Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMJ Open ; 8(8): e021125, 2018 08 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30121596

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Test effectiveness of an educational intervention for general practitioners (GPs) on quality of life and depression outcomes for patients. DESIGN: Double-blind, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in Australia between 2007 and 2010. PARTICIPANTS: General practices were randomly allocated to the waitlist (n=37) or intervention (n=66) group, in a ratio of 1:2. A total of 2030 (1478 intervention; 552 waitlist) community-dwelling participants aged 75 years or older were recruited via 168 GPs (113 intervention; 55 waitlist). INTERVENTIONS: A practice-based academic detailing intervention led by a peer educator that included: (1) training in use of the GP assessment of cognition dementia screening instrument; (2) training in diagnosis and management based on Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Dementia Guidelines; (3) addressing GPs' barriers to dementia diagnosis; and (4) a business case outlining a cost-effective dementia assessment approach. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were patient quality of life and depression; secondary outcome measures were: (1) sensitivity and specificity of GP identification of dementia; (2) referral to medical specialists and/or support services; (3) patient satisfaction with care; and (4) carer quality of life, depression and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: The educational intervention had no significant effect on patient quality of life or depression scores after 12 months. There were however improvements in secondary outcome measures including sensitivity of GP judgement of dementia (p=0.002; OR 6.0, 95% CI 1.92 to 18.73), satisfaction with GP communication for all patients (p=0.024; mean difference 2.1, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.93) and for patients with dementia (p=0.007; mean difference 7.44, 95% CI 2.02 to 12.86) and enablement of carers (p=0.0185; mean difference 24.77, 95% CI 4.15 to 45.40). CONCLUSION: Practice-based academic detailing did not improve patient quality of life or depression scores but did improve detection of dementia in primary care and patient satisfaction with GP communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12607000117415; Pre-results.


Assuntos
Demência/diagnóstico , Clínicos Gerais/educação , Grupo Associado , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Austrália , Cuidadores/psicologia , Auditoria Clínica , Competência Clínica , Comunicação , Demência/terapia , Depressão/terapia , Método Duplo-Cego , Educação Médica Continuada , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Satisfação do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Qualidade de Vida , Encaminhamento e Consulta/estatística & dados numéricos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
2.
Br J Gen Pract ; 62(601): e546-53, 2012 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22867678

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Dementia is an insidious and stigmatised condition, and research indicates that GPs find communicating this diagnosis particularly problematic. Delays in diagnosis may impede optimal patient care. Little research has been published on Australian GPs' perceptions of barriers to disclosing the diagnosis of dementia. AIM: To explore GPs' perceptions of barriers to disclosing the diagnosis of dementia. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in the general practice consultation context. METHOD: Semi-structured, audiorecorded interviews were conducted with GPs from three capital cities and one regional centre in Australia. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: GPs' lack of confidence in having a correct diagnosis, concern to act in patients' best interests, and the stigma associated with the 'dementia' label influenced the disclosure process. GPs found it challenging to identify dementia in the consultation context. It was difficult to raise the issue when both the patient and their family/carer(s) ignore/are unaware of symptoms of cognitive decline. Referral to a specialist was favoured to confirm suspicions, although this did not always result in a definitive diagnosis. Opinions differed as to whether the GP or the specialist was better placed to deliver the diagnosis. GPs preferred disclosure to the patient with his/her family/carer(s) present; associated issues of confidentiality and the importance of offering hope emerged. The severity of the patient's dementia also guided the diagnostic disclosure process. GPs often used euphemisms for dementia when disclosing the diagnosis, to soften the message. CONCLUSION: Complex issues surround the disclosure of dementia. Communicating this diagnosis remains particularly challenging for many GPs.


Assuntos
Demência/diagnóstico , Medicina Geral/métodos , Relações Médico-Paciente , Revelação da Verdade , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Austrália , Confidencialidade , Humanos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Percepção , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
3.
BMC Fam Pract ; 13: 12, 2012 Mar 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22397614

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Dementia is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. An earlier rather than later diagnosis allows persons with dementia and their families to plan ahead and access appropriate management. However, most diagnoses are made by general practitioners (GPs) later in the course of the disease and are associated with management that is poorly adherent to recommended guidelines. This trial examines the effectiveness of a peer led dementia educational intervention for GPs. METHODS: The study is a cluster randomised trial, conducted across three states and five sites. All GPs will complete an audit of their consenting patients aged 75 years or more at three time points - baseline, 12 and 24 months. GPs allocated to the intervention group will receive two educational sessions from a peer GP or nurse, and will administer the GPCOG to consenting patients at baseline and 12 months. The first education session will provide information about dementia and the second will provide individualised feedback on audit results. GPs in the waitlist group will receive the RACGP Guidelines by post following the 12 month audit OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes are carer and consumer quality of life and depression. Secondary outcomes include: rates of GP identification of dementia compared to a more detailed gold standard assessment conducted in the patient's home; GP identification of differential diagnoses including reversible causes of cognitive impairment; and GP referral to specialists, Alzheimers' Australia and support services. A "case finding" and a "screening" group will be compared and the psychometrics of the GPCOG will be examined. SAMPLE SIZE: Approximately 2,000 subjects aged 75 years and over will be recruited through approximately 160 GPs, to yield approximately 200 subjects with dementia (reducing to 168 by 24 months). DISCUSSION: The trial outlined in this paper has been peer reviewed and supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. At the time of submission of this paper 2,034 subjects have been recruited and the intervention delivered to 114 GPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12607000117415.


Assuntos
Demência/diagnóstico , Demência/terapia , Medicina de Família e Comunidade/educação , Avaliação Geriátrica , Médicos de Família/educação , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Auditoria Clínica , Análise por Conglomerados , Feminino , Idoso Fragilizado , Humanos , Masculino , Grupo Associado , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA