General practitioners' perceived indicators of vulnerability in pregnancy- A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore general practitioners' (GPs') perceived indicators of vulnerability among pregnant women in primary care. DESIGN: A qualitative study with semi-structured in-depth focus group interviews. SETTING: General practices located in a mixture of urban, semi-urban and rural practices throughout the Region of Southern Denmark SUBJECTS: Twenty GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Through qualitative analysis with systematic text condensation of the interview data, the following themes emerged: (1) obvious indicators of vulnerability-i.e. somatic or psychological illnesses, or complex social problems and 2) intangible indicators of vulnerability - i.e. identification depended on the GPs' gut-feeling. From the GPs' perspective, the concept of vulnerability in pregnancy were perceived as the net result of risk factors and available individual and social resources, with a psychosocial etiology as the dominant framework. CONCLUSIONS: The GPs demonstrated a broad variety of perceived indicators of vulnerability in pregnancy; most importantly, the GPs were aware of a group of pregnant women with intangible vulnerability mainly representing low resilience. Despite not fitting into the GPs' perceived concept of vulnerability, the GPs had a strong gut feeling that these women might be vulnerable. Misjudging the resources of pregnant women due to their physical appearance could delay the GPs' identification of vulnerability. Future studies should explore the challenges GPs experiences when assessing vulnerability among pregnant women.

General practice variation when initiating long-term prescribing of proton pump inhibitors: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Suggestions of overprescribing of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for long-term treatment in primary care have been raised. This study aims to analyse associations between general practice characteristics and initiating long-term treatment with PPIs. METHODS: A nationwide register-based cohort study of patients over 18 years redeeming first-time prescription for PPI issued by a general practitioner in Denmark in 2011. Patients redeeming more than 60 defined daily doses (DDDs) of PPI within six months were defined first-time long-term users. Detailed information on diagnoses, concomitant drug use and sociodemography of the cohort was extracted. Practice characteristics such as age and gender of the general practitioner (GP), number of GPs, number of patients per GP, geographical location and training practice status were linked to each PPI user. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine associations between practice characteristics and initiating long-term prescribing of PPIs. RESULTS: We identified 90 556 first-time users of PPI. A total of 30 963 (34.2 %) met criteria for long-term use at six months follow-up. GPs over 65 years had significantly higher odds of long-term prescribing (OR 1.32, CI 1.16-1.50), when compared to younger GPs (<45 years). Furthermore, female GPs were significantly less likely to prescribe long-term treatment with PPIs (OR 0.87, CI 0.81-0.93) compared to male GPs. CONCLUSIONS: Practice characteristics such as GP age and gender could explain some of the observed variation in prescribing patterns for PPIs. This variation may indicate a potential for enhancing rational prescribing of PPIs.

Assessing and addressing vulnerability in pregnancy: General practitioners perceived barriers and facilitators - a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Vulnerability due to low psychosocial resources increases among women in the fertile age. Undetected vulnerability in pregnancy is a major contributor to inequality in maternal and perinatal health and constitutes a risk of maternal depression, adverse birth outcomes,-i.e. preterm birth, low birth weight, and adverse outcomes in childhood such as attachment disorders. General practitioners (GPs) have a broad understanding of indicators of vulnerability in pregnancy. However, less than 25% of pregnant women with severe vulnerability are identified in Danish general practice. The aim was to explore GPs' perceived barriers and facilitators for assessing and addressing vulnerability among pregnant women. METHODS: A qualitative study with semi-structured focus group interviews with twenty GPs from urban and rural areas throughout the Region of Southern Denmark. A mixed inductive and deductive analytic strategy was applied, structured according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: Five themes emerged covering twelve TDF domains: (I)knowledge and attention, (II)professional confidence, (III)incentives, (IV)working conditions and (V)behavioral regulations. Prominent barriers to assessment were lack of continuity of care and trust in the doctor-patient relation. Other barriers were inattention to indicators of vulnerability, time limits, unavailable information on patients' social support needs from cross-sectoral collaborators, and lack of reimbursement for the use of extra time. Fear of damaging the doctor-patient relation, ethical dilemmas and time limits were barriers to addressing vulnerability. Facilitators were increased attention on vulnerability, professionalism and a strong and trustful doctor-patient relation. Behavioral regulations ensuring continuity of care and extra time for history taking enabled assessing and addressing vulnerability, especially when a strong doctor-patient relation was absent. CONCLUSIONS: The TDF disclosed several barriers, especially in the absence of a strong doctor-patient relation. A behavior change intervention of restructuring the organization of antenatal care in general practice might reduce the GPs' barriers to assessing and addressing vulnerability in pregnancy. The findings may serve as a guide for commissioners and policymakers of antenatal care on the GPs' support needs when providing antenatal care to vulnerable pregnant women.

