PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Grol

Publications and source records attributed to R Grol.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Patients either contacting a general practice cooperative or accident and emergency department out of hours: a comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Lack of collaboration between general practice (GP) cooperatives and accident and emergency (A&E) departments and many self referrals may lead to inefficient out-of-hours care. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the records of all patients contacting the GP cooperative and all patients self referring to the A&E department out of hours in a region in the Netherlands. RESULTS: 258 patients contacted the GP cooperative and 43 self referred to the A&E department per 1000 patients per year. A wide range of problems were seen in the GP cooperative, mainly related to infections (26.2%). The A&E department had a smaller range of problems, mainly related to trauma (66.1%). Relatively few urgent problems were seen in the GP cooperative (4.6%) or for self referrals in the A&E department (6.1%). Women, children, the elderly, and rural patients chose the GP cooperative significantly more often, as did men and patients with less urgent complaints, infections, and heart and airway problems. DISCUSSION: The contact frequency of self referrals to the A&E department is much lower than that at the GP cooperative. Care is complementary: the A&E department focuses on trauma while the GP cooperative deals with a wide range of problems. The self referrals concern mostly minor, non-urgent problems and can generally be treated by the general practitioner, by a nurse, or by advice over the telephone, particularly in the case of optimal collaboration in an integrated care facility of GP cooperatives and A&E departments with one access point to medical care for all patients.

Adolescent↗

Substitution of doctors by nurses in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Demand for primary care services has increased in developed countries due to population ageing, rising patient expectations, and reforms that shift care from hospitals to the community. At the same time, the supply of physicians is constrained and there is increasing pressure to contain costs. Shifting care from physicians to nurses is one possible response to these challenges. The expectation is that nurse-doctor substitution will reduce cost and physician workload while maintaining quality of care. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to evaluate the impact of doctor-nurse substitution in primary care on patient outcomes, process of care, and resource utilisation including cost. Patient outcomes included: morbidity; mortality; satisfaction; compliance; and preference. Process of care outcomes included: practitioner adherence to clinical guidelines; standards or quality of care; and practitioner health care activity (e.g. provision of advice). Resource utilisation was assessed by: frequency and length of consultations; return visits; prescriptions; tests and investigations; referral to other services; and direct or indirect costs. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following databases were searched for the period 1966 to 2002: Medline; Cinahl; Bids, Embase; Social Science Citation Index; British Nursing Index; HMIC; EPOC Register; and Cochrane Controlled Trial Register. Search terms specified the setting (primary care), professional (nurse), study design (randomised controlled trial, controlled before-and-after-study, interrupted time series), and subject (e.g. skill mix). SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included if nurses were compared to doctors providing a similar primary health care service (excluding accident and emergency services). Primary care doctors included: general practitioners, family physicians, paediatricians, general internists or geriatricians. Primary care nurses included: practice nurses, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, or advanced practice nurses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study selection and data extraction was conducted independently by two reviewers with differences resolved through discussion. Meta-analysis was applied to outcomes for which there was adequate reporting of intervention effects from at least three randomised controlled trials. Semi-quantitative methods were used to synthesize other outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: 4253 articles were screened of which 25 articles, relating to 16 studies, met our inclusion criteria. In seven studies the nurse assumed responsibility for first contact and ongoing care for all presenting patients. The outcomes investigated varied across studies so limiting the opportunity for data synthesis. In general, no appreciable differences were found between doctors and nurses in health outcomes for patients, process of care, resource utilisation or cost. In five studies the nurse assumed responsibility for first contact care for patients wanting urgent consultations during office hours or out-of-hours. Patient health outcomes were similar for nurses and doctors but patient satisfaction was higher with nurse-led care. Nurses tended to provide longer consultations, give more information to patients and recall patients more frequently than did doctors. The impact on physician workload and direct cost of care was variable. In four studies the nurse took responsibility for the ongoing management of patients with particular chronic conditions. The outcomes investigated varied across studies so limiting the opportunity for data synthesis. In general, no appreciable differences were found between doctors and nurses in health outcomes for patients, process of care, resource utilisation or cost. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that appropriately trained nurses can produce as high quality care as primary care doctors and achieve as good health outcomes for patients. However, this conclusion should be viewed with caution given that only one study was powered to assess equivalence of care, many studies had methodological limitations, and patient follow-up was generally 12 months or less. While doctor-nurse substitution has the potential to reduce doctors' workload and direct healthcare costs, achieving such reductions depends on the particular context of care. Doctors' workload may remain unchanged either because nurses are deployed to meet previously unmet patient need or because nurses generate demand for care where previously there was none. Savings in cost depend on the magnitude of the salary differential between doctors and nurses, and may be offset by the lower productivity of nurses compared to doctors.

