Search

Background: Most of the previous studies of help seeking for psychological distress were conducted in Western countries. Chinese studies have had a stronger emphasis on psychosis.Objective: This study aims to understand how Hong Kong Chinese primary care attenders see psychological distress, including its causes, management approaches and recovery, and whether their views are different from Western views.Method: Nine focus groups and six individual interviews were conducted in Hong Kong among Chinese primary care attenders with/without known distress, patients' significant others and the general public, and a questionnaire survey was conducted with 1626 primary care attenders recruited from 13 private clinics and 6 public clinics.Results: More survey respondents agreed with psychological counselling (95.3%) than drugs (69.0%) to relieve psychological distress. Despite the belief in self-resilience (77.7%), only 34.8% respondents agreed that psychological distress could get better without professional help. Respondents with younger ages, better education and higher incomes tended to have stronger trust in counselling and self-resilience than drugs. Qualitative interviews revealed that although participants regarded psychological distress as a common problem in modern societies, distressed patients might be seen as being weak and troublesome. Some distressed patients found their recovery process painful because of discouragement from family and personnel at their workplace.Conclusions: Hong Kong Chinese patients' views of the causes and management approaches of psychological distress are similar to Western findings. However, help seeking and recovery are of greater concern in a Chinese context where patients may receive limited empathy for their conditions of psychological distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Doctors' profit-oriented practices in public institutions were widespread in China. Two major targets of the healthcare reform launched in 2009 were to curb the profit-making practices in public institutions and to encourage the citizens to use primary care. After 6 years, the status of profit-orientation of public institutions remains unknown. Compared with hospitals, there is no trend of increasing use of primary care. Our study aimed to explore the status of profit-orientation of public institutions and patients' utilization preference. The impacts of guanxi (personal relationship) on patients' utilization of healthcare and doctors' practices were also explored. From September 2014 to September 2015, we conducted focus group and individual interviews, followed by a survey with doctors (n = 1111) in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province. Thematic analysis, independent t-test and Fisher's exact test were conducted to analyse the data. This study found that 36.8% of survey respondents needed to consider making profits for their institutions, especially the hospital specialists. A total of 38.5% and 40.7% thought that their practices led to patients' worries of unnecessary drugs and tests, respectively. Doctors attributed their profit-oriented practices to institutions' agenda setting, poor salary and an organizational bonus system. Their awareness of breaching medical ethics created a guilt feeling and frustration. Nearly 65.0% reported patients' preference for hospital-based care even for minor conditions and 76.2% if the patient was a child. Ineffective gate-keeping mechanism, weak primary care and mistrust in community-based care were major reasons. More specialists than primary care practitioners (41.0 vs 21.5%, P < 0.001) said that patients would use guanxi to gain better services and 64.5% of doctors reported better dedication when patients were somehow connected. In conclusion, profit-orientated practice widely exists in public institutions. Patients generally prefer hospital-based services. Guanxi, which affects both patients' and doctors' practices, is more often used to access hospital-based services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Physicians' prescribing patterns may be influenced by how they perceive their patients' expectations of medical care. This study explored doctors' perceptions of patient expectations of medical care.Design: Qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey (September 2014-September 2015).Setting: Primary- and tertiary-care facilities in Zhejiang province, China.Participants: Primary care practitioners (PCPs) and hospital specialists.Main Outcomes: Perceived patients' expectations.Results: Seven focus groups and 21 individuals were interviewed. Questionnaires were completed by 460 PCPs and 651 specialists (response rate: 78%). About 36.8% of doctors reported generating profit for the facility at which they practiced as a foremost consideration. Participants perceived patients as holding high expectations of clinical performance and use of medical products. Respondents perceived that their patients expected either drug prescriptions (48.2%) or intravenous (IV) therapy (45.2%). Perceived patient expectations of an arrangement of tests and consultation fee refunds if no prescriptions were made were reported by 29.7 and 22.7%, respectively. Doctors reported feeling undervalued and disrespected when patients requested consultation fee refunds. Compared to those who did not report a need for profit-making, doctors who did were significantly more likely to perceive that their patients expected medication-based treatments (AOR = 1.62, P < 0.001), IV therapy (AOR = 1.32, P = 0.037), the arrangement of tests (AOR = 2.06, P < 0.001), and consultation fee refunds when no prescriptions were made (AOR = 1.92, P < 0.001).Conclusions: Most doctors believed that patients had high expectations. Workplace profit-orientation demonstrated a strong association with doctors' perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To examine the public's views towards their choice of first-contact care and its associated factors in urban China.Methods: A mixed-method study was adopted using individual interviews, focus group interviews and a cross-sectional survey. The study was conducted among the general public between September 2014 and September 2015 in Zhejiang province, China.Results: Six focus groups and 13 individual interviews were conducted. The questionnaire was completed by 1248 respondents with a response rate of 83%. Survey results showed that 70% of the respondents preferred hospital-based services for first-contact care, it is especially the case with paediatric patients (83.3%). The qualitative data revealed that a major cause was the public distrust in the competence of primary care practitioners with lower educational qualifications. In the decision-making process, compared to cost factors like medical expenses and waiting times, participants attached greater emphasis on organizational characteristics. Respondents