Challenges in the cross-sectoral collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women: a qualitative study among Danish general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Vulnerable pregnant women, defined as women threatened by social, psychological, or physical risk factors, need special support during pregnancy to prevent complications in pregnancy, birth, and childhood. Proper cross-sectoral collaboration in antenatal care is paramount to delivering sufficient supportive care to these women. General practitioners (GPs) often face barriers when assessing vulnerable pregnant women and may; as a result, under-identify and underreport child abuse. Little is known about how the cross-sectoral collaboration in antenatal care affects the GP's opportunities of managing vulnerable pregnant women. This study explores GPs' perceived barriers and facilitators in the antenatal care collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women and in the reporting of these women to social services. METHODS: A qualitative study with semi-structured focus group interviews among twenty GPs from the Region of Southern Denmark. A mixed inductive and deductive analytic strategy was applied, structured according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: Three themes emerged: I) collaborative experience, II) motivation, and III) organizational working conditions. Barriers were lacking experience, i.e. knowledge, skills, and attention to antenatal care collaboration and reporting, inadequate organizational working contexts, i.e. insufficient pathways for communication between health care and social care systems, and laws restricting feedback on the consequences of reporting. This decreased the GPs motivation, i.e. poor confidence in navigating the system, fear of breaking the patient alliance when collaborating in antenatal care and reporting with the social services. GPs motivation to collaborate and report was increased by knowing the working contexts of their collaborative partners in the antenatal care and social services system and by a strong doctor-patient relationship enabling them to describe the vulnerability to collaborators. CONCLUSIONS: GPs experience system-related barriers to collaborating and reporting on vulnerable pregnant women within the health care sector and in the interplay with the social services sector. Organizational development of cross-sectoral antenatal care collaboration should imply user involvement of all collaborative partners. Results suggest that health authorities should consider establishing accessible communication pathways between the GPs and the social services to improve options for proper cross-sectoral communication and feedback to GPs, thereby improving care trajectories of vulnerable pregnant women.

Multimorbidity and mortality: A 15-year longitudinal registry-based nationwide Danish population study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about prevalent and deadly combinations of multimorbidity is needed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the nationwide prevalence of multimorbidity and estimate mortality for the most prevalent combinations of one to five diagnosis groups. Furthermore, to assess the excess mortality of the combination of two groups compared to the product of mortality associated with the single groups. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study using Danish registries and including 3.986.209 people aged ≥18 years on 1 January, 2000. Multimorbidity was defined as having diagnoses from at least 2 of 10 diagnosis groups: lung, musculoskeletal, endocrine, mental, cancer, neurological, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, kidney, and sensory organs. Logistic regression (odds ratios, ORs) and ratio of ORs (ROR) were used to study mortality and excess mortality. RESULTS: Prevalence of multimorbidity was 7.1% in the Danish population. The most prevalent combination was the musculoskeletal-cardiovascular (0.4%), which had double the mortality (OR, 2.03) compared to persons not belonging to any of the diagnosis groups but showed no excess mortality (ROR, 0.97). The neurological-cancer combination had the highest mortality (OR, 6.35), was less prevalent (0.07%), and had no excess mortality (ROR, 0.94). Cardiovascular-lung was moderately prevalent (0.2%), had high mortality (OR, 5.75), and had excess mortality (ROR, 1.18). Endocrine-kidney had high excess mortality (ROR, 1.81) and cancer-mental had low excess mortality (ROR, 0.66). Mortality increased with the number of groups. CONCLUSIONS: All combinations had increased mortality risk with some of them having up to a six-fold increased risk. Mortality increased with the number of diagnosis groups. Most combinations did not increase mortality above that expected, that is, were additive rather than synergistic.

Medical and non-medical predictors of initiating long-term use of proton pump inhibitors: a nationwide cohort study of first-time users during a 10-year period.

BACKGROUND: Studies of the increasing use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have mainly focused on prevalent long-term use and associations with gastrointestinal morbidity and comedication. Little is known about non-medical characteristics of first-time users of PPI, and predictors of initiating long-term use of PPIs. AIMS: To describe medical and non-medical characteristics of first-time PPI users during a 10-year period and to analyse predictors of initiation of long-term use (>60 defined daily doses (DDDs) within 6 months) of PPIs. METHODS: A nationwide cohort study of first-time users of PPI. Data were collected from Danish national registers. Individuals redeeming their first prescription for a PPI (omeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, rabeprazole, esomeprazole) in 2001 and 2011 were identified. Redemption of more than 60 DDDs of PPI within 6 months defined long-term use. Logistic regression models were used to determine the associations between previous diagnoses, comedication and socio-economic characteristics and initiation of long-term use of PPIs in 2011. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2011 incidence of first-time users increased with an incidence rate ratio of 1.53 and mean quantity of PPI redeemed at first prescription increased by 44.6%. In 2011 a total of 37.6% redeemed >60 DDDs within 6 months, and 96% of the long-term users did not have a diagnosis registered which indicated treatment. New onset long-term use was significantly associated with low income and low educational level when adjusting for other predisposing variables. CONCLUSIONS: Proton pump inhibitor treatment is increasingly initiated with larger quantities prescribed for indications that are unidentifiable from the registers. Morbidity and comedication seem to be the strongest predictors of new onset long-term use of PPIs. However, there is also an independent social gradient.

Meta-analysis: Helicobacter pylori'test and treat' compared with empirical acid suppression for managing dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND: Which of Helicobacter pylori'test and treat' or empirical acid suppression should be preferred for the initial management of uncomplicated dyspepsia is controversial. Aim To conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 'test and treat' vs. empirical acid suppression in adults with uncomplicated dyspepsia in primary care. METHODS: Investigators provided original data sets for analysis. Effect of management strategy on symptom status and dyspepsia-related resource use at 12-month follow-up was examined by pooling symptom and cost data to obtain relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic at 12 months and weighted mean difference (WMD) in costs between the two strategies with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We identified three eligible RCTs containing 1547 patients, 791 (51%) of whom were assigned to 'test and treat'. There was no difference detected in symptom-cure at 12 months (RR = 0.99; 95% CI: 0.95-1.03). There was a nonsignificant trend towards cost-savings with 'test and treat' (WMD in costs = - 28.91 pound; 95% CI: - 68.48 pound to 10.65 pound). CONCLUSIONS: There was little difference in symptom-resolution or costs between the two strategies. A combination of patient and physician preference should determine the initial approach to the management of uncomplicated dyspepsia.