Search

Interprofessional mentoring in palliative care sees different members of the interprofessional team providing holistic, personalised andlongitudinal mentoring support, skills training and knowledge transfer as they mentor trainees at different points along their mentoring journeys. However, gaps in practice and their risk of potential mentoring malpractice even as interprofessional mentoring use continues to grow in palliative medicine underlines the need for careful scrutiny of its characteristics and constituents in order to enhance the design, evaluation and oversight of interprofessional mentoring programmes. Hence, a systematic scoping review on prevailing accounts of interprofessional mentoring in medicine is conducted to address this gap. Using Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews and identical search strategies, 6 reviewers performed independent literature reviews of accounts of interprofessional mentoring published in 10 databases. Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis approach was adopted to evaluate across different mentoring settings. A total of 11111 abstracts were identified from 10 databases, 103 full-text articles reviewed and 14 full-text articles were thematically analysed to reveal 4 themes: characterizing, implementing, evaluating and obstacles to interprofessional mentoring. Interprofessional mentoring is founded upon a respectful and collaborative mentoring relationship that thrives despite inevitable differences in individual values, ethical perspectives at different career stages within diverse working environments. This warrants effective mentor-mentee trainings, alignment of expectations, roles and responsibilities, goals and timelines, and effective oversight of the programmes. Drawing upon the data provided, an interprofessional mentoring framework is forwarded to guide the design, evaluation and oversight of the programmes.

Tooth pain is a common presentation in primary care, with 32.4% of Singaporeans experiencing pain from dental caries in their lifetime. Some systemic conditions can have oral presentations, and oral conditions may be associated with chronic disease. A good history and examination is key in delineating odontogenic from non-odontogenic causes of tooth pain. Primary care physicians should accurately diagnose and assess common dental conditions and make appropriate referrals to the dentist. Common non-odontogenic causes of orofacial pain can be mostly managed in primary care, but important diagnoses such as acute coronary syndrome, peritonsillar abscess and temporal arteritis must not be missed. Ibuprofen has been shown to be effacious, safe and cost-effective in managing odontogenic pain. Antibiotics are indicated when there is systemic or local spread of dental infection. Without evidence of spread, antibiotics have not been shown to reduce pain or prevent subsequent dental infections.

BackgroundFactors affecting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among primary healthcare workers (HCW) remain poorly understood. This study aims to identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among HCW.MethodsA multi-centre online cross-sectional survey was performed across 6 primary care clinics from May to June 2021, after completion of vaccination exercise. Demographics, profession, years working in healthcare, residential status, presence of chronic medical conditions, self-perceived risk of acquiring COVID-19 and previous influenza vaccination were collected. HCW who accepted vaccine were then asked to rank their top 5 reasons for vaccine acceptance; HCW who were vaccine hesitant had to complete the 5C scale on psychological antecedents of vaccination.Results557 out of 1182 eligible HCW responded (47.1%). 29 were excluded due to existing contraindications. Among 557 respondents, vaccine acceptance rate was 94.9% (n=501) and 5.1% were hesitant (n=27). COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was not associated with sex, age, ethnicity, profession, number of years in healthcare, living status, presence of chronic diseases, self-perceived risk or previous influenza vaccination. The top 3 reasons for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance ranked by 501 HCW were to protect their family and friends, protect themselves from COVID-19 and due to high risk of acquiring COVID-19 because of their jobs. The 15-item questionnaire from the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination was completed by 27 vaccine hesitant HCW. The mean scores for the components of the 5Cs were: ‘Confidence’ (3.96), ‘Complacency’ (3.23), ‘Constraint’ (2.85), ‘Calculation’ (5.79) and ‘Collective responsibility’ (4.12).ConclusionCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a minute issue among Singapore primary HCW, having achieved close to 95% acceptance rate with 5% hesitancy rate. Future studies can focus on other settings with higher hesitancy rates, and acceptance of booster vaccinations with the emergence of the delta COVID-19 variant.Trial RegistrationThis study was approved by the National Healthcare Group (NHG) Domain Specific Review Board (DSRB), Singapore on 26th April 2021 (Reg No. 2021/00213).

