endoscopy for evaluation of new-onset IDA. Both misinterpretation of iron studies and underuse of bidirectional endoscopy can lead to delayed diagnosis of gastrointestinal tract cancers and warrant additional interventions.


Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Physicians, Primary Care/standards , Adult , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
16.
J Clin Lipidol ; 15(5): 682-689, 2021.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34593357

BACKGROUND: HeFH is a common inherited disorder that leads to markedly elevated LDL-cholesterol from birth and premature cardiovascular disease. HeFH is frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated. OBJECTIVE: To compare how well primary care physicians and cardiologists recognize and treat HeFH. METHODS: The National Lipid Association surveyed 500 primary care physicians and 500 cardiologists in the US who have patients with baseline LDL-cholesterol ≥ 190 mg/dL. The survey was conducted between August 29 and September 30, 2019. RESULTS: For a hypothetical case of HeFH, 57% of cardiologists versus 43% of primary care physicians made the correct diagnosis (P<0.001). Among respondents, 21% of cardiologists versus 29% of primary care physicians have never made a diagnosis of HeFH in a patient with an LDL-cholesterol ≥ 190 mg/dL (P<0.004). Only 7% of cardiologists versus 5% of primary care physicians would refer to a lipid specialist (P=0.05). For additional LDL-cholesterol lowering after statins, 58% of cardiologists versus 48% of primary care physicians would prescribe a PCSK9 inhibitor (P=0.004); however, 30% of cardiologists versus 53% of primary care physicians have never prescribed a PSCK9 inhibitor in an HeFH patient (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Although cardiologists compared to primary care physicians are somewhat more likely to recognize and treat HeFH patients according to guidelines, both physician specialties do not adequately recognize or treat HeFH. There is a need for more education and training in recognizing and treating HeFH, greater access to lipid specialists, and fewer barriers for PCSK9 inhibitor use.


Awareness , Cardiologists/statistics & numerical data , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/diagnosis , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/drug therapy , PCSK9 Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Cholesterol, LDL/blood , Female , Heterozygote , Humans , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/blood , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/genetics , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , United States , Young Adult
17.
Postgrad Med ; 133(8): 979-987, 2021 Nov.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34538196

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Obesity is a major risk factor for development and worsening of osteoarthritis (OA). Managing obesity with effective weight loss strategies can improve patients' OA symptoms, functionality, and quality of life. However, little is known about the clinical journey of patients with both OA and obesity. This study aimed to map the medical journey of patients with OA and obesity by characterizing the roles of health care providers, influential factors, and how treatment decisions are made. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was completed with 304 patients diagnosed with OA and a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2 and 101 primary care physicians (PCPs) treating patients who have OA and obesity. RESULTS: Patients with OA and obesity self-manage their OA for an average of five years before seeking care from a healthcare provider, typically a PCP. Upon diagnosis, OA treatments were discussed; many (61%) patients reported also discussing weight/weight management. Despite most (74%) patients being at least somewhat interested in anti-obesity medication, few (13%) discussed this with their PCP. Few (12%) physicians think their patients are motivated to lose weight, but almost all (90%) patients have/are currently trying to lose weight. Another barrier to effective obesity management in patients with OA is the low utilization of clinical guidelines for OA and obesity management by PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: As the care coordinator of patients with OA and obesity, PCPs have a key role in supporting their patients in the treatment journey; obesity management guidelines can be valuable resources.


PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYOsteoarthritis (OA) is a disease where the soft tissue between joints wears out causing pain and swelling. Obesity, having unhealthy extra body weight, increases the chances of a person getting OA and can make their OA worse.We wanted to learn more about what patients with OA and obesity experience as they try to manage their OA, including the doctors they talked to, the treatments they used, and if their weight was discussed. To better understand this journey, 304 people with OA and obesity and 101 primary care doctors who treat people with OA and obesity took an online survey.We found that people with OA and obesity tried to manage their OA symptoms on their own for an average of five years before going to a doctor for help. Many (54%) talked with their primary care doctor first. When people with obesity were told by doctors that they had OA, most people (61%) said that they talked about weight and weight loss. Most people (72%) also talked with their doctors about OA treatments.Few doctors (12%) thought their patients were serious about losing weight but almost all patients (90%) said they had tried or were still trying to lose weight. About half of doctors followed guidelines for taking care of people with OA (51%) and obesity (61%).Primary care doctors play a key role in helping patients with OA and obesity. Doctors can follow guidelines and provide treatment options including referrals to other specialists to support weight loss efforts.


Obesity/drug therapy , Osteoarthritis/therapy , Physician-Patient Relations , Physicians, Primary Care/psychology , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/standards , Aged , Attitude of Health Personnel , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic
18.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(7): e2117038, 2021 07 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34264328

