The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative trauma-informed care (CTIC) for treating depression in primary care in Chile.
From August 2021 through June 2023, 16 primary care teams in the Maule Region of Chile, were randomly assigned to either the CTIC or usual treatment (UT) group. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, 115 patients in the CTIC group, and 99 in the UT group, were blindly evaluated. The primary outcome was reduction in depressive symptoms. Secondary outcomes included improvement in anxiety symptoms, interpersonal and social functioning, emotional regulation, and adherence. Intention-to-treat data analysis, using analysis of covariance was conducted.
There were 214 patients recruited; 85% were women, and 61% had 4 or more adverse childhood experiences. At 6 months, depressive symptoms declined significantly in the CTIC arm relative to UT (adjusted mean difference [AMD]= –3.09, 95% CI, –4.94 to –1.23; d = –0.46, 95% CI,–0.73 to –0.18; P = .001). Anxiety symptoms exhibited a trend toward improvement in the CTIC vs UT group (AMD = –1.50, 95% CI, –3.03 to 0.31; P = .055). No significant differences were observed in other secondary outcomes, except for adherence, which was significantly higher in the CTIC vs UT groups (AMD = 2.59, 95% CI, 1.80-4.99; P = .035).
The CTIC approach demonstrated superior outcomes in treating depression and improving adherence compared with UT. Moreover, the observed trends in anxiety improvement warrant further exploration in future research with a larger sample size. It is necessary to assess the effectiveness of this approach in treating more complex, difficult-to-treat forms of depression.
Efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic to address the health-related social needs (HRSN) of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, such as food and housing, were insufficient. We examined HRSN data from the Accountable Health Communities study collected in Oregon to understand changes in these needs at the onset and during the first 2 years of the pandemic.
We conducted an interrupted time series analysis with data from 21,522 Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries screened for overall HRSN between May 13, 2019 and December 24, 2021. Secondary interrupted time series analyses were conducted for each type of HRSN assessed with the Accountable Health Communities screening tool: food, housing, transportation, utilities, and interpersonal safety.
The interrupted time series analysis indicated an abrupt 17.7–percentage point increase in overall HRSN around March 23, 2020, which did not significantly decline during the subsequent 2 years. Food, housing, and interpersonal safety needs increased by 16.5, 15.9, and 4.4 percentage points, respectively, with no significant decline thereafter. Transportation and utility needs increased by 7.2 and 7.5 percentage points, respectively, but decreased significantly after the start of the pandemic (decreasing by 0.2 and 0.1 percentage points each week, respectively).
The jump in HRSN following the start of the pandemic and the persistence of need, particularly in food and housing, highlight the importance of research to better understand which public health and health care interventions, investments, and policies effectively address HRSN.
Primary care access is a key health system metric, but little research has compared models to provide primary care access when one’s regular physician is not available. We compared health system use after a visit with a patient’s own family physician group (ie, within-group physician who was not the patient’s primary physician) vs a visit with a walk-in clinic physician who was not part of the patient’s family physician group.
We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada, including all individuals formally enrolled with a family physician, from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020. We compared those visiting within-group physicians to those visiting walk-in clinic physicians using propensity score matching to account for differences in patient characteristics. The primary outcome was any emergency department visit within 7 days of the initial visit.
Matched patients who visited a within-group physician (N = 506,033) were 10% less likely to visit an emergency department in the 7 days after the initial visit compared to patients who saw a walk-in clinic physician (N = 506,033; 20,117 [4.0%] vs 22,320 [4.4%]; risk difference [RD] 0.4%; 95% CI 0.4-0.5; relative risk [RR] 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92). Restricting to visits occurring on weekends, the observed association was stronger (7,964 [3.7%] vs 10,055 [4.7%]; RD 1.0%; 95% CI 0.9-1.1; RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.82). Those accessing after-hours within-group physician visits were more likely to have ≥1 additional virtual or in-person within-group physician visit within 7 days (virtual RR 1.86, in-person RR 1.87).
Compared to visiting a walk-in clinic physician, seeing a within-group physician after hours might decrease downstream emergency department visits. This finding could be explained by better continuity of care and can inform primary care service models and the policies that support them.
The Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization (Dobbs) Supreme Court decision revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Now, restrictive state abortion laws may contribute to the shortage and strain already felt in primary care practice, especially related to the provision of reproductive health care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate perceived impacts of state abortion legislation on family medicine clinicians’ practice and medical education regarding reproductive health care.
Ten questions were added to the 2022 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance general membership survey to evaluate impact on relevant themes in reproductive health care and training after the Dobbs decision. Responses were categorized by severity of restriction of state abortion policies.
Of 1,196 respondents, 49.7% reported employment in states with very restrictive or restrictive abortion policies. The 991 respondents with clinical responsibilities reported significant (P <.05) changes in their counseling practices, clinical decision making, worry of legal risks, and trust in patients’ self-reported reproductive medical history, compared with peers in protective states. Perceived patient trust toward clinicians remained unchanged. Almost one-half of clinical respondents reported an absence of reproductive health care guidance or recommendations. Restrictive abortion policies significantly (P <.05) reduced the desirability and confidence in resident training programs.