Background Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among primary healthcare workers (HCW) remain poorly understood. This study aims to identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among HCW. Methods A multi-centre online cross-sectional survey was performed across 6 primary care clinics from May to June 2021, after completion of staff vaccination exercise. Demographics, profession, years working in healthcare, residential status, presence of chronic medical conditions, self-perceived risk of acquiring COVID-19 and previous influenza vaccination were collected. HCW who accepted vaccine were then asked to rank their top 5 reasons for vaccine acceptance; HCW who were vaccine hesitant had to complete the 15-item 5C scale on psychological antecedents of vaccination. Results Five hundred fifty seven out of 1182 eligible HCW responded (47.1%). Twenty nine were excluded due to contraindications. Among 528 respondents, vaccine acceptance rate was 94.9% (n = 501). There were no statistically significant differences in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance between sex, age, ethnicity, profession, number of years in healthcare, living alone, presence of chronic diseases, self-perceived risk or previous influenza vaccination. The top 3 reasons for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance ranked by 501 HCW were to protect their family and friends, protect themselves from COVID-19 and due to high risk of acquiring COVID-19 because of their jobs. HCW with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 exposure were 3.4 times more likely to rank ‘high risk at work’ as one of the top reasons for vaccine acceptance (χ2 = 41.9, p n = 27) highlighted that accessibility was not a concern; HCW took time to weigh vaccine benefits and consequences. Conclusion COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a minute issue among Singapore primary HCW, having achieved close to 95% acceptance rate. COVID-19 exposure risk influences vaccine acceptance; time is required for HCW to weigh benefits against the risks. Future studies can focus on settings with higher hesitancy rates, and acceptance of booster vaccinations with the emergence of delta and omicron variants.

Background Singapore’s healthcare system presents an ideal context to learn from diverse public and private operational models and funding systems. Aim To explore processes underpinning decision-making for antibiotic prescribing, by considering doctors’ experiences in different primary care settings. Methods Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 doctors working in publicly funded primary care clinics (polyclinics) and 13 general practitioners (GP) working in private practices (solo, small and large). Data were analysed using applied thematic analysis following realist principles, synthesised into a theoretical model, informing solutions to appropriate antibiotic prescribing. Results Given Singapore’s lack of national guidelines for antibiotic prescribing in primary care, practices are currently non-standardised. Themes contributing to optimal prescribing related first and foremost to personal valuing of reduction in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) which was enabled further by organisational culture creating and sustaining such values, and if patients were convinced of these too. Building trusting patient-doctor relationships, supported by reasonable patient loads among other factors were consistently observed to allow shared decision-making enabling optimal prescribing. Transparency and applying data to inform practice was a minority theme, nevertheless underpinning all levels of optimal care delivery. These themes are synthesised into the VALUE model proposed for guiding interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices. These should aim to reinforce intrapersonal Values consistent with prioritising AMR reduction, and Aligning organisational culture to these by leveraging standardised guidelines and interpersonal intervention tools. Such interventions should account for the wider systemic constraints experienced in publicly funded high patient turnover institutions, or private clinics with transactional models of care. Thus, ultimately a focus on Liaison between patient and doctor is crucial. For instance, building in adequate consultation time and props as discussion aids, or quick turnover communication tools in time-constrained settings. Message consistency will ultimately improve trust, helping to enable shared decision-making. Lastly, Use of monitoring data to track and Evaluate antibiotic prescribing using meaningful indicators, that account for the role of shared decision-making can also be leveraged for change. Conclusions These VALUE dimensions are recommended as potentially transferable to diverse contexts, and the model as implementation tool to be tested empirically and updated accordingly.

