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.

Strengthening the primary care system and promoting utilization of primary care are the major targets of China's ambitious health reforms to meet its people's escalating health care needs. However, the changing trend of primary care utilization 4 years before and after 2009, when the health reforms started, is against the government's stated goal. The percentage of outpatient visits in primary care significantly declined from 63% in 2005 to 59% in 2013 (P = .002). In Western China it went down from 66% in 2010 to 62% in 2013 (P = .017) and slightly dropped in Eastern and Central China. Causes are multiple and include major historic and institutional factors such as severe maldistribution of human resources and lack of primary care practitioners (PCPs), lack of a functional gate-keeping mechanism, the low educational attainment of PCPs, and the detrimental elements of health reforms. Immediate measures need to be taken to improve the situation. These include taking irrational hospital expansion under strict control through enhancing the government's accountability for health care industry regulation, strategies to recruit and retain a quality primary care workforce, empowering PCPs as gatekeepers in the system, timely evaluation of the impact of health reforms on primary care, and modifying damaging policies., (© Copyright 2016 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

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., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: This study aimed to examine the prevalence, risk factors, detection rates and management of primary care depression in Hong Kong., Methods: A cross-sectional survey containing the PHQ-9 instrument was conducted on waiting room patients of 59 primary care doctors. Doctors blinded to the PHQ-9 scores reported whether they thought their patients had depression and their management., Results: 10,179 patients completed the survey (response rate 81%). The prevalence of PHQ-9 positive screening was 10.7% (95% CI: 9.7%-11.7%). Using multivariate analysis, risk factors for being PHQ-9 positive included: being female; aged ≤34 years; being unmarried; unemployed, a student or a homemaker; having a monthly household income < HKD$30,000 (USD$3,800); being a current smoker; having no regular exercise; consulted a doctor or Chinese medical practitioner within the last month; having ≥ two co-morbidities; having a family history of mental illness; and having a past history of depression or other mental illness. Overall, 23.1% of patients who screened PHQ-9 positive received a diagnosis of depression by the doctor. Predictors for receiving a diagnosis of depression included: having higher PHQ-9 scores; a past history of depression or other mental health problem; being female; aged ≥35 years; being retired or a homemaker; being non-Chinese; having no regular exercise; consulted a doctor within the last month; having a family history of mental health problems; and consulted a doctor in private practice.In patients diagnosed with depression, 43% were prescribed antidepressants, 11% were prescribed benzodiazepines, 42% were provided with counseling and 9% were referred, most commonly to a counselor., Conclusion: About one in ten primary care patients screen positive for depression, of which doctors diagnose depression in approximately one in four. At greatest risk for depression are patients with a past history of depression, who are unemployed, or who have multiple illnesses. Patients most likely to receive a diagnosis of depression by a doctor are those with a past history of depression or who have severe symptoms of depression. Chinese patients are half as likely to be diagnosed with depression as non-Chinese patients. Over half of all patients diagnosed with depression are treated with medications.

Background: The health care systems in many countries are focused on specialist care. In those countries that have recently changed to a primary care-based system, some doctors and patients were dissatisfied with the change., Objective: To explore the opinions of the general public and the doctors on the change to a family medicine (FM)-based health care system., Methods: Qualitative study with focus groups of doctors working in different practice settings. Quantitative study with questionnaires sent to all doctors registered in Hong Kong and a telephone survey targeting the general public aged ≥18., Results: Doctors in the focus groups generally supported a FM-based health care system. They were concerned that there were not enough family doctors for such a system and the patients' current free choice of any doctor for primary care would impede its success. Thousand six hundred and forty-seven adults took part in the telephone survey (response rate 67.6%) and 2310 doctors (22.8%) responded to the questionnaire. Nearly 95% of the general public respondents agreed to the FM system though only 66.3% of them had ever heard of the term family doctor. About 65% of the doctors supported this system but only 33% agreed that the system would work. The specialist-doctors were less supportive of mandatory referral than the non-specialists, while the public was equally divided on this issue., Conclusions: The public accepts the FM-based system but needs education on the benefits of primary health care. Direct access to the specialist would be the greatest barrier. Government involvements are essential for the reform.

Background: Primary care based management of long-term conditions (LTCs) is high on the international healthcare agenda, including the Asia-Pacific region. Hong Kong has a 'mixed economy' healthcare system with both public and private sectors with a range of types of primary care doctors. Recent Hong Kong Government policy aims to enhance the management of LTCs in primary care possibly based on a 'family doctor' model. Patients' views on this are not well documented and the aim of the present study was to explore the views of patients with LTCs on family doctors in Hong Kong., Methods: The views of patients (with a variety of LTCs) on family doctors in Hong Kong were explored. Two groups of participants were interviewed; a) those who considered themselves as having a family doctor, b) those who considered themselves as not having a family doctor (either with a regular primary care doctor but not a family doctor or with no regular primary care doctor). In-depth individual semi-structured interviews were carried out with 28 participants (10 with a family doctor, 10 with a regular doctor, and 8 with no regular doctor) and analysed using the constant comparative method., Results: Participants who did not have a family doctor were familiar with the concept but regarded it as a 'luxury item' for the rich within the private healthcare system. Those with a regular family doctor (all private) regarded having one as important to their and their family's health. Participants in both groups felt that as well as the more usual family medicine specialist or general practitioner, traditional Chinese medicine practitioners also had the potential to be family doctors. However most participants attended the public healthcare system for management of their LTCs whether they had a family doctor or not. Cost, perceived need, quality, trust, and choice were all barriers to the use of family doctors for the management of their LTCs., Conclusions: Important barriers to the adoption of a 'family doctor' model of management of LTCs exist in Hong Kong. Effective policy implementation seems unlikely unless these complex barriers are addressed.

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]

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]