Reported changes to clinical activities and training, coming early after the Dobbs decision, affect our current and future workforce and therefore, our patients. Future studies are needed to document continued impact of state restrictions and inform policy to support family medicine clinicians in reproductive health practice and education.
Infection with HIV remains a global health challenge, with >36.9 million individuals living with HIV in 2017. Despite efforts to increase HIV testing and treatment, traditional services have not effectively reached marginalized communities. The use of HIV self-testing (HIVST) offers a discreet and accessible alternative, potentially improving testing rates among at-risk populations including university students in Kenya.
We performed a cross-sectional analytical study using a multistage cluster sampling technique among undergraduate students at Kenyatta University. Clusters from various academic departments were randomly selected, and individual students were chosen for participation. Ethical approval was obtained from the Kenyatta University Ethics Review Committee and the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation. Participants were informed of the study’s aims and their right to withdraw at any time. We collected data via questionnaires administered by trained enumerators.
Participants’ age averaged 21.1 years, with a majority being single, female, and full-time students. Substantial HIV knowledge was observed, and nearly one-half were aware of preexposure prophylaxis. Facility-based testing was prevalent, with significant preference for the OraQuick self-test kit among those who self-tested. Fear of positive results and stigma were primary barriers, whereas motivations for self-testing included routine use and protecting loved ones. Media exposure, especially the "Chukua Selfie" campaign, correlated with greater HIVST usage.
This study highlights the importance of school-based interventions and the critical role of academic institution support in HIV prevention. Participants’ substantial knowledge of HIV contrasts with findings from other regions, underscoring the need for _targeted education and safe-sex promotion. Addressing fear and stigma via comprehensive interventions is essential for improving HIVST uptake. Integrating HIVST into existing prevention programs can enhance HIV care frameworks in East Africa. Strategies to destigmatize HIV, ensure privacy in testing, and address misconceptions are vital for improving health outcomes among young individuals. Continuous efforts to strengthen self-testing programs are crucial to achieving global HIV _targets.
For most guidelines, diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is based on a combination of clinical signs and focal consolidation visible on chest radiographs (CRs). Our objective was to analyze antibiotic initiation by general practitioners for patients with suspected CAP according to CR.
We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study in general practice in France. From November 2017 to December 2019, adult patients with clinically suspected CAP after CR were included. Radiographs were categorized as CAP positive or CAP negative. We analyzed patient characteristics and antibiotic initiation according to CR results.
A total of 259 patients were included in the study. Median age was 58.0 years (interquartile range, 41.0-71.0 years); 249 (96.1%) patients had not received antibiotics before inclusion, and 144 (55.6%) had a positive CR. Patients with positive CR were clinically more severe than those with negative CR, with longer-lasting symptoms. Antibiotics were initiated for 142/143 (99.3% [95% CI, 97.9%-100.0%]) patients with positive CR and 79/115 (68.7% [95% CI, 60.2%-77.2%]) with negative CR (P < .001). Among the 115 CR-negative patients, clinical characteristics that were significantly different between patients for whom antibiotics were initiated or not did not appear to be clinically relevant.
For patients with suspected CAP, general practitioners systematically took into account results of positive CRs to initiate antibiotics and took much less account of negative CRs. These results justify clarification of what should be done in cases of clinical suspicion of CAP without radiologic confirmation.
Annals Early Access article
]]>Building timely consensus among diverse stakeholders is important in primary health care research. Consensus can be obtained using the nominal group technique which includes 5 steps: (1) introduction and explanation; (2) silent generation of ideas; (3) sharing ideas; (4) discussion; and (5) voting and ranking. The main challenges in using this technique are a lack of representation of different stakeholder opinions and the amount of time taken to reach consensus. In this paper, we demonstrate how to effectively achieve consensus using an adapted nominal group technique that mitigates the challenges.
This project aimed to reach consensus on the priority care domains for individuals aged 65 or older, using an adapted nominal group technique with 4 strategies: (1) recruit 4 stakeholders groups (older people, clinicians, managers, decision makers) by using maximum variation and snowballing sampling approaches; (2) use remote tools to ensure high participation; (3) add an individual pre-elicitation activity to increase effectiveness; and (4) adapt discussions to the stakeholders’ preferences for meaningful engagement.
In total, 28 diverse stakeholders participated. After the pre-elicitation activity and 1 round of group discussion, we reached consensus on a priority domain called symptoms, functioning, and quality of care. Adaptive group discussions and remote tools were the most effective strategies. All participants strongly agreed that they were able to express their views freely. Some perceived a need for emphasizing the alignment between the research objectives and anticipated practice and policy implications.
This adapted nominal group technique is an effective and enriching method when timely consensus is needed among diverse stakeholders. Health care researchers in various fields can benefit from using this research methodology.
Annals Early Access article
]]>Annals Early Access article
]]>Annals Early Access article
]]>For many patients with post–COVID-19 condition (long COVID), primary care is the first point of interaction with the health care system. In principle, primary care is well situated to manage long COVID. Beyond expressions of disempowerment, however, the patient’s perspective regarding the quality of long COVID care is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the expectations and experiences of primary care patients seeking treatment for long COVID.
A phenomenological approach guided this analysis. Using purposive sampling, we conducted semistructured interviews with English-speaking, adult primary care patients describing symptoms of long COVID. We deidentified and transcribed the recorded interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis.