Background: This study examines the effectiveness of a pilot Mindful Caring workshop in improving self-compassion, mindfulness, and empathy, while reducing stress. Methods: Year 3 and 4 medical students from the National University of Singapore underwent 16 hours of online workshops over 4 days with didactic and experiential learning activities on self-compassion and mindfulness. Primary outcomes of self-compassion were measured with the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS). Secondary outcomes include mindfulness measured with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-15 (FFMQ-15), empathy and stress levels. Qualitative comments were also sought in the feedback. Results: Out of 21 participants, 90.5% (n =19) completed both pre- and post-intervention questionnaires. Participants experienced significant mean improvements in self-compassion (p Conclusions: A short online Mindful Caring workshop could be an avenue to improve self-compassion and mindfulness, which may have a downstream effect on burnout.

Background Personalised care and support planning (CSP) has been shown to improve diabetes outcomes, patient experience and provider morale in the care of persons living with diabetes. However, this has not been confirmed in controlled studies. Patient Activation through Community Empowerment/Engagement for Diabetes Management (PACE-D) is a pragmatic controlled trial that evaluates the effectiveness of personalised CSP in persons living with diabetes in the public primary care setting in Singapore. Methods Teamlet-empanelled patients with diabetes at four polyclinics are recruited for this study. Participants who attend either of the two Intervention clinics are sent their investigation results in a care planning letter (CPL) to prepare them for the CSP conversation. This conversation is facilitated by a trained CSP practitioner who engages them in discussion of concerns, goals and action plans, and documents their plans for subsequent review. Participants in the two Control clinics will receive standard diabetes care. Participants will complete two or more CSP conversations (Intervention) or regular consultations (Control) at the annual review visits within the 18 months of the study. The sample size is calculated at 1620 participants, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures include patient activation (as measured by PAM-13) and changes in healthcare utilisation and cost. Discussion This study is a pragmatic trial that evaluates the effectiveness of personalised CSP in persons living with diabetes in a real world setting. It promises to provide insights with regard to the implementation of this model of care in Singapore and the region. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04288362. Retrospectively registered on 28 February 2020.

With coronavirus disease 2019 declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30 January 2020, occupational health services in a tertiary hospital in Singapore stepped up via a three‐pronged approach, namely, protection of individual staff, protection of staff workforce, and prevention of nosocomial spread so as to support business continuity plans. Despite the multiple new challenges brought by the COVID‐19 pandemic, the hospital's occupational health services were able to adapt and keep all employees and patients safe with strong support from senior management and close collaboration with various departments.

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a common disease that causes significant disability. Most patients can be managed conservatively in the outpatient setting. A small minority require surgery. The cornerstones of treatment are weight loss, exercise and analgesia. Walking aids, medial patellar taping, acupuncture and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation are useful management adjuncts. Current evidence does not support routine prescription of glucosamine and chondroitin supplements. Early consultation with an orthopaedic surgeon should be made when conservative measures fail.

Headaches are common in primary care. For safe assessment and management of the patient with headache, a focused history and physical examination are important to identify secondary headache, and find out whether an immediate referral to the emergency department or a non-emergent referral to the neurologist is warranted. The majority of patients with primary headache may be safely managed in the outpatient setting. Key steps include proper categorisation of the primary headache, attention to lifestyle and psychosocial factors, prescription of analgesics for acute pain relief, and the use of preventive medication when indicated. The patient with a cluster headache, a headache of uncertain diagnosis and/or poor response to preventive strategies or a migraine with persistent aura, or a headache with associated motor weakness, should be referred to a neurologist. Secondary headache and the diagnosis of medication overuse headache should be considered in a patient on long-term analgesics with unremitting headache.

Stroke is a significant cause of death and disability in Singapore; in 2014, it was the fourth most common cause of death. Transient ischaemic attack (TIA) is defined as a transient episode of neurological dysfunction caused by focal brain, spinal cord or retinal ischaemia without evidence of acute infarction. The diagnosis of TIA/acute stroke needs to be considered in all patients who present with sudden focal neurological dysfunction. Prompt referral for assessment, neuroimaging and intervention provides the best chance for neurological recovery and/or minimising further neurological damage. Primary care physicians have a crucial role in TIA/stroke prevention and management. This includes referring patients with suspected acute TIA/stroke to hospitals with stroke treatment facilities immediately; managing the modifiable risk factors of cerebral ischaemia; continuing prescription of antiplatelet agents and/or anticoagulation where indicated; and teaching patients to recognise and respond to suspected cerebral ischaemia using the FAST (face, arm, speech, time) acronym.

