Search

Background: The incorporation of shared decision making (SDM) is a central part of empowerment processes, as it facilitates greater activation on the part of patients, increasing the likelihood of them gaining control over their healthcare and developing skills to solve their health problems. Despite these benefits, there are still difficulties in the implementation of SDM among healthcare professionals due to internal and external factors related to the context and health systems. Aim: To explore primary care professionals (PCPs)’ perceptions of the SDM model, based on their preconceptions and experience in clinical practice. Methods: A framework analysis was conducted on qualitative data derived from a virtual community practice forum, within a cluster-randomized clinical trial developed in the e-MPODERA project. Results: The most important points in the opinions of the PCPs were: exploring the patients’ values, preferences and expectations, providing them with and checking their understanding of up-to-date and evidence-based health information. The analysis revealed three themes: determinants of the implementation process of SDM, lack of consistency and dilemmas and benefits of PCP active listening, motivation and positive expectations of SDM. Discussion: In our initial analysis, we examined the connections between the categories of the TDC model and its application in the primary care context. The categories related to the model reflect the theoretical understanding of professionals, while those related to perceptions of its application and use show certain discrepancies. These discrepancies could indicate a lack of understanding of the model and its real-world implications or insufficient commitment on the part of professionals or the organization to ensure its effective implementation. Conclusions: Specific targeted training that addresses knowledge, attitudes and practice may resolve the aforementioned findings. Resumen Antecedentes: La incorporación de la toma de decisiones compartida (TDC) es una parte central del empoderamiento del paciente, ya que facilita una mayor activación, ganar control sobre la atención que recibe y desarrollar habilidades para resolver sus problemas de salud. A pesar de estos beneficios, todavía existen dificultades para implementar la TDC entre los profesionales sanitarios debido a factores internos de los propios profesionales y externos, relacionados con el contexto y los sistemas sanitarios. Objetivo: Explorar en el foro de una comunidad virtual de práctica (CVdP) las percepciones de los profesionales de atención primaria (PAP) sobre el modelo de TDC en función de sus ideas preconcebidas y su experiencia en la práctica clínica. Métodos: Se realizó un análisis de marco desde un abordaje cualitativo de las intervenciones hechas por los PAP en el foro de una CVdP. Esta CVdP se implementó dentro de un ensayo clínico aleatorizado por grupos desarrollado en el proyecto e-MPODERA. Resultados: Los aspectos más importantes relacionados con la TDC desde la perspectiva de los PAP incluyeron: explorar los valores, preferencias y expectativas de los pacientes, proporcionarles información actualizada y basada en la evidencia, y comprobar su comprensión. En el análisis posterior, tres categorías emergieron como los temas más relevantes: determinantes de la implementación del TDC, falta de consistencia y dilemas, y beneficios de la escucha activa de los PAP, motivación y expectativas positivas de la TDC. Discusión: En nuestro análisis inicial, examinamos las conexiones entre las categorías del modelo de TDC y su aplicación en el contexto de atención primaria. Las categorías relacionadas con el modelo reflejan la comprensión teórica de los profesionales, mientras que las relativas a las percepciones de su aplicación y uso muestran ciertas discrepancias. Estas discrepancias podrían indicar una falta de comprensión del modelo y de sus implicaciones en el mundo real o un compromiso insuficiente por parte de los profesionales o de la organización para garantizar su aplicación efectiva. Conclusión: Una formación específica que aborde los conocimientos, las actitudes y la práctica puede resolver los hallazgos mencionados. Palabras Clave: Atención primaria; Profesionales sanitarios; Percepciones; Empoderamiento; Toma de decisiones compartida; Comunidad virtual de práctica