This article reports results from 19 interviews (53% female, mean age = 54 years). Patients expected their primary care practitioners (PCPs) to be knowledgeable about long COVID, attentive to their individual condition, and to engage in collaborative processes for treatment. Patients described 2 areas of experiences. First, interactions with clinicians were perceived as positive when clinicians were honest and validating, and negative when patients felt dismissed or discouraged. Second, patients described challenges navigating the fragmented US health care system when coordinating care, treatment and testing, and payment.
Primary care patients’ experiences seeking care for long COVID are incongruent with their expectations. Patients must overcome barriers at each level of the health care system and are frustrated by the constant challenges. PCPs and other health care professionals might increase congruence with expectations and experiences through listening, validating, and advocating for patients with long COVID.
Annals Early Access article
Currently, 40% of counties in the United States do not have an obstetrician or midwife, and in rural areas the likelihood of childbirth being attended to by a family medicine (FM) physician is increasing. We sought to characterize the effect of the FM presence on unit culture and a key perinatal quality metric in Iowa hospital intrapartum units.
Using a cross-sectional design, we surveyed Iowa physicians, nurses, and midwives delivering intrapartum care at hospitals participating in a quality improvement initiative to decrease the incidence of cesarean delivery. We linked respondents with their hospital characteristics and outcomes data. The primary outcome was the association between FM physician, obstetrician (OB), or both disciplines’ presence on labor and delivery and hospital low-risk, primary cesarean delivery rate. Unit culture was compared by hospital type (FM-only, OB-only, or Both).
A total of 849 clinicians from 39 hospitals completed the survey; 13 FM-only, 11 OB-only, and 15 hospitals with both. FM-only hospitals were all rural, with <1,000 annual births. Among hospitals with <1,000 annual births, births at FM-only hospitals had an adjusted 34.3% lower risk of cesarean delivery (adjusted incident rate ratio = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-.0.98) compared with hospitals with both. Nurses endorsed unit norms more supportive of vaginal birth and stronger safety culture at FM-only hospitals (P <.05).
Birthing hospitals staffed exclusively by FM physicians were more likely to have lower cesarean rates and stronger nursing-rated safety culture. Both access and quality of care provide strong arguments for reinforcing the pipeline of FM physicians training in intrapartum care.
Despite being key to better health outcomes for patients from racial and ethnic minority groups, the proportion of underrepresented in medicine (URiM) physicians remains low in the US health care system. This study linked a nationally representative sample of family physicians (FPs) with Medicaid claims data to explore the relative contributions to care of Medicaid populations by FP race and ethnicity.
This descriptive cross-sectional study used 2016 Medicaid claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System and from 2016-2017 American Board of Family Medicine certification questionnaire responses to examine the diversity and Medicaid participation of FPs. We explored the diversity of FP Medicaid patient panels and whether they saw ≥150 beneficiaries in 2016. Using logistic regression models, we controlled for FP demographics, practice characteristics, and characteristics of the communities in which they practiced.
Of 13,096 FPs, Latine, Hispanic, or of Spanish Origin (LHS) FPs and non-LHS Black FPs saw more Medicaid beneficiaries compared with non-LHS White and non-LHS Asian FPs. The patient panels of URiM FPs had a much greater proportion of Medicaid beneficiaries from racial and ethnic minority groups. Overall, non-LHS Black and LHS FPs had greater odds of seeing ≥150 Medicaid beneficiaries in 2016.
These findings clearly show the critical role URiM FPs play in caring for Medicaid beneficiaries, suggesting physician race and ethnicity are correlated with Medicaid participation. Diversity in the health care workforce is essential for addressing racial health inequities. Policies need to address problems in pathways to medical education, including failures to recruit, nurture, and retain URiM students.
We undertook a trial to test the efficacy of a technology-assisted health coaching intervention for weight management, called Goals for Eating and Moving (GEM), within primary care.
This cluster-randomized controlled trial enrolled 19 primary care teams with 63 clinicians; 9 teams were randomized to GEM and 10 to enhanced usual care (EUC). The GEM intervention included 1 in-person and up to 12 telephone-delivered coaching sessions. Coaches supported goal setting and engagement with weight management programs, facilitated by a software tool. Patients in the EUC arm received educational handouts. We enrolled patients who spoke English or Spanish, were aged 18 to 69 years, and either were overweight (body mass index 25-29 kg/m2) with a weight-related comorbidity or had obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2). The primary outcome (weight change at 12 months) and exploratory outcomes (eg, program attendance, diet, physical activity) were analyzed according to intention to treat.
We enrolled 489 patients (220 in the GEM arm, 269 in the EUC arm). Their mean (SD) age was 49.8 (12.1) years; 44% were male, 41% Hispanic, and 44% non-Hispanic Black. At 12 months, the mean adjusted weight change (standard error) was –1.4 (0.8) kg in the GEM arm vs –0.8 (1.6) kg in the EUC arm, a nonsignificant difference (P = .48). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses showed that the GEM arm had a greater change than the EUC arm in mean number of weekly minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity other than walking, a finding that may warrant further exploration.
The GEM intervention did not achieve clinically important weight loss in primary care. Although this was a negative study possibly affected by health system resource limitations and disruptions, its findings can guide the development of similar interventions. Future studies could explore the efficacy of higher-intensity interventions and interventions that include medication and bariatric surgery options, in addition to lifestyle modification.
