Search

Introduction: Research suggests that general practice can play an important role in managing long COVID. However, studies investigating the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and patients are lacking and knowledge regarding optimal long COVID care in general practice is therefore limited. Aim: To investigate GPs' and patients' perspectives on the topic of long COVID and its management in general practice. Methods: Brief questionnaires (GP n = 11, Patient n = 7) and in-depth semi-structured interviews (GP n = 10, Patient n = 7) were conducted with GPs and patients from Irish general practices during July 2022-January 2023. Interviews were conducted via telephone and audio recordings were transcribed. A phenomenological analysis involving reflexive thematic analysis and constant comparison techniques was adopted. Results: Analysis of interviews with GPs (male = 7, female = 3; median age = 50yrs (IQR = 39.5–56)) and patients (males = 2, female = 5; median age = 58yrs (IQR = 45-62yrs) generated four themes. These were (1) Complex presentations (2) the value of standardising care, (3) choosing the right path, and (4) supportive and collaborative doctor-patient relationships. Strong agreement was observed among GPs and patients regarding the need for holistic and integrated multidisciplinary care. Supportive and collaborative doctor-patient relationships were largely well received by GPs and patients also. GPs strongly endorsed standardising long COVID care operations. Conclusion: GPs and patients indicated that structured, integrated, and collaborative care can help optimise long COVID management in general practice. GPs are advised to incorporate these elements into their long COVID care practices going forward. Future research examining stakeholder's perspectives using larger and longitudinal samples is advised to enhance the generalisability of evidence in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy rise, health care systems must respond to these challenges. Data is needed from general practice regarding the impact of age, number of chronic illnesses and medications on specific metrics of healthcare utilisation. Methods: This was a retrospective study of general practices in a university-affiliated education and research network, consisting of 72 practices. Records from a random sample of 100 patients aged 50 years and over who attended each participating practice in the previous two years were analysed. Through manual record searching, data were collected on patient demographics, number of chronic illnesses and medications, numbers of attendances to the general practitioner (GP), practice nurse, home visits and referrals to a hospital doctor. Attendance and referral rates were expressed per person-years for each demographic variable and the ratio of attendance to referral rate was also calculated. Results: Of the 72 practices invited to participate, 68 (94%) accepted, providing complete data on a total of 6603 patients' records and 89,667 consultations with the GP or practice nurse; 50.1% of patients had been referred to hospital in the previous two years. The attendance rate to general practice was 4.94 per person per year and the referral rate to the hospital was 0.6 per person per year, giving a ratio of over eight attendances for every referral. Increasing age, number of chronic illnesses and number of medications were associated with increased attendance rates to the GP and practice nurse and home visits but did not significantly increase the ratio of attendance to referral rate. Discussion: As age, morbidity and number of medications rise, so too do all types of consultations in general practice. However, the rate of referral remains relatively stable. General practice must be supported to provide person centred care to an ageing population with rising rates of multi-morbidity and polypharmacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interdisciplinary team working is of paramount importance in the reform of primary care in order to provide cost-effective and comprehensive care. However, international research shows that it is not routine practice in many healthcare jurisdictions. It is imperative to understand levers and barriers to the implementation process. This review examines interdisciplinary team working in practice, in primary care, from the perspective of service providers and analyses 1 barriers and facilitators to implementation of interdisciplinary teams in primary care and 2 the main research gaps., Methods and Findings: An integrative review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Following a search of 10 international databases, 8,827 titles were screened for relevance and 49 met the criteria. Quality of evidence was appraised using predetermined criteria. Data were analysed following the principles of framework analysis using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which has four constructs: sense making, enrolment, enactment, and appraisal. The literature is dominated by a focus on interdisciplinary working between physicians and nurses. There is a dearth of evidence about all NPT constructs apart from enactment. Physicians play a key role in encouraging the enrolment of others in primary care team working and in enabling effective divisions of labour in the team. The experience of interdisciplinary working emerged as a lever for its implementation, particularly where communication and respect were strong between professionals., Conclusion: A key lever for interdisciplinary team working in primary care is to get professionals working together and to learn from each other in practice. However, the evidence base is limited as it does not reflect the experiences of all primary care professionals and it is primarily about the enactment of team working. We need to know much more about the experiences of the full network of primary care professionals regarding all aspects of implementation work., Systematic Review Registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015019362.