who rated sophisticated medical equipment, reputation of the facility, average education of doctors as important were significantly more inclined to choose hospital services. Respective adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were 2.14 (P < 0.001), 1.83 (P < 0.001) and 1.40 (P = 0.043) for their own conditions and 2.19 (P = 0.004), 1.94 (P = 0.002) and 1.86 (P = 0.003) for their children's conditions. Availability of medications and perceived severity of illness were also significantly associated with their choice of hospital services for their children.Conclusion: The public's preference for hospital-based services for first-contact care places a huge obstacle to promoting community-based primary care. Addressing the public's concerns about the primary care practitioners' competence is worth more efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies have reported a lack of collaboration and consensus between primary care physicians (PCPs) and psychiatrists.Objective: To compare the views of PCPs and psychiatrists on managing common mental health problems in primary care.Methods: Four focus group interviews were conducted to explore the in-depth opinions of PCPs and psychiatrists in Hong Kong. The acceptance towards the proposed collaborative strategies from the focus groups were investigated in a questionnaire survey with data from 516 PCPs and 83 psychiatrists working in public and private sectors.Results: In the focus groups, the PCPs explained that several follow-up sessions to build up trust and enable the patients to accept their mental health problems were often needed before making referrals. Although some PCPs felt capable of managing common mental health problems, they had limited choices of psychiatric drugs to prescribe. Some public PCPs experienced the benefits of collaborative care, but most private PCPs perceived limited support from psychiatrists. The survey showed that around 90% of PCPs and public psychiatrists supported setting up an agreed protocol of care, management of common mental health problems by PCPs, and discharging stabilized patients to primary care. However, only around 54-67% of private psychiatrists supported different components of these strategies. Besides, less than half of the psychiatrists agreed with setting up a support hotline for the PCPs to consult them.Conclusions: The majority of PCPs and psychiatrists support management of common mental health problems in primary care, but there is significantly less support from the private psychiatrists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: China rolled out the national essential medicines policy (NEMP) in primary care in 2009 and led to some unintended consequences including unavailability of essential medicines. This study examined patients' coping behaviors to these unintended consequences of NEMP as well as the potential impact on primary care system development in Hangzhou, a developed city of China., Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews and surveys with service users, primary care physicians (PCPs), and specialists in tertiary hospitals. Qualitative findings informed the design of the survey questionnaires. Main outcomes included patients' coping behaviors after the NEMP implementation, as well as providers' perceptions of NEMP's impact on primary care development. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data and descriptive analysis of the survey data were conducted., Results: Unintended effects of NEMP included frequent unavailability of certain essential drugs, leading to patient flow from primary care to hospital outpatient clinics for drug refills, difficulties in the provision of continuing care in primary care, as well as compromised patient trust in PCPs. In total, 1248 service users completed the questionnaires. A total of 132 (10.6%) were aged 60 years or above. Among 153 (57.7%) of the 265 who had some chronic condition(s) and needed long-term medication treatment, 60.1% went to hospitals for refills. Four-hundred sixty PCPs and 651 specialists were recruited. Among 404 PCPs who were aware of the NEMP policy implementation in their facility, 169 (41.8%) reported that there was often a shortage of drugs at their facilities and 44 (10.9%) reported always. Moreover, 68.6% of these PCPs thought that the NEMP could not meet their patients' needs. Further, 44.2% (220/498) of specialists who were aware of the NEMP policy in primary care reported that they often heard patients complaining about the policy. In total, 53.1% of PCPs and 42.4% of specialists disagreed that NEMP helped direct patient flow to community-based care., Conclusion: NEMP's unintended effects undermined patients' utilization of primary care in a developed city in China and led to unnecessary hospital visits. Countermeasures are needed to mitigate the negative impacts of NEMP on the primary care system., (© 2021 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: Health professionals including psychiatrists were reported to have stigmatising opinions on psychiatric patients. Their views may be affected by clinical, social and cultural factors., Objective: This study explored the views of Chinese psychiatrists on stigmatisation of psychiatric patients., Methods: Focus group discussions with psychiatrists were conducted in Hong Kong. Their views towards stigmatisation of psychiatric patients and strategies to reduce stigmatisation were discussed., Findings: The psychiatrists perceived the clinical needs to classify the patients according to the diagnoses and they did not see it as stigmatisation. They believed that some mental illnesses are characterised with violence or deviance, and were not completely curable. Instead of trying to eliminate stigma, they managed in ways that took social expectations into consideration. They might offer a relative vague diagnostic label to save the 'face' of the patients and secure greater acceptance for the illness from the public. They tended to accept family members to make decisions on behalf of the patients. Reconciling public interest and patients' autonomy, they encouraged stable psychotic patients to live in the community but agreed to institutionalise those patients with violent behaviours., Conclusion: While the psychiatrists argued that the diagnosis was not a form of stigma, they were sensitive enough and framed responses to patients in ways to minimise stigma. They tended to believe that stigma was inevitable given the nature of some psychotic disorders. Disguising the stigma appeared to be the common approach to deal with stigma in a Chinese context., Clinical Implications: The psychiatrists, especially those practicing in a Chinese context, may consider a wider perspective of community mental health rehabilitation which is not limited to social stability but also social life., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)