Meeting scholarly activity requirements continues to be a challenge in many family medicine (FM) residency programs. Studies comprehensively describing FM resident scholarship have been limited. We sought to identify institutional factors associated with increased scholarly output and meeting requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).
Our goals were to: (1) describe scholarly activity experiences among FM residents compared with ACGME requirements; (2) classify experiences by Boyer’s domains of scholarship; and (3) associate experiences with residency program characteristics and scholarly activity infrastructure.
This was a cross-sectional survey. The survey questions were part of an omnibus survey to FM residency program directors conducted by the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA). All ACGME-accredited US FM residency program directors, identified by the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, were sampled.
Of the 691 eligible program directors, 298 (43%) completed the survey. The respondents reported that 25% or more residents exceeded ACGME minimum output, 17% reported that 25% or more residents published their work, and 50% reported that 25% or more residents delivered conference presentations. Programs exceeding ACGME scholarship requirements exhibit robust infrastructure characterized by access to faculty mentorship, scholarly activity curricula, Institutional Review Board, medical librarian, and statistician.
These findings suggest the need for codified ACGME requirements for scholarly activity infrastructure to ensure access to resources in FM residency programs. By fostering FM resident engagement in scholarly activity, programs help to create a culture of inquiry, and address discrepancies in funding and output among FM residency programs.
The impact of digital health on medically underserved patients is unclear. This study aimed to determine the early impact of a digital innovation to grow quality care through an interprofessional care team (DIG IT) on the blood pressure (BP) and 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score of medically underserved patients.
This was a 3-month, prospective intervention study that included patients aged 40 years or more with BP of 140/90 mmHg or higher who received care from DIG IT from August through December 2021. Sociodemographic and clinical outcomes of DIG IT were compared with historical controls (controls) whose data were randomly extracted by the University of California Data Warehouse and matched 1:1 based on age, ethnicity, and baseline BP of the DIG IT arm. Multiple linear regression was performed to adjust for potential confounding factors.
A total of 140 patients (70 DIG IT, 70 controls) were included. Both arms were similar with an average age (SD) of 62.8 (9.7) years. The population was dominated by Latinx (79.3%) persons, with baseline mean BP of 163/81 mmHg, and mean ASCVD risk score of 23.9%. The mean (SD) reduction in systolic BP at 3 months in the DIG IT arm was twice that of the controls (30.8 [17.3] mmHg vs 15.2 [21.2] mmHg; P <.001). The mean (SD) ASCVD risk score reduction in the DIG IT arm was also twice that of the controls (6.4% [7.4%] vs 3.1% [5.1%]; P = .003).
The DIG IT was more effective than controls (receiving usual care). Twofold improvement in the BP readings and ASCVD scores in medically underserved patients were achieved with DIG IT.
Chest pain frequently poses a diagnostic challenge for general practitioners (GPs). Utilizing risk stratification tools might help GPs to rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and make appropriate referral decisions. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating risk stratification tools for chest pain in primary care settings, both with and without troponin assays. Our aims were to assess the performance of tools for ruling out ACS and to provide a comprehensive review of the current evidence.
We searched PubMed and Embase for articles up to October 9, 2023 concerning adult patients with acute chest pain in primary care settings, for whom risk stratification tools (clinical decision rules [CDRs] and/or single biomarker tests) were used. To identify eligible studies, a combination of active learning and backward snowballing was applied. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment (following the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool) were performed independently by 2 researchers.
Of the 1,204 studies screened, 14 were included in the final review. Nine studies validated 7 different CDRs without troponin. Sensitivities ranged from 75.0% to 97.0%, and negative predictive values (NPV) ranged from 82.4% to 99.7%. None of the CDRs outperformed the unaided judgment of GP’s. Five studies reported on strategies using troponin measurements. Studies using high-sensitivity troponin showed highest diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity 83.3% to 100% and NPV 98.8% to 100%.
Clinical decision rules without troponin and the use of conventional troponin showed insufficient sensitivity to rule out ACS in primary care and are not recommended as standalone tools. High-sensitivity troponin strategies are promising, but studies are limited. Further prospective validation in primary care is needed before implementation.
HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) may increase rates of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) through risk compensation (eg, an increase in condomless sex or number of partners); however, longitudinal studies exploring the time-dependent nature of PrEP uptake and bacterial STIs are limited. We used marginal structural models to estimate the effect of PrEP uptake on STI incidence.
We analyzed data from the iCruise study, an online longitudinal study of 535 Ontarian GBM from July 2017 to April 2018, to estimate the effects of PrEP uptake on incidence of self-reported bacterial STIs (chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis) collected with 12 weekly diaries. The incidence rate was calculated as the number of infections per 100 person-months, with evaluation of the STIs overall and individually. We used marginal structural models to account for time-varying confounding and quantitative bias analysis to evaluate the sensitivity of estimates to nondifferential outcome misclassification.
Participating GBM were followed up for a total of 1,623.5 person-months. Overall, 70 participants (13.1%) took PrEP during the study period. Relative to no uptake, PrEP uptake was associated with an increased incidence rate of gonorrhea (incidence rate ratio = 4.00; 95% CI, 1.67-9.58), but not of chlamydia or syphilis, and not of any bacterial STI overall. Accounting for misclassification, the median incidence rate ratio for gonorrhea was 2.36 (95% simulation interval, 1.08-5.06).