Abstract Background In recent decades, many self‐report instruments have been developed to assess the extent to which patients want to be informed and involved in decisions about their health as part of the concept of person‐centred care (PCC). The main objective of this research was to translate, adapt and validate the Patient‐Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) using a sample of primary care health‐care professionals in Spain. Methods Baseline analysis of PPOS scores for 321 primary care professionals (general practitioners and nurses) from 63 centres and 3 Spanish regions participating in a randomized controlled trial. We analysed missing values, distributions and descriptive statistics, item‐to‐scale correlations and internal consistency. Performed were confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the 2‐factor model (sharing and caring dimensions), scale depuration and principal component analysis (PCA). Results Low inter‐item correlations were observed, and the CFA 2‐factor model only obtained a good fit to the data after excluding 8 items. Internal consistency of the 10‐item PPOS was acceptable (0.77), but low for individual subscales (0.70 and 0.55). PCA results suggest a possible 3‐factor structure. Participants showed a patient‐oriented style (mean = 4.46, SD = 0.73), with higher scores for caring than sharing. Conclusion Although the 2‐factor model obtained empirical support, measurement indicators of the PPOS (caring dimension) could be improved. Spanish primary care health‐care professionals overall show a patient‐oriented attitude, although less marked in issues such as patients’ need for and management of medical information.

Abstract Background Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders in primary care (PC). GAD has low remission and high relapse rates over long follow-up periods. Qualitative evidence was synthesized to understand the implementation of care and treatment options for people with GAD in PC. Methods Research published from 2008 to September 2020 was searched in five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, WOS and PsycArticles). Studies that used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis to investigate the implementation of care and treatment options for people with GAD in PC and outpatient settings were included. Non-qualitative studies, mixed methods studies that did not separately report qualitative findings and studies in languages other than English or Spanish were excluded. We used the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) framework to assess the overall confidence in the findings. Results The results with a moderate level of confidence showed that the trajectory of care for people with GAD in PC and outpatient settings is long and fluctuates over time, involving multiple difficulties in accessing and maintaining initial treatment or successive treatment options. In addition, there are wide variations in the preferences for and acceptability of different treatment options. The results with a high level of confidence indicated that more information on GAD and its treatment options is needed for PC practitioners, GAD patients and their carers. The results with a low level of confidence suggested that patients use antidepressants for longer than recommended and that the interruption of treatment is not usually planned. Conclusions Initial resistance to new treatments among people with GAD can make access and adherence to treatment difficult. Improving care may require patients to be informed of possible trajectories in stepped care pathways before the initiation of treatment so they are aware that they may need to try a number of options until the most effective treatment for them is found. Increased awareness of and information materials on GAD may facilitate both appropriate diagnosis and long-term care.

Background: The incorporation of shared decision making (SDM) is a central part of empowerment processes, as it facilitates greater activation on the part of patients, increasing the likelihood of them gaining control over their healthcare and developing skills to solve their health problems. Despite these benefits, there are still difficulties in the implementation of SDM among healthcare professionals due to internal and external factors related to the context and health systems. Aim: To explore primary care professionals (PCPs)' perceptions of the SDM model, based on their preconceptions and experience in clinical practice. Methods: A framework analysis was conducted on qualitative data derived from a virtual community practice forum, within a cluster-randomized clinical trial developed in the e-MPODERA project. Results: The most important points in the opinions of the PCPs were: exploring the patients' values, preferences and expectations, providing them with and checking their understanding of up-to-date and evidence-based health information. The analysis revealed three themes: determinants of the implementation process of SDM, lack of consistency and dilemmas and benefits of PCP active listening, motivation and positive expectations of SDM. Discussion: In our initial analysis, we examined the connections between the categories of the TDC model and its application in the primary care context. The categories related to the model reflect the theoretical understanding of professionals, while those related to perceptions of its application and use show certain discrepancies. These discrepancies could indicate a lack of understanding of the model and its real-world implications or insufficient commitment on the part of professionals or the organization to ensure its effective implementation. Conclusions: Specific targeted training that addresses knowledge, attitudes and practice may resolve the aforementioned findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has shown to reduce incidence and mortality rates, and therefore is widely recommended for people above 50 years-old. However, despite the implementation of population-based screening programs in several countries, uptake rates are still low. Decision aids (DAs) may help patients to make informed decisions about CRC screening. Methods We performed a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a DA developed to promote CRC screening, with patients from two primary care centers in Spain who never had underwent CRC screening. Contrary to center B (n = 24), Center A (n = 83) attended patients from an area where the population-based screening program was not implemented at that moment. Outcome measures were decisional conflict, knowledge of the disease and available screening options, intention to uptake the test, and concordance between patients’ goals/concerns and intention. Results In center A, there were significant differences favoring the DA in decisional conflict (p