Family Practice↗

User-related pharmaceutical care problems and factors affecting them: the importance of clinical relevance.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many studies determined the number and nature of user-related Pharmaceutical Care Problems (PCP) and factors affecting them, but none considered the inclusion of clinical relevance. The aims of this study are (i) to investigate the type, number and clinical relevance of user-related PCP self-reported by home dwelling elderly on polypharmacy and (ii) to develop a risk-model for detecting elderly drug-users at risk of user-related PCP. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional study conducted among 286 home dwelling elderly on polypharmacy (> or =75 years, > or =4 medicines) in the Netherlands. The user-related PCP found were divided into problem categories and subsequently a pharmacist and a general practitioner classified the problems into those with low and those with (potential) clinical relevance. Factors possibly associated with PCP (both for all and relevant problems) were identified, and subsequently tested in multivariate models using logistic regression. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-eight user-related PCP were observed in 189 patients (66% of all participants). After classification of user-related PCP only 26% appeared to be of clinical relevance (26% of all participants). When including clinical relevance a shift in predominantly present problem categories is observed. Furthermore, the risk model for problems with clinical relevance contains more factors than the model which considered all problems. Factors associated with clinically relevant PCP are emotional or physical problems interfering with social life, communication skills (vision and hearing), using tablets that have to be divided, using inhaled medicines, and the number of medicines used. This risk-model has a specificity of 92% and a sensitivity of 32%. CONCLUSIONS: Although user-related PCP were seen in about two-thirds of the participants, in only one out of four participants was the PCP considered to be of clinical relevance. With inclusion of clinical relevance, other problem categories become more dominant. A specific risk model is designed to select elderly patients that are most likely to have PCP in need of more urgent intervention. Unfortunately higher specificity is accompanied by low sensitivity in the present model.

Aged↗

Clinical guidelines to improve patient care.

The aim of clinical guidelines is to improve quality of care by translating new research findings into practice. There is evidence that the following characteristics contribute to their use: inclusion of specific recommendations, sufficient supporting evidence, a clear structure and an attractive lay out. In the process of formulating recommendations, implicit norms of the target users should be taken into account. Guidelines should be developed within a structured and coordinated programme by a credible central organisation. To promote their implementation, guidelines could be used as a template for local protocols, clinical pathways and interprofessional agreements.

Delivery of Health Care↗

Patient-directed strategy to reduce prescribing for patients with dyspepsia in general practice: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The percentage of patients receiving long-term treatment with acid suppressive drugs, mainly proton pump inhibitors, is higher than the prevalence of diseases that are commonly accepted as the proper indication for long-term proton pump inhibitor use. AIM: To evaluate whether a patient-directed intervention (direct mail) reduced the prescription of antisecretory medication for dyspepsia in general practice. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial was performed. One hundred and thirteen chronic users of proton pump inhibitors were recruited by 20 general practitioners. An unsolicited information leaflet was sent to patients that suggested stopping or reducing the use of proton pump inhibitors. The number of patients who stopped or reduced proton pump inhibitor use was measured at 12 and 20 weeks after the intervention. Secondary outcome measures were dyspepsia symptom severity and perceived quality of life measured at 12 weeks after the intervention. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 59 (24%) intervention group patients stopped or reduced their use of proton pump inhibitors, compared with three of the 45 (7%) control group patients (relative risk ratio 3.56; CI 95%: 1.088-11.642). Dyspepsia symptom severity and quality of life did not change. CONCLUSIONS: A simple patient-directed intervention reduced the volume of long-term prescriptions of proton pump inhibitors in patients with dyspepsia.

Drug Prescriptions↗

Achieving involvement: process outcomes from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice.