We observed an increased incidence rate of gonorrhea associated with PrEP uptake among Ontarian GBM that was robust to misclassification. Although our findings support current guidelines for integrating gonorrhea screening with PrEP services, additional research should consider the long-term impact of PrEP among this population.
Annals Early Access article
Black birthing parents and their newborns disproportionately experience newborn drug testing for prenatal substance exposure by health care professionals (HCPs), which contributes to Child Protective Services (CPS) reporting, family separation, and termination of parental rights. This qualitative study aims to interrogate dominant power structures by exploring knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of HCPs and CPS professionals regarding the influence of structural racism on inequities in newborn drug testing practices.
We conducted semistructured interviews with 30 physicians, midwives, nurses, social workers, and CPS professionals guided by an explanatory framework, and conducted inductive, reflexive thematic analysis.
We identified 3 primary themes: (1) levels of racism beyond the hospital structure contributed to higher rates of drug testing for Black newborns; (2) inconsistent hospital policies led to racialized application of state law and downstream CPS reporting; and (3) health care professionals knowledge of the benefits and disproportionate harms of CPS reporting on Black families influenced their decision making.
Health care professionals recognized structural racism as a driver of disproportionate newborn drug testing. Lack of knowledge and skill limitations of HCPs were barriers to dismantling power structures, thus impeding systems-level change. Institutional changes should shift focus from biologic testing and reporting to supporting the mutual needs of birthing parent and child through family-centered substance use treatment. State and federal policy changes are needed to ensure health equity for Black families and eliminate reporting to CPS for prenatal substance exposure when no concern for child abuse and neglect exists.
COVID-19 is a condition that can lead to other chronic conditions. These conditions are frequently diagnosed in the primary care setting. We used a novel primary care registry to quantify the burden of post-COVID conditions among adult patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis across the United States.
We used the American Family Cohort, a national primary care registry, to identify study patients. After propensity score matching, we assessed the prevalence of 17 condition categories individually and cumulatively, comparing patients having COVID-19 in 2020-2021 with (1) historical control patients having influenza-like illness in 2018 and (2) contemporaneous control patients seen for wellness or preventive visits in 2020-2021.
We identified 28,215 patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis and 235,953 historical control patients with influenza-like illness. The COVID-19 group had higher prevalences of breathing difficulties (4.2% vs 1.9%), type 2 diabetes (12.0% vs 10.2%), fatigue (3.9% vs 2.2%), and sleep disturbances (3.5% vs 2.4%). There were no differences, however, in the postdiagnosis monthly trend in cumulative morbidity between the COVID-19 patients (trend = 0.026; 95% CI, 0.025-0.027) and the patients with influenza-like illness (trend = 0.026; 95% CI, 0.023-0.027). Relative to contemporaneous wellness control patients, COVID-19 patients had higher prevalences of breathing difficulties and type 2 diabetes.
Our findings show a moderate burden of post-COVID conditions in primary care, including breathing difficulties, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. Based on clinical registry data, the prevalence of post-COVID conditions in primary care practices is lower than that reported in subspecialty and hospital settings.
Person-centered care is foundational to good quality primary care and has positive effects on health outcomes and patient satisfaction. The Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) is a recently developed, patient-reported survey able to assess person-centeredness and has demonstrated strong validity and reliability. Little is known, however, about the feasibility of the PCPCM in non-English–speaking settings. We aimed to translate the questionnaire into Dutch, psychometrically evaluate the translated version, and ensure its feasibility for patients in Dutch primary care.
We translated the PCPCM into Dutch using forward-backward translations. We conducted psychometric evaluations to ensure its feasibility among Dutch-speaking primary care patients, with special attention to low literacy populations. Next, we assessed structural validity, convergent validity using the Quality of Care Through the Patient’s Eyes (QUOTE) questionnaire, and internal consistency in a cross-sectional study in primary care.
Translation and adaptation for low literacy populations required 4 iterations. In 4 general practices, 205 patients completed the survey. Confirmatory factor analyses could not confirm the 1-factor solution. The 3-factor solution was found to be a more optimal fit: comprehensiveness of care, personal relation, and contextual care. Internal reliability was high (Cronbach’s α were 0.82, 0.73, and 0.86, respectively). We found a strong correlation between the total PCPCM and QUOTE scores (Spearman’s = 0.65, P <.001), indicating good convergent validity.
The Dutch version of the PCPCM has acceptable validity and reliability for measuring person-centeredness in primary care among Dutch-speaking populations including those with low literacy.
The COVID-19 pandemic not only exacerbated existing disparities in health care in general but likely worsened disparities in access to primary care. Our objective was to quantify the nationwide decrease in primary care visits and increase in telehealth utilization during the pandemic and explore whether certain groups of patients were disproportionately affected.
We used a geographically diverse primary care electronic health record data set to examine the following 3 outcomes: (1) change in total visit volume, (2) change in in-person visit volume, and (3) the telehealth conversion ratio defined as the number of pandemic telehealth visits divided by the total number of prepandemic visits. We assessed whether these outcomes were associated with patient characteristics including age, gender, race, ethnicity, comorbidities, rurality, and area-level social deprivation.
