Search

Objectives: Integrated respiratory and palliative care services for people with advanced lung disease provide disease-orientated care until the end of life, alongside symptom management and discussions about future care. This study aimed to explore patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service, to understand which components of the service were considered valued and effective. Methods: We approached patients, caregivers and general practitioners, to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. A grounded theory approach guided data collection and qualitative analysis. Results: Between July and December 2019, 10 patients, eight caregivers and five general practitioners completed interviews. The overarching theme was that of valuing integrated care – the provision of disease-orientated care along with palliative care. Four other major themes emerged: Valuing communication and engagement between patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals – who spoke of 'growing this plan together'; the delivery of person-centred care – where physicians 'actually listen and you are not treated like a number'; the reality of action plan use in serious illness – while many found plans 'certainly' do help, others described when they were simply 'too ill to do the action plan'; and finally, divergent preferences for discussions about future care – while some patients felt this subject was 'better left alone', caregivers consistently reported their preference was to 'make a plan.' Conclusion: Consumer perspectives highlight the service was valued for delivering personalised care with high communication standards. Similar services should appreciate the usefulness and limitations of action plan use in advanced lung disease, and be sensitive to potential diverging preferences of the patient and caregiver when discussing future care. What is known about the topic? Integrated respiratory and palliative care services for people with advanced lung disease may improve quality of life and decrease acute healthcare utilisation and cost. What does this paper add? This paper adds to our understanding of patients', caregivers' and general practitioners' perspectives of this integrated care model. Participants highly valued this integrated service for providing person-centred care. Participants outlined both the effectiveness and limitations of action plan use in advanced lung disease, and of diverging preferences between patients and caregivers for discussions about future care. What are the implications for practitioners? The integration of disease-orientated care along with the provision of palliative care is highly valued from a consumer perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The study explored the experiences and perceptions of GPs regarding the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Specifically, participants were asked to identify perceived enablers and barriers to CNCP care and how the care of patients with CNCP may be improved. Methods: The study utilised a qualitative descriptive methodology. General practice in Western Australia. The sample was purposive with 12 Australian GPs from predominantly metropolitan locations and with experience in managing CNCP. Semi structured interviews were conducted. Each interview was of 45–60 min duration. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed using a secure transcription service. Thematic analysis developed themes inductively and deductively. Results: Themes emerged regarding: the importance of a holistic and personalised approach; the important role of a coordinating GP; the need for an evidence-based approach to opioid management; concerns relating to access to multidisciplinary services; the importance of clinician and patient education regarding CNCP; and an acknowledgement of the challenges for doctors and patients in managing CNCP. Conclusions: Currently, the management of CNCP in Australia is challenging. Notable challenges include: difficulties with continuity of patient care; challenges with patient expectations of treatment, in particular opioid medications; difficulty with access to the health services required to enable holistic care; and the need for improved pain education in the community. The breadth of these challenges suggests there is a need for supportive organisational and structural considerations in the healthcare system to enable optimal care of CNCP in the community. Access to specialist services for chronic non-cancer pain is problematic ins In Australia, resulting in general practitioners bearing much of the burden of care that requires a holistic and multidimensional approach. In this paper, 12 general practitioners in Western Australia described, through qualitative interviews, the challenges of caring for patients with chronic pain including fragmentation of care, difficulty with access to recommended services, mismatched patient and practitioner expectations and inadequate GP and community knowledge about chronic pain. These findings could assist in planning better services for chronic pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Efforts to contain the SARS-CoV-2 virus would fall short without strong primary health care. Aim. In this study, we aimed to understand family physicians’ experiences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Istanbul, focusing on their coping strategies in order to draw lessons for the future management of pandemics. Methods. Twelve community-based physicians working in Istanbul participated in semi-structured interviews between January and May 2021. Purposive sampling was used to ensure a range of physicians’ characteristics. Individual interviews were conducted with each participant on an online platform. Participants were asked 26 open-ended questions. Phenomenological analysis was performed to describe experiences of physicians. Results. The physical conditions of participants’ health centres were insufficient to provide service safely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most physicians were uncomfortable about the quality and quantity of personal protective equipment received from the Ministry of Health and took additional measures themselves. Vaccine supply was thought to be insufficient and there were problems with the associated software. Many family physicians highlighted the inadequate communication from the Ministry. Insufficient knowledge about the disease caused anxiety and fear for the physicians and hindered their performance at the beginning of the pandemic. Physicians who live with their families were more anxious than those who did not. Discussion. Despite challenges, routine procedures have mostly been continued, but newly added responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic have had significant impact on physicians’ lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]