BACKGROUND: A consulting method known as 'shared decision making' (SDM) has been described and operationalized in terms of several 'competences'. One of these competences concerns the discussion of the risks and benefits of treatment or care options-'risk communication'. Few data exist on clinicians' ability to acquire skills and implement the competences of SDM or risk communication in consultations with patients. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate the effects of skill development workshops for SDM and the use of risk communication aids on the process of consultations. METHODS: A cluster randomized trial with crossover was carried out with the participation of 20 recently qualified GPs in urban and rural general practices in Gwent, South Wales. A total of 747 patients with known atrial fibrillation, prostatism, menorrhagia or menopausal symptoms were invited to a consultation to review their condition or treatments. Half the consultations were randomly selected for audio-taping, of which 352 patients attended and were audio-taped successfully. After baseline, participating doctors were randomized to receive training in (i) SDM skills or (ii) the use of simple risk communication aids, using simulated patients. The alternative training was then provided for the final study phase. Patients were allocated randomly to a consultation during baseline or intervention 1 (SDM or risk communication aids) or intervention 2 phases. A randomly selected half of the consultations were audio-taped from each phase. Raters (independent, trained and blinded to study phase) assessed the audio-tapes using a validated scale to assess levels of patient involvement (OPTION: observing patient involvement), and to analyse the nature of risk information discussed. Clinicians completed questionnaires after each consultation, assessing perceived clinician-patient agreement and level of patient involvement in decisions. Multilevel modelling was carried out with the OPTION score as the dependent variable, and rater, consultation and clinician levels of data, standardized by rater within clinician. RESULTS: Following each of the interventions, the clinicians significantly increased their involvement of patients in decision making (OPTION score increased by 10.6 following risk communication training [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.9 -13.3; P < 0.001] and by 12.9 after SDM skill development (95% CI 10 -15.8, P < 0.001), a moderate effect size. The level of involvement achieved by the risk communication aids was significantly increased by the subsequent introduction of the skill development workshops (7.7 increase in OPTION score, 95% CI 3.4-12; P < 0.001). The alternative sequence (skills followed by risk communication aids) did not achieve this effect. The use of most risk information formats increased after the provision of specific risk communication aids (P < 0.001). Clinicians using the risk communication tools perceived significantly higher patient and clinician agreement on treatment (P < 0.001), patient satisfaction with information (P < 0.01), clinician satisfaction with decision (P < 0.01) and general overall satisfaction with the consultation (P < 0.001) than those who were exposed to SDM skill development workshops. CONCLUSIONS: These clinicians were able to acquire the skills to implement SDM competences and to use risk communication aids. Each intervention provided independent effects. Further progress towards greater patient involvement in health care decision making is possible, and skill development in this area should be incorporated into postgraduate professional development programmes.

Adult↗

Organisational change theory and the use of indicators in general practice.

General practices are making greater use of indicators to help shape and develop organisational arrangements supporting the delivery of health care. Debate continues concerning what exactly such indicators should measure and how they should be used to achieve improvement. Organisational theories can provide an analytical backdrop to inform the design of indicators, critique their construction, and evaluate their use. Systems theory, organisational development, social worlds theory, and complexity theory each has a practical contribution to make to our understanding of how indicators work in prompting quality improvements and why they sometimes don't. This paper argues that systems theory exerts the most influence over the use of indicators. It concludes that a strategic framework for quality improvement should take account of all four theories, recognising the multiple realities that any one approach will fail to reflect.

Family Practice↗

Assessing organisational development in primary medical care using a group based assessment: the Maturity Matrix.

OBJECTIVE: To design and develop an instrument to assess the degree of organisational development achieved in primary medical care organisations. DESIGN: An iterative development, feasibility and validation study of an organisational assessment instrument. SETTING: Primary medical care organisations. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care teams and external facilitators. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to an evaluation questionnaire, qualitative process feedback, hypothesis testing, and quantitative psychometric analysis (face and construct validity) of the results of a Maturity Matrix assessment in 55 primary medical care organisations. RESULTS: Evaluations by 390 participants revealed high face validity with respect to its usefulness as a review and planning tool at the practice level. Feedback from facilitators suggests that it helped practices to prioritise their organisational development. With respect to construct validity, there was some support for the hypothesis that training and non-training status affected the degree and pattern of organisational development. The size of the organisation did not have a significant impact on the degree of organisational development. CONCLUSION: This practice based facilitated group evaluation method was found to be both useful and enjoyable by the participating organisations. Psychometric validation revealed high face validity. Further developments are in place to ensure acceptability for summative work (benchmarking) and formative feedback processes (quality improvement).

Benchmarking↗

Quality assurance in clinical trials.

From the literature that was initially searched by electronic databases using the keywords quality, quality control and quality assurance in combination with clinical trials, surgery, pathology, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and data management, a comprehensive review is given on what quality assurance means, the various methods used for quality assurance in different aspects of clinical trials and the impact of this quality assurance on outcome and every day practice.

Clinical Protocols↗

The development of quality circles/peer review groups as a method of quality improvement in Europe. Results of a survey in 26 European countries.