Our primary sample included 1,652,871 patients from 408 practices. During the pandemic we observed decreases of 7% and 17% in total and in-person visit volume and a 10% telehealth conversion ratio. The greatest decreases in visit volume were observed among pediatric patients (–24%), Asian patients (–11%), and those with more comorbidities (–9%). Telehealth usage was greatest among Hispanic or Latino patients (17%) and those living in urban areas (12%).
Decreases in primary care visit volume were partially offset by increasing telehealth use for all patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the magnitude of these changes varied significantly across all patient characteristics. These variations have implications not only for the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also for planners seeking to ready the primary care delivery system for any future systematic disruptions.
Relationship continuity of care has declined across English primary health care, with cross-sectional and longitudinal variations between general practices predicted by population and service factors. We aimed to describe cross-sectional and longitudinal variations across the COVID-19 pandemic and determine whether practice factors predicted the variations.
We conducted a longitudinal, ecological study of English general practices during 2018-2022 with continuity data, excluding practices with fewer than 750 patients or National Health Service (NHS) payments exceeding £500 per patient. Variables were derived from published data. The continuity measure was the product of weighted responses to 2 General Practice Patient Survey questions. In a multilevel mixed-effects model, the fixed effects were 11 variables’ interactions with time: baseline continuity, NHS region, deprivation, location, percentage White ethnicity, list size, general practitioner and nurse numbers, contract type, NHS payments per patient, and percentage of patients seen on the same day as booking. The random effects were practices.
Main analyses were based on 6,010 practices (out of 7,190 active practices). During 2018-2022, mean continuity in these practices declined (from 29.3% to 19.0%) and the coefficient of variation across practices increased (from 48.1% to 63.6%). Both slopes were steepest between 2021 and 2022. Practices having more general practitioners and higher percentages of patients seen the same day had slower declines. Practices having higher baseline continuity, located in certain non-London regions, and having higher percentages of White patients had faster declines. The remaining variables were not predictors.
Variables potentially associated with greater appointment availability predicted slower declines in continuity, with worsening declines and relative variability immediately after the COVID-19 lockdown, possibly reflecting surges in demand. To achieve better levels of continuity for those seeking it, practices can increase appointment availability within appointment systems that prioritize continuity.
Annals Early Access article
We undertook a study to investigate the relationship between duration of medication use and prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) among patients with insulin-treated or sulfonylurea-treated type 2 diabetes in Taiwan.
A total of 898 patients (41.0% insulin users, 65.1% sulfonylurea users; mean [SD] age = 59.9 [12.3] years, 50.7% female) were enrolled in pharmacies, clinics, and health bureaus of Tainan City, Taiwan. Presence of IAH was determined with Chinese versions of the Gold questionnaire (Gold-TW) and Clarke questionnaire (Clarke-TW). Sociodemographics, disease and treatment histories, diabetes-related medical care, and health status were collected. We used multiple logistic regression models to assess the relationship between duration of medication use and IAH.
Overall IAH prevalence was 41.0% (Gold-TW) and 28.2% (Clarke-TW) among insulin users, and 65.3% (Gold-TW) and 51.3% (Clarke-TW) among sulfonylurea users. Prevalence increased with the duration of sulfonylurea use, whereas it decreased with the duration of insulin use. After controlling for potential confounders, 5 or more years of sulfonylurea use was significantly associated with 3.50-fold (95% CI, 2.39-5.13) and 3.06-fold (95% CI, 2.11-4.44) increases in the odds of IAH based on the Gold-TW and Clarke-TW criteria, respectively. On the other hand, regular blood glucose testing and retinal examinations were associated with reduced odds in both insulin users and sulfonylurea users.
The prevalence of IAH was high among patients using sulfonylureas long term, but the odds of this complication were attenuated for those who received regular diabetes-related medical care. Our study suggests that long-term sulfonylurea use and irregular follow-up increase risk for IAH. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the observed associations.
Annals Early Access article
Information about social determinants of health (SDOH) is essential for primary care clinicians in the delivery of equitable, comprehensive care, as well as for program planning and resource allocation. SDOH are rarely captured consistently in clinical settings, however. Artificial intelligence (AI) could potentially fill these data gaps, but it needs to be designed collaboratively and thoughtfully. We report on a codesign process with primary care clinicians to understand how an AI tool could be developed, implemented, and used in practice.
We conducted semistructured, 50-minute workshops with a large urban family health team in Toronto, Ontario, Canada asking their feedback on a proposed AI-based tool used to derive patient SDOH from electronic health record data. An inductive thematic analysis was used to describe participants’ perspectives regarding the implementation and use of the proposed tool.
Fifteen participants contributed across 4 workshops. Most patient SDOH information was not available or was difficult to find in their electronic health record. Discussions focused on 3 areas related to the implementation and use of an AI tool to derive social data: people, process, and technology. Participants recommended starting with 1 or 2 social determinants (income and housing were suggested as priorities) and emphasized the need for adequate resources, staff, and training materials. They noted many challenges, including how to discuss the use of AI with patients and how to confirm their social needs identified by the AI tool.
Our codesign experience provides guidance from end users on the appropriate and meaningful design and implementation of an AI-based tool for social data in primary care.