We investigated the efficacy of patient-targeted education in reducing antibiotic prescriptions for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) among adults in the private primary care setting in Singapore. Our randomized controlled trial enrolled patients aged 21 years and above presenting at general practitioner (GP) clinics with URTI symptoms for 7 days or less. Intervention arm patients were verbally educated via pamphlets about the etiology of URTIs, the role of antibiotics in treating URTIs, and the consequences of inappropriate antibiotic use. Control arm patients were educated on influenza vaccinations. Both arms were compared regarding the proportions prescribed antibiotics and the patients' postconsultation views. A total of 914 patients consulting 35 doctors from 24 clinics completed the study (457 in each arm). The demographics of patients in both arms were similar, and 19.1% were prescribed an antibiotic, but this varied from 0% to 70% for individual GPs. The intervention did not significantly reduce antibiotic prescriptions (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83–1.73) except in patients of Indian ethnicity (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.09–0.93). Positive associations between the intervention and the view that antibiotics were not needed most of the time for URTIs ( P = 0.047) and on being worried about the side effects of antibiotics ( P = 0.018) were restricted to the Indian subgroup. GPs in limited liability partnerships or clinic chains prescribed less (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.92), while certain inappropriate patient responses were associated with the receipt of antibiotics. Follow-up studies to investigate differences in responses to educational programs between ethnicities and to explore GP-targeted interventions are recommended.

Background Patients’ expectations can influence antibiotic prescription by primary healthcare physicians. We assessed knowledge, attitude and practices towards antibiotic use for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), and whether knowledge is associated with increased expectations for antibiotics among patients visiting primary healthcare services in Singapore. Methods Data was collected through a cross-sectional interviewer-assisted survey of patients aged ≥21 years waiting to see primary healthcare practitioners for one or more symptoms suggestive of URTI (cough, sore throat, runny nose or blocked nose) for 7 days or less, covering the demographics, presenting symptoms, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices of URTI and associated antibiotic use. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to assess independent factors associated with patients’ expectations for antibiotics. Results Nine hundred fourteen out of 987 eligible patients consulting 35 doctors were recruited from 24 private sector primary care clinics in Singapore. A third (307/907) expected antibiotics, of which a substantial proportion would ask the doctor for antibiotics (121/304, 40 %) and/or see another doctor (31/304, 10 %) if antibiotics were not prescribed. The majority agreed “antibiotics are effective against viruses” (715/914, 78 %) and that “antibiotics cure URTI faster” (594/912, 65 %). Inappropriate antibiotic practices include “keeping antibiotics stock at home” (125/913, 12 %), “taking leftover antibiotics” (114/913, 14 %) and giving antibiotics to family members (62/913, 7 %). On multivariate regression, the following factors were independently associated with wanting antibiotics (odds ratio; 95 % confidence interval): Malay ethnicity (1.67; 1.00–2.79), living in private housing (1.69; 1.13–2.51), presence of sore throat (1.50; 1.07–2.10) or fever (1.46; 1.01–2.12), perception that illness is serious (1.70; 1.27–2.27), belief that antibiotics cure URTI faster (5.35; 3.76–7.62) and not knowing URTI resolves on its own (2.18; 1.08–2.06), while post-secondary education (0.67; 0.48–0.94) was inversely associated. Those with lower educational levels were significantly more likely to have multiple misconceptions about antibiotics. Conclusion Majority of patients seeking primary health care in Singapore are misinformed about the role of antibiotics in URTI. Agreeing with the statement that antibiotics cure URTI faster was most strongly associated with wanting antibiotics. Those with higher educational levels were less likely to want antibiotics, while those with lower educational levels more likely to have incorrect knowledge. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0547-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.