BACKGROUND: Peer review groups (PRGs) and quality circles (QCs) commenced in The Netherlands and have grown to become an important method of quality improvement in primary care in several other European countries. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to provide an overview of QC/PRG activities and exemplary programmes in European countries. METHODS: A survey was performed in three consecutive steps by EQuiP (European Working Party on Quality in Family Practice), which is a representative association of experts from 26 European countries. The national representatives initially completed a structured questionnaire documenting the number and objectives of QCs/PRGs, sources of support and special programmes in their countries (step 1). In step 2, these sources were used to extend and validate the expert statements. Step 3 studied paradigmatic initiatives in depth. RESULTS: Step 1 took place in 2000; the response rate was 100% (26 countries). QCs/PRGs were very active in 10 countries; 16 countries showed little or no activity. Participation ranged from <2 to 86% of all GPs. Step 2 concentrated upon the countries with a high level of activity. Development appeared to be associated with establishment in private practice and the portion of GPs with vocational training. Eight programmes from six countries describing the establishment and the targeting of QC/PRG work are presented as case reports (step 3). CONCLUSION: In the last 10 years, substantial development of QCs/PRGs has taken place in The Netherlands, the UK, Denmark, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Further evaluation is needed to clarify the impact on quality of care.

Europe↗

Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review has shown that no measures of the extent to which healthcare professionals involve patients in decisions within clinical consultations exist, despite the increasing interest in the benefits or otherwise of patient participation in these decisions. AIMS: To describe the development of a new instrument designed to assess the extent to which practitioners involve patients in decision making processes. DESIGN: The OPTION (observing patient involvement) scale was developed and used by two independent raters to assess primary care consultations in order to evaluate its psychometric qualities, validity, and reliability. STUDY SAMPLE: 186 audiotaped consultations collected from the routine clinics of 21 general practitioners in the UK. METHOD: Item response rates, Cronbach's alpha, and summed and scaled OPTION scores were calculated. Inter-item and item-total correlations were calculated and inter-rater agreements were calculated using Cohen's kappa. Classical inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficients and generalisability theory statistics were used to calculate inter-rater reliability coefficients. Basing the tool development on literature reviews, qualitative studies and consultations with practitioner and patients ensured content validity. Construct validity hypothesis testing was conducted by assessing score variation with respect to patient age, clinical topic "equipoise", sex of practitioner, and success of practitioners at a professional examination. RESULTS: The OPTION scale provided reliable scores for detecting differences between groups of consultations in the extent to which patients are involved in decision making processes in consultations. The results justify the use of the scale in further empirical studies. The inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (0.62), kappa scores for inter-rater agreement (0.71), and Cronbach's alpha (0.79) were all above acceptable thresholds. Based on a balanced design of five consultations per clinician, the inter-rater reliability generalisability coefficient was 0.68 (two raters) and the intra-rater reliability generalisability coefficient was 0.66. On average, mean practitioner scores were very similar (and low on the overall scale of possible involvement); some practitioner scores had more variation around the mean, indicating that they varied their communication styles to a greater extent than others. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement in decision making is a key facet of patient participation in health care and the OPTION scale provides a validated outcome measure for future empirical studies.

Decision Making↗

Self-management of asthma in general practice, asthma control and quality of life: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of asthma self-management in general practice. METHODS: Nineteen general practices were randomly allocated to usual care (UC) or self-management (SM). Asthma patients were included after confirmation of the GP diagnosis. Follow up was 2 years. Patients kept diary cards and visited the lung function laboratory every 6 months. Outcomes were number of successfully treated weeks, limited activity days, asthma specific quality of life, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)), FEV(1) reversibility, concentration of histamine provoking a fall in FEV(1) of 20% or more (PC(20) histamine), and amount of inhaled steroids. RESULTS: A total of 214 patients were included in the study (104 UC/110 SM; one third of the total asthma population in general practice); 62% were female. The mean percentage of successfully treated weeks per patient in the UC group was 72% (74/103 weeks) compared with 78% (81/105 weeks) in the SM group (p=0.003). The mean number of limited activity days was 1.2 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.9) in the SM group and 3.9 (95% CI 2.5 to 5.4) in the UC group. The estimated increase in asthma quality of life score was 0.10 points per visit in the UC group and 0.21 points per visit in the SM group (p=0.055). FEV(1), FEV(1) reversibility, and PC(20) histamine did not change. There was a saving of 217 puffs of inhaled steroid per patient in favour of the SM group (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Self-management lowers the burden of illness as perceived by patients with asthma and is at least as effective as the treatment usually provided in Dutch primary care. Self-management is a safe basis for intermittent treatment with inhaled corticosteroids.

