Search

This study aimed to provide insight and learnings from Australian general practitioners in facilitating positive interactions with refugee and asylum seeker patients and the role they play in helping those community members engage with healthcare. We conducted semi‐structured individual remote interviews with 12 general practitioners (GPs) who worked in areas with high refugee and migrant populations. Interview transcripts were coded inductively and deductively, based on the research questions, using Thematic Analysis. Extensive debriefing and discussion took place within the research team throughout data collection and analysis. Creating a culturally safe environment was an initial step taken by GPs to minimise the inherent power imbalance, in addition to applying the principles of trauma‐informed care (TIC) to appropriately listen and respond to their patients' needs and individual social circumstances. GPs at times were involved in using their role to advocate on behalf of their patient and played a key role in helping build their patients' health systems literacy. This study highlights the important role that GPs play in advocating and engaging refugee and asylum seeker patients, as well as helping them navigate the healthcare system. Whilst GPs practice can be made more efficient through experience and time; to deliver the care required GPs need to provide care in response to the individual's capacity and social circumstances. Enabling time and the application of the principles of TIC and cultural safety may allow for GPs to provide the quality of care that is needed in supporting patients from refugee and asylum seeker backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research on general practitioners' (GPs') involvement in end‐of‐life care has largely focused on a specific aspect of care or has provided broad overviews that failed to capture individual variations in patient management. This qualitative study aimed to explore Australian GPs' feedback and reflections on the individual‐level care provided for patients in their last year of life. The findings of the study were drawn from a nation‐wide survey of GPs' experiences in end‐of‐life care. We analysed responses from 63 GPs for 267 of the 272 reported deaths. Factors influencing delivery of optimal end‐of‐life care reported by GPs were categorised into four groups: patient‐related factors, carer‐related factors, interactions between GPs and patients/carer‐related factors and broader health system issues. Each group included both barriers and facilitators. Our study highlighted importance of the emotional dimensions of therapeutic relationships with patients and their family, availability and capacity of family support and smooth communication and continuity of care between GPs and hospitals in delivery of optimal end‐of‐life care. Lack of these facilitators, misconceptions of palliative care and conflicts on implementing care plans among patients and their family tended to impede delivery of such care. On the basis of our findings in the present study and previous literature, we conclude that improved end‐of‐life care in general practice requires comprehensive approaches to supporting both the GP and family to provide care in patients' preferred place, such as enhanced palliative care training and improved availability of external support for GPs, higher levels of hospital‐based services reaching into community settings and broader community‐based resources for families beyond simply the healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As many patients' sole point of contact with the health care system, primary health care physicians (general practitioners [GPs] in Australia) are often positioned as key players in responding to rates of overweight and obesity in dominant public discourse. However, research from Western industrialised countries suggests that GPs may not be prepared for, or confident in, having conversations about overweight and obesity with patients. Little attention has been given to this topic in Australia, particularly in the context of rural health. The aim of this study was to understand how GPs in two rural settings in Victoria, Australia talk about overweight and obesity with patients. Working from a multidisciplinary perspective, a qualitative study design was adopted, and semi‐structured interviews were conducted with seven GPs and seven GP patients living in two rural communities between January and April, 2016. Data was coded manually and thematic analysis was used to explore the data. The findings of this study support the argument that, in contrast to dominant messages within public health discourses, GPs may not be best placed to act as the primary actors in responding to overweight and obesity as they are constructed in epidemiological terms. In fact, the perspectives of GP study participants suggest that to do so would compromise important dimensions of general medical practice that make it simultaneously a human practice. Instead, more balanced, holistic approaches to discussing and responding to overweight and obesity with patients could be taken up in local, interdisciplinary collaborations between different health professionals and patients, which utilise broader social supports. Focussing on long‐term, incremental programs that consider the whole person within their particular socio‐cultural environment would be a productive means of working with the complexities of overweight and obesity. However, structural level changes are required to ensure such initiatives are sustainable in rural practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Somatic mutations in key oncogenes in non-small cell lung cancer ( NSCLC) and melanoma are important determinants of tumour sensitivity to targeted therapies. Molecular screening for these predictive biomarkers is routinely used to inform treatment decisions; however, little is known about how best to communicate testing and results to patients. This qualitative study aimed to explore advanced cancer patients' attitudes and experiences regarding somatic tumour screening to identify their information and support needs. Sixteen NSCLC and eight melanoma patients who had undergone screening participated in a semi-structured face-to-face or telephone interview exploring their understanding, views, preferences and needs regarding screening. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed for thematic patterns. Participants expressed positive views and unequivocal acceptance of screening, and understood its role in guiding treatment selection. They preferred to receive information verbally through simple, non-technical language from their oncologist with additional take-home materials. Patients were interested in learning about their test results, but wanted discussion to be focused on practical matters relevant to treatment. While receiving their screening results was not considered burdensome, information overload and cancer-related distress were identified as barriers to test comprehension. Patients may benefit from information and decision-related tools to better understand genomic information and adequately support psychosocial outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]