This study marks the 50th anniversary of NAPCRG (formerly the North American Primary Care Research Group) by examining social connections among members.
This descriptive social network analysis was conducted via the Program to Analyze, Record, and Track Networks to Enhance Relationships (PARTNER) survey tool.
Responses from 906 participants resulted in 1,721 individuals with 5,196 partner relationships. Most relationships (60%) were characterized as having an integrated level of collaboration. Many relationships led to a research paper (58%) or a grant (34%).
This social network analysis of NAPCRG members’ relationships described over 5,000 relationships, many producing publications, grants, and perceived advancements in primary care.
The efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for treatment of laboratory-confirmed mild/moderately severe COVID-19 remains unclear.
We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world studies (RWS; observational studies) of the efficacy/effectiveness and/or safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for COVID-19. We pooled appropriate data (adjusted estimates for RWS) using an inverse variance, random-effects model. We calculated statistical heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) with associated 95% CI. We further assessed risk of bias/study quality and conducted trial sequential analysis of the evidence from RCTs.
We included 4 RCTs (4,070 persons) and 16 RWS (1,925,047 persons) of adults (aged ≥18 years). One and 3 RCTs were of low and unclear risk of bias, respectively. The RWS were of good quality. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization compared with placebo/no treatment (RR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10-0.31; I2 = 77.2%; 2 RCTs, 3,542 persons), but there was no significant difference for decrease of worsening severity (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.01; I2 = 47.5%; 3 RCTs, 1,824 persons), viral clearance (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.93-1.51; I2 = 82%; 2 RCTs, 528 persons), adverse events (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 0.92-2.14; I2 = 70.6%; 4 RCTs, 4,070 persons), serious adverse events (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.41-1.62; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04-1.70; I2 = 49.9%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), although trial sequential analysis suggested that the current total sample sizes for these outcomes were not large enough for conclusions to be drawn. Real-world studies also showed significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization (RR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60; I2 = 95.0%; 11 RWS, 1,421,398 persons) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.34; I2 = 65%; 7 RWS, 286,131 persons) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with no treatment.
Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir appears to be promising for preventing hospitalization and potentially decreasing all-cause mortality for persons with mild/moderately severe COVID-19, but the evidence is weak. More studies are needed.
This essay contrasts the elements of independent practice with employed practice as part of what has been lost in the past half century, but what might be regained if physicians demanded more autonomy and control over their practices.
]]>Procedures are manual technical skills clinicians perform for their patients. Family physicians (FPs) acquire these skills during residency; most are undertaken in outpatient settings. We performed a retrospective observational cohort study to describe the extent to which FPs perform the core procedures recommended by the Council of Academic Family Medicine (CAFM) and how this might have changed over time.
The CAFM recommended a list of procedures all FP residents should perform competently after graduation. We modified this list for Medicare beneficiaries to enable matching with Current Procedural Terminology codes. We probed Medicare Part B databases for modified CAFM procedure claims submitted by FPs in 2021 and how these claims changed from 2014 to 2021.
In 2021, there were 904,278 modified CAFM procedures filed by 9,410 FPs in the outpatient setting. All procedures were clustered with respect to organ system (eg, musculoskeletal, skin, pulmonary). Beginning in 2014 and continuously through 2021, there was a 33% decrease in outpatient procedures filed and a 36% decrease in the number of FPs filing them.
Office-based procedures are integral to a primary care physician’s role, although the activity is rarely analyzed. At a time when the Medicare population is growing, the number of available FPs and the number of procedures they perform are not. This decrease might result from the changing scope of FP practice, new referral patterns, task shifting, and/or increased delegation to physician associates and nurse practitioners.
To determine the effects of stratified primary care for low back pain (SPLIT program) in decreasing back-related disability for patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care.
We conducted a before-and-after study. We compared health-related outcomes for 2 sequential, independent cohorts of patients with LBP recruited at 7 primary care units in Portugal. The first prospective cohort study characterized usual care (UC) and collected data from February to September 2018. The second was performed when the SPLIT program was implemented and collected data from November 2018 to October 2021. Between cohorts, physical therapists were trained in the implementation of the SPLIT program, which used the STarT Back Screening Tool to categorize patients for matched treatment. We compared back-related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, 0-24 points), pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale, 0-10 points), perceived effect of treatment (Global Perceived Effect Scale, –5 to +5 points), and health-related quality of life (EuroQoL 5 dimensions 3 levels index, 0-1 points).
We enrolled a total of 447 patients: 115 in the UC cohort (mostly treated with pharmacologic treatment) and 332 in the SPLIT cohort (all referred for a physical therapy intervention program). Over the study period of 6 months, patients in the SPLIT program showed significantly greater improvements in back-related disability (ß, –2.94; 95% CI, –3.63 to –2.24; P ≤ .001), pain (ß, –0.88; 95% CI, –1.18 to –0.57; P ≤ .001), perceived effect of treatment (ß, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.82; P ≤ .001), and health-related quality of life (ß, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.14; P ≤ .001) compared with UC.
Patients in the SPLIT program for LBP showed greater benefits regarding health-related outcomes than those receiving UC.
