Search

Background Electronic clinical decision support systems (eCDSS), such as the ‘Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing’ Assistant (STRIPA), have become promising tools for assisting general practitioners (GPs) with conducting medication reviews in older adults. Little is known about how GPs perceive eCDSS-assisted recommendations for pharmacotherapy optimization. The aim of this study was to explore the implementation of a medication review intervention centered around STRIPA in the ‘Optimising Pharmaco Therapy In the multimorbid elderly in primary CAre’ (OPTICA) trial. Methods We used an explanatory mixed methods design combining quantitative and qualitative data. First, quantitative data about the acceptance and implementation of eCDSS-generated recommendations from GPs (n=21) and their patients (n=160) in the OPTICA intervention group were collected. Then, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs from the OPTICA intervention group (n=8), and interview data were analyzed through thematic analysis. Results In quantitative findings, GPs reported averages of 13 min spent per patient preparing the eCDSS, 10 min performing medication reviews, and 5 min discussing prescribing recommendations with patients. On average, out of the mean generated 3.7 recommendations (SD=1.8). One recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient in the intervention group (SD=1.2). Overall, GPs found the STRIPA useful and acceptable. They particularly appreciated its ability to generate recommendations based on large amounts of patient information. During qualitative interviews, GPs reported the main reasons for limited implementation of STRIPA were related to problems with data sourcing (e.g., incomplete data imports), preparation of the eCDSS (e.g., time expenditure for updating and adapting information), its functionality (e.g., technical problems downloading PDF recommendation reports), and appropriateness of recommendations. Conclusions Qualitative findings help explain the relatively low implementation of recommendations demonstrated by quantitative findings, but also show GPs’ overall acceptance of STRIPA. Our results provide crucial insights for adapting STRIPA to make it more suitable for regular use in future primary care settings (e.g., necessity to improve data imports). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In early 2020, when the first COVID-19 cases were confirmed in Switzerland, the federal government started implementing measures such as national stay-at-home recommendations and a strict limitation of health care services use. General practitioners (GPs) and their at-risk patients faced similar uncertainties and grappled with subsequent sensemaking of the unprecedented situation. Qualitative interviews with 24 GPs and 37 at-risk patients were conducted which were analyzed using thematic analysis. Weick's (1993) four sources of -resilience – improvisation, virtual role systems, attitudes of wisdom and respectful interaction – heuristically guide the exploration of on-the-ground experiences and informal ways GPs and their at-risk patients sought to ensure continuity of primary care. GPs used their metaphorical Swiss army knives of learned tools as well as existing knowledge and relationships to adapt to the extenuating circumstances. Through improvisation, GPs and patients found pragmatic solutions, such as using local farmer apple brandy as disinfectant or at-home treatments of clavicle fractures. Through virtual role systems, GPs and patients came to terms with new and shifting roles, such as "good soldier" and "at-risk patient" categorizations. Both parties adopted attitudes of wisdom by accepting that they could not know everything. They also diversified their sources of information through personal relationships, formal networks, and the internet. The GP-patient relationship grew in importance through respectful interaction, and intersubjective reflection helped make sense of shifting roles and ambiguous guidelines. The empirical analysis of this paper contributes to theoretical considerations of sensemaking, resilience, crisis settings and health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "A mixed methods analysis of the medication review intervention centered around the use of the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing' Assistant (STRIPA) in Swiss primary care practices." The correction addresses an error in the author's name, which was incorrectly written as Johanna Alida Corlina Huibers instead of Corlina Johanna Alida Huibers. The publisher apologizes for any inconvenience caused by this mistake. The document also includes a note from the publisher stating their neutrality regarding jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]

Continuity of care is important for the health of aging individuals with comorbidities. When initial coronavirus mitigation campaigns involved messaging such as "Stay at home—stay safe," and banned provision of non-urgent care, at-risk patients depending upon regular consultations with general practitioners (GPs) faced confusion about the possibility of seeking non-COVID-19 related healthcare. We employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, consisting of a quantitative component followed by a qualitative component, to understand at-risk patients' health services use during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland. Quantitatively, we used electronic medical records data from 272 GPs and 266,796 patients. Based on pre-pandemic data, we predicted weekly consultation counts as well as weekly measurement counts (blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) per 100 patients that would be expected in 2020 in absence of a pandemic and compared those to actual observed values. Qualitatively, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with 24 GPs (∼45 min) and 37 interviews with at-risk patients (∼35 min). Quantitative results demonstrate a significant decrease in consultation and measurement counts during the first shutdown period, with consultation counts quickly returning to normal and moving within expected values for the rest of 2020. Qualitative data contextualize these findings with GPs describing constantly implementing material, administrative, and communication changes. GPs reported communication gaps with the authorities and noted a lack of clear guidelines delineating how to define "at-risk patients" and what cases were "urgent" to treat during shutdowns. Patient interviews show that patient-level factors, such as fear of contracting coronavirus, perceptions that GPs were overburdened, and a sense of solidarity, influenced patients' decisions to consult less at the beginning of the pandemic. Findings demonstrate communication gaps during pandemic periods and provide valuable lessons for future pandemic preparedness, particularly the need for contingency plans for the overall healthcare system instead of plans focusing only on the infectious agent itself. • Consultation and measurement counts decreased during the first shutdown period. • Health service utilization recovered quickly after the end of the shutdown. • Consultation counts stayed within expectations for the rest of 2020. • GPs noted a lack of clear guidelines from authorities. • Patient-level factors influenced patients' decisions to refrain from consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]