Search

Introduction and Aims: Guidelines recommend anxiolytics and hypnotics (A/H) as second-line, short-term medications. We aimed to establish prevalence and associations of A/H prescribing by Australian general practice (GP) trainees.Design and Methods: A cross-sectional analysis from a cohort study of vocational trainees from four GP Regional Training Providers during 2010-2013. General practice trainees act as independent practitioners (including for prescribing purposes) while having recourse to advice from a GP supervisor. Practice and trainee demographic data were collected as well as patient, clinical and educational data from 60 consecutive consultations of each trainee each training term. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the outcome factor being prescription of any anxiolytic or hypnotic.Results: Overall, 645 registrars (response rate 94.0%) prescribed 68 582 medications in 69 621 consultations (with 112 890 problems managed). A/Hs were prescribed for 1.3% of problems managed and comprised 2.2% of all prescriptions. They were prescribed particularly for insomnia (28.2%) or anxiety (21.8%), but also for many 'off-label' indications. Significant associations of A/H prescriptions were: patient-level (greater age, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, English-speaking background, being new to the trainee but not to the practice); trainee-level (male) and consultation-level (longer duration, pre-existing problem, specialist referral not being made). Prescribing was significantly lower in one of the four Regional Training Providers.Discussion and Conclusions: GP trainees, inconsistent with most guideline recommendations, prescribe A/Hs mainly as maintenance therapy to unfamiliar and older patients. Our results suggest that changes in management approaches are needed which may be facilitated by support for psychotherapeutic training. [Holliday SM, Morgan S, Tapley A, Henderson KM, Dunlop AJ, van Driel ML, Spike NA, McArthur LA, Ball J, Oldmeadow CJ, Magin PJ. The pattern of anxiolytic and hypnotic management by Australian general practice trainees. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:261-269]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Eye conditions are common presentations in Australian general practice, with the potential for serious sequelae. Pre-vocational ophthalmology training for General Practitioner (GP) trainees is limited. AIM: To describe the rate, nature and associations of ophthalmic problems managed by Australian GP trainees, and derive implications for education and training. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis from an ongoing cohort study of GP trainees' clinical consultations. Trainees recorded demographic, clinical and educational details of consecutive patient consultations. Descriptive analyses report trainee, patient and practice demographics. Proportions of all problems managed in these consultations that were ophthalmologyrelated were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Associations were tested using simple logistic regression within the generalised estimating equations (GEE) framework. RESULTS: In total, 884 trainees returned data on 184,476 individual problems or diagnoses from 118,541 encounters. There were 2649 ophthalmology-related problems, equating to 1.4% (95% CI: 1.38-1.49) of all problems managed. The most common eye presentations were conjunctivitis (32.5% of total problems), eyelid problems (14.9%), foreign body (5.3%) and dry eye (4.7%). Statistically significant associations were male trainee; male patient and patient aged 14 years or under; the problem being new and the patient being new to both trainee and practice; urban and of higher socioeconomic status practice location; the practice nurse not being involved; planned follow up not arranged; referral made; in-consultation information sought; and learning goals generated. DISCUSSION: Trainees have comparable ophthalmology exposure to established GPs. However, associations with referral and information-seeking suggest GP trainees find ophthalmic problems challenging, reinforcing the critical importance of appropriate training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the context of increasing over-testing and the implications for patient safety, to establish the prevalence and nature of pathology test-ordering of GP trainees, and to describe the associations of this test-ordering.Design: A cross-sectional analysis of data from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study.Setting: Five of Australia's 17 general practice regional training providers, encompassing urban-to-very remote practices.Participants: GP trainees.Main Outcome Measures: The number of pathology tests ordered per problem/diagnosis managed.Results: A total of 856 individual trainees (response rate 95.2%) contributed data from 1832 trainee-terms, 108 759 encounters and 169 304 problems. Pathology test-ordering prevalence was 79.3 tests (95% CI: 78.8-79.8) per 100 encounters, 50.9 (95% CI: 50.6-51.3) per 100 problems, and at least 1 test was requested in 22.4% of consultations. Most commonly ordered was full blood count (6.1 per 100 problems). The commonest problem prompting test-ordering was 'check-up' (18.6%). Test-ordering was significantly associated, on multivariable analysis, with the trainee having worked at the practice previously; the patient being adult, male and new to both trainee and practice; the practice being urban; the problem/diagnosis being new; imaging being ordered; referral being made and follow-up being arranged. Trainees were significantly less likely to order tests for problems/diagnoses for which they had sought in-consultation information or advice.Conclusions: Compared with the established GPs, trainees order more pathology tests per consultation and per problem managed, and in a higher proportion of consultations. Our findings will inform educational policy to enhance quality and safety in general practice training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Travel medicine is a common and challenging area of clinical practice and practitioners need up-to-date knowledge and experience in a range of areas. Australian general practitioners (GPs) play a significant role in the delivery of travel medicine advice. We aimed to describe the rate and nature of travel medicine consultations, including both the clinical and educational aspects of the consultations.Methods: A cross-sectional analysis from an ongoing cohort study of GP trainees' clinical consultations was performed. Trainees contemporaneously recorded demographic, clinical, and educational details of consecutive patient consultations. Proportions of all problems/diagnoses managed in these consultations that were coded "travel-related" and "travel advice" were both calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Associations of a problem/diagnosis being "travel-related" or "travel advice" were tested using simple logistic regression within the generalized estimating equations (GEE) framework.Results: A total of 856 trainees contributed data on 169,307 problems from 108,759 consultations (2010-2014). Travel-related and travel advice problems were managed at a rate of 1.1 and 0.5 problems per 100 encounters, respectively. Significant positive associations of travel-related problems were younger trainee and patient age; new patient to the trainee and practice; privately billing, larger, urban, and higher socioeconomic status practices; and involvement of the practice nurse. Trainees sought in-consultation information and generated learning goals in 34.7 and 20.8% of travel advice problems, respectively, significantly more than in non-travel advice problems. Significant positive associations of travel advice problems were seeking in-consultation information, generation of learning goals, longer consultation duration, and more problems managed.Conclusions: Our findings reinforce the importance of focused training in travel medicine for GP trainees and adequate exposure to patients in the practice setting. In addition, our findings have implications more broadly for the delivery of travel medicine in general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Fatigue is the most common undifferentiated problem presenting in general practice. Previous studies have shown that this presentation leads to multiple investigations. There is no published literature describing the management of patients with fatigue by general practice (GP) registrars. AIM: To document the investigation-ordering behaviour of GP registrars in managing patients with a new diagnosis of unexplained fatigue. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of data from Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT), an ongoing cohort study of GP registrars' consultations. We established the prevalence of new diagnoses of unexplained fatigue and associations with that diagnosis, the rate of test ordering and the number and types of investigations ordered. RESULTS: 644 registrars contributed data from 68 986 encounters. In 0.78% of patient encounters, a new diagnosis of unexplained fatigue was made. Pathology was ordered in 78.4% of these problems (versus 18.1% in non-fatigue problems), at a rate of 488 tests per 100 new fatigue problems. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that unexplained fatigue elicits a non-rational approach to test ordering by registrars. These findings contribute to the understanding of GP registrar management of fatigue, and undifferentiated presentations more broadly, and suggest educational approaches to improve practice, including dealing with uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]