Despite increased clinician awareness of systemic racism, lack of substantial action toward antiracism exists within health care. Clinical staff perspectives, particularly those of racial-ethnic minorities/persons of color (POC) who disproportionately occupy support staff roles with less power on the team, can yield insights into barriers to progress and can inform future efforts to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI, also referred to as EDI) within health care settings. This qualitative study explored the perspectives of staff members on race and role power dynamics within community health clinic teams.
We conducted semistructured 45-minute interviews with staff members working in community health clinics in a large urban health care system from May to July 2021. We implemented purposeful recruitment to oversample POC and support staff and to achieve equal representation from the 13 community health clinics in the system. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed over 6 months using a critical-ideological paradigm. Themes reflecting experiences related to race and role power dynamics were identified.
Our cohort had 60 participants: 42 (70%) were support staff (medical assistants, front desk clerks, care navigators, nurses) and 18 (30%) were clinicians and clinic leaders. The large majority of participants were aged 26 to 40 years (60%), were female (83%), and were POC (68%). Five themes emerged: (1) POC face hidden challenges, (2) racial discrimination persists, (3) power dynamics perpetuate inaction, (4) interpersonal actions foster safety and equity, and (5) system-level change is needed for cultural shift.
Understanding the race and role power dynamics within care teams, including experiences of staff members with less power, is critical to advancing DEI in health care.
The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly interrupted breast cancer screening, an essential preventive service in primary care. We aimed to evaluate the pandemic’s impact on overall and follow-up breast cancer screening using real-world health records data.
We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of women eligible for breast cancer screening through the study period from January 1, 2017 to February 28, 2022 using TriNetX Research Network data. We examined the temporal trend of monthly screening volume throughout the study period and compared the rate of adherence to follow-up screening within 24 months after the previous screening when the follow-up screening was due in the pre-COVID period vs the COVID period. To account for multiple screenings in the longitudinal data, we applied a logistic regression model using generalized estimating equations with adjustment for individual-level covariates.
Among 1,186,669 screening-eligible women, the monthly screening volume temporarily decreased by 80.6% from February to April 2020 and then rebounded to close to pre-COVID levels by June 2020. Yet, the follow-up screening rate decreased from 78.9% (95% CI, 78.8%-79.0%) in the pre-COVID period to 77.7% (95% CI, 77.6%-77.8%) in the COVID period. Multivariate regression analysis also showed a lower adherence to follow-up screening during the COVID period (odds ratio = 0.86; 0.86-0.87) and a greater pandemic impact among women aged 65 years and older and women of non-Hispanic "other" race (Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander).
The COVID-19 pandemic had a transient negative effect on breast cancer screening overall and a prolonged negative effect on follow-up screening. It also exacerbated gaps in adherence to follow-up screening, especially among certain vulnerable groups, requiring innovative strategies to address potential health disparities in primary care.
The experience of ethnically diverse parents of children with serious illness in the US health care system has not been well studied. Listening to families from these communities about their experiences could identify modifiable barriers to quality pediatric serious illness care and facilitate the development of potential improvements. Our aim was to explore parents’ perspectives of their children’s health care for serious illness from Somali, Hmong, and Latin-American communities in Minnesota.
We conducted a qualitative study with focus groups and individual interviews using immersion-crystallization data analysis with a community-based participatory research approach.
Twenty-six parents of children with serious illness participated (8 Somali, 10 Hmong, and 8 Latin-American). Parents desired 2-way trusting and respectful relationships with medical staff. Three themes supported this trust, based on parents’ experiences with challenging and supportive health care: (1) Informed understanding allows parents to understand and be prepared for their child’s medical care; (2) Compassionate interactions with staff allow parents to feel their children are cared for; (3) Respected parental advocacy allows parents to feel their wisdom is heard. Effective communication is 1 key to improving understanding, expressing compassion, and partnering with parents, including quality medical interpretation for low–English proficient parents.
Parents of children with serious illness from Somali, Hmong, and Latin-American communities shared a desire for improved relationships with staff and improved health care processes. Processes that enhance communication, support, and connection, including individual and system-level interventions driven by community voices, hold the potential for reducing health disparities in pediatric serious illness.
Continuity of care is broadly associated with better patient health outcomes. The relative contributions of continuity with an individual physician and with a practice, however, have not generally been distinguished. This retrospective observational study examined the impact of continuity of care for patients seen at their main clinic but by different family physicians.
We analyzed linked health administrative data from 2015-2018 from Alberta, Canada to explore the association of physician and clinic continuity with rates of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations across varying levels of patient complexity. Physician continuity was calculated using the known provider of care index and clinic continuity with an analogous measure. We developed zero-inflated negative binomial models to assess the association of each with all-cause ED visits and hospitalizations.
High physician continuity was associated with lower ED use across all levels of patient complexity and with fewer hospitalizations for highly complex patients. Broadly, no (0%) clinic continuity was associated with increased use and complete (100%) clinic continuity with decreased use, with the largest effect seen for the most complex patients. Levels of clinic continuity between 1% and 50% were generally associated with slightly higher use, and levels of 51% to 99% with slightly lower use.
The best health care outcomes (measured by ED visits and hospitalizations) are associated with consistently seeing one’s own primary family physician or seeing a clinic partner when that physician is unavailable. The effect of partial clinic continuity appears complex and requires additional research. These results provide some reassurance for part-time and shared practices, and guidance for primary care workforce policy makers.
Annals Early Access article
]]>