Adult↗

Guideline adherence rates and interprofessional variation in a vignette study of depression.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the appropriateness of and variation in intention-to-treat decisions in the management of depression in the Netherlands. DESIGN: Mailed survey with 22 paper cases (vignettes) based on a population study. SETTING: A random sample from four professional groups in the Dutch mental healthcare system. SUBJECTS: 264 general practitioners, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, and clinical psychologists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each vignette contained information on a number of patient characteristics taken from three national depression guidelines. The distribution of patient characteristics was based on data from a population study. Respondents were asked to choose the best treatment option and the best treatment setting. For each vignette we examined which of the selected treatments was appropriate according to the recommendations of the three published Dutch clinical guidelines and a panel of experts. RESULTS: 31% of all intention-to-treat decisions were not consistent with the guidelines. Overall, less severe depression, alcohol abuse, psychotic features, and lack of social resources were related to more inappropriate judgements. There was considerable variation between the professional groups: psychiatrists made more appropriate choices than the other professions although they had the highest rate of overtreatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is sufficient variation in the intentions to treat depression to give it priority in quality assessment and guideline development. Efforts to achieve appropriate care should focus on treatment indications, referral patterns, and overtreatment.

Antidepressive Agents↗

Comparison of patients' and general practitioners' evaluations of general practice care.

OBJECTIVES: To compare patients' and general practitioners' (GPs') evaluations of the quality of general practice care. DESIGN: Written surveys among patients and GPs. SETTING: General practice in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: 1772 patients (from 45 GPs) and a random sample of 315 GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' and GPs' evaluations of 23 aspects of general practice care and GPs' perceptions of patients' evaluations using a 5 point scale. RESULTS: The response rate was 88% in the patient sample and 63% in the GP sample. The patients' ratings of care were significantly more positive (mean 4.0) than those of the GPs (mean 3.7) as well as GPs' perceptions of patients' evaluations (mean 3.5) (p<0.001). The overall rank order correlations between the patients' evaluations, GPs' evaluations, and GPs' perceptions of the patients' evaluations were 0.75 or higher (p<0.001). Patients and practitioners gave the most positive evaluations of specific aspects of the doctor-patient relationship ("keeping patients' records and data confidential", "listening to patients", and "making patients feel they had enough time during consultations") and aspects of the organisation of care ("provide quick service for urgent health problems" and "helpfulness of the staff (other than the doctor)"). The aspects of care evaluated least positively by patients as well as by GPs were other organisational aspects ("preparing patients for what to expect from specialist or hospital care" and "getting through to practice on the telephone"). CONCLUSIONS: GPs and patients have to some extent a shared perspective on general practice care. However, GPs were more critical about the quality of care than patients and they underestimated how positive patients were about the care they provide. Furthermore, specific aspects of care were evaluated differently, so surveys and other consultations with patients are necessary to integrate their perspective into quality improvement activities.

Adolescent↗

Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction.

Physicians today are confronted with increasing demand to ensure and improve care of their patients. A variety of approaches claim to provide solutions to the problems of health care delivery. These approaches represent different perspectives on optimal care and the best method for improving care. By summarizing recent reviews and debates in this field, this article critically reflects on the value of some of the approaches that have gained popularity during the last decades: evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines, professional development, assessment and accountability, patient empowerment, and total quality management. Evidence regarding the impact and feasibility of the various approaches is mixed or simply lacking. In particular, the health care community lacks an understanding of which approaches are most appropriate for what types of improvement in what settings and of the determinants of successful performance change. Given the complexity of improvement and change in patient care, it is not realistic to expect that one approach can solve all the problems in health care delivery. None of the popular models for improving clinical performance appear to be superior. Therefore, bridges must be built and models must be integrated to be truly effective.

Delivery of Health Care↗

Implementation barriers for general practice guidelines on low back pain a qualitative study.

STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study design, using semi-structured interviews. OBJECTIVE: To explore factors that determine non-adherence to the guidelines for low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Guidelines for low back pain have been published in the past decade in various countries. In the Netherlands, general practitioners adhere to them to a fair extent, and it is unclear whether room for improvement remains. METHODS: Forty semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted with twenty patients who consulted for low back pain, and with their general practitioners. The interviews were fully transcribed and analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Patients often had limited expectations of the consultation. They wanted to hear a diagnosis or expected to receive simple advice. The general practitioners said they were well informed about the guideline and mostly agreed with its content. Reasons for non-adherence were mainly related to patients' experiences in the past and general practitioners' interpretations of their preferences. General practitioners stated that they were inclined to give in to patients' demands, for example the request for radiographic films or a referral to a physical therapist. In general, patients and their general practitioners were satisfied with the chosen management. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement of the quality of back pain care may still be possible. Implementation strategies should aim at training physicians in communication skills, especially about subjects for debate, where patients' beliefs and experiences color their expectations.

Adult↗