Importance: More conservative prescribing has the potential to reduce adverse drug events and patient harm and cost; however, no method exists defining the extent to which individual clinicians prescribe conservatively. One potential domain is prescribing a more limited number of drugs. Personal formularies-defined as the number and mix of unique, newly initiated drugs prescribed by a physician-may enable comparisons among clinicians, practices, and institutions. Objectives: To develop a method of defining primary care physicians' personal formularies and examine how they differ among primary care physicians at 4 institutions; evaluate associations between personal formularies and patient, physician, and practice site characteristics; and empirically derive and examine the variability of the top 200 core drugs prescribed at the 4 sites. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 4 US health care systems among 4655 internal and family medicine physicians and 4 930 707 patients who had at least 1 visit to these physicians between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018. Exposures: Personal formulary size was defined as the number of unique, newly initiated drugs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Personal formulary size and drugs used, physician and patient characteristics, core drugs, and analysis of selected drug classes. Results: The study population included 4655 primary care physicians (2274 women [48.9%]; mean [SD] age, 48.5 [4.4] years) and 4 930 707 patients (16.5% women; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [8.3] years). There were 41 378 903 outpatient prescriptions written, of which 9 496 766 (23.0%) were new starts. Institution median personal formulary size ranged from 150 (interquartile range, 82.0-212.0) to 296 (interquartile range, 230.0-347.0) drugs. In multivariable modeling, personal formulary size was significantly associated with panel size (total number of unique patients with face-to-face encounters during the study period; 1.2 medications per 100 patients), physician's total number of encounters (5.7 drugs per 10% increase), and physician's sex (-6.2 drugs per 100 patients for female physicians). There were 1527 unique, newly prescribed drugs across the 4 sites. Fewer than half the drugs (626 [41.0%]) were used at every site. Physicians' prescribing of drugs from a pooled core list varied from 0% to 100% of their prescriptions. Conclusions and Relevance: Personal formularies, measured at the level of individual physicians and institutions, reveal variability in size and mix of drugs. Similarly, defining a list of commonly prescribed core drugs in primary care revealed interphysician and interinstitutional differences. Personal formularies and core medication lists enable comparisons and may identify outliers and opportunities for safer and more appropriate prescribing.


Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Female , Formularies as Topic , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , United States
19.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(7): e2117954, 2021 07 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34319356

Importance: There has been a growth in the use of performance-based payment models in the past decade, but inherently noisy and stochastic quality measures complicate the assessment of the quality of physician groups. Examining consistently low performance across multiple measures or multiple years could potentially identify a subset of low-quality physician groups. Objective: To identify low-performing physician groups based on consistently low performance after adjusting for patient characteristics across multiple measures or multiple years for 10 commonly used quality measures for diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used medical and pharmacy claims and laboratory data for enrollees ages 18 to 65 years with diabetes or CVD in an Aetna health insurance plan between 2016 and 2019. Each physician group's risk-adjusted performance for a given year was estimated using mixed-effects linear probability regression models. Performance was correlated across measures and time, and the proportion of physician groups that performed in the bottom quartile was examined across multiple measures or multiple years. Data analysis was conducted between September 2020 and May 2021. Exposures: Primary care physician groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance scores of 6 quality measures for diabetes and 4 for CVD, including hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing, low-density lipoprotein testing, statin use, HbA1c control, low-density lipoprotein control, and hospital-based utilization. Results: A total of 786 641 unique enrollees treated by 890 physician groups were included; 414 655 (52.7%) of the enrollees were men and the mean (SD) age was 53 (9.5) years. After adjusting for age, sex, and clinical and social risk variables, correlations among individual measures were weak (eg, performance-adjusted correlation between any statin use and LDL testing for patients with diabetes, r = -0.10) to moderate (correlation between LDL testing for diabetes and LDL testing for CVD, r = .43), but year-to-year correlations for all measures were moderate to strong. One percent or fewer of physician groups performed in the bottom quartile for all 6 diabetes measures or all 4 cardiovascular disease measures in any given year, while 14 (4.0%) to 39 groups (11.1%) were in the bottom quartile in all 4 years for any given measure other than hospital-based utilization for CVD (1.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: A subset of physician groups that was consistently low performing could be identified by considering performance measures across multiple years. Considering the consistency of group performance could contribute a novel method to identify physician groups most likely to benefit from limited resources.


Group Practice/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Work Performance/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Female , Glycemic Control/statistics & numerical data , Group Practice/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance, Health/economics , Linear Models , Lipid Regulating Agents/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Physicians, Primary Care/economics , Reimbursement, Incentive/statistics & numerical data , Work Performance/economics , Young Adult
20.
Med Clin North Am ; 105(4): 681-697, 2021 Jul.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34059245

Diabetes mellitus is a significant worldwide health concern and cutaneous manifestations are common. This review describes characteristic skin findings of diabetes, general skin findings related to diabetes, and findings related to diabetes treatment with a focus on clinical presentation, diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, and treatment. As the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise, cutaneous manifestations of diabetes mellitus likely will be encountered more frequently by physicians in all disciplines including dermatologists and primary care physicians. Accordingly, knowledge regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and management of cutaneous manifestations is an important aspect in the care of patients with diabetes.


Diabetes Complications/pathology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Skin Diseases/diagnosis , Skin Diseases/prevention & control , Skin Diseases/physiopathology , Acanthosis Nigricans/etiology , Acanthosis Nigricans/pathology , Acanthosis Nigricans/therapy , Dermatologists/statistics & numerical data , Diabetic Foot/etiology , Diabetic Foot/pathology , Diabetic Foot/therapy , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Knowledge , Lipodystrophy/etiology , Lipodystrophy/pathology , Lipodystrophy/therapy , Middle Aged , Necrobiosis Lipoidica/etiology , Necrobiosis Lipoidica/pathology , Necrobiosis Lipoidica/therapy , Physicians, Primary Care/statistics & numerical data , Prevalence , Scleredema Adultorum/etiology , Scleredema Adultorum/pathology , Scleredema Adultorum/therapy , Skin Diseases/epidemiology
...