Background: Healthcare professionals traditional education reflects constraints to face the complex needs of people with chronic diseases in primary care settings. Since more innovative and practical solutions are required, Virtual Community of Practices (vCoP) seem to better respond to learning updates, improving professional and organizational knowledge. However, little is known about the value created in vCoPs as social learning environments. The objective of this project was to explore the value creation process of a gamified vCoP ("e-mpodera vCoP") aimed at improving the knowledge and attitudes of primary healthcare professionals (PCPs) (nurses and general practitioners) to the empowerment of people with chronic conditions. Methods: A framework analysis assessed the value creation process using a mixed methods approach. The framework provided awareness about knowledge and usefulness in a learning community through five cycles: (1) immediate value, (2) potential value, (3) applied value, (4) realized value, and (5) reframing value. Quantitative data included vCoP analytics such as logins, contributions, points, badges, and performance metrics. Qualitative data consisted of PCPs' forum contributions from Madrid, Catalonia, and Canary Islands over 14 months. Results: A total of 185 PCPs had access to the e-mpodera vCoPs. The vCoP showed the dynamic participation of 146 PCPs, along 63 content activities posted, including a total of 3,571 contributions (including text, images, links to webpages, and other files). Regarding the value creation process, the e-mpodera vCoP seems to encompass a broad spectrum of value cycles, with indicators mostly related to cycle 1 (immediate value – activities and interactions) and cycle 2 (potential value – knowledge capital); and to a lesser extent for cycle 3 (applied value – changes in practice) and for cycle 4 (realized value – performance improvement). The presence of indicators related to cycle 5 (reframing value), was minimal, due to few individual redefinitions of success. Conclusion: To reach a wider range of value possibilities, a combination of learning objectives, competence framework, challenged-based gamified platform, and pathway model of skill development seems crucial. However, additional research is required to gain clearer insights into organizational values, professionals' lifelong educational needs in healthcare, and the long-term sustainability of performance improvement. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02757781. Registered on 02/05/2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In recent decades, many self‐report instruments have been developed to assess the extent to which patients want to be informed and involved in decisions about their health as part of the concept of person‐centred care (PCC). The main objective of this research was to translate, adapt and validate the Patient‐Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) using a sample of primary care health‐care professionals in Spain. Methods: Baseline analysis of PPOS scores for 321 primary care professionals (general practitioners and nurses) from 63 centres and 3 Spanish regions participating in a randomized controlled trial. We analysed missing values, distributions and descriptive statistics, item‐to‐scale correlations and internal consistency. Performed were confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the 2‐factor model (sharing and caring dimensions), scale depuration and principal component analysis (PCA). Results: Low inter‐item correlations were observed, and the CFA 2‐factor model only obtained a good fit to the data after excluding 8 items. Internal consistency of the 10‐item PPOS was acceptable (0.77), but low for individual subscales (0.70 and 0.55). PCA results suggest a possible 3‐factor structure. Participants showed a patient‐oriented style (mean = 4.46, SD = 0.73), with higher scores for caring than sharing. Conclusion: Although the 2‐factor model obtained empirical support, measurement indicators of the PPOS (caring dimension) could be improved. Spanish primary care health‐care professionals overall show a patient‐oriented attitude, although less marked in issues such as patients' need for and management of medical information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]