Groping around in the dark for adequate COPD management: a qualitative study on experiences in long-term care

Perspectives and Attitudes of General Practitioners Towards Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological COPD Management in a Belgian Primary Care Setting: A Qualitative Study

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a complex and heterogeneous condition that requires multidisciplinary management. In Belgium, the treatment of COPD is mainly managed by general practitioners (GPs). Several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommend the use of non-pharmacological treatments, such as pulmonary rehabilitation, and interdisciplinary care for COPD patients. Although considerable research has been devoted to addressing the multitude of reasons for the lack of adherence to these aspects of the CPGs, less attention has been paid to understanding the perspectives and attitudes of GPs that lead to this suboptimal implementation.

Purpose

This study aimed to 1) explore Belgian GPs' perceptions regarding COPD management in a primary care setting and 2) collect their views on the importance of pulmonary rehabilitation and interprofessional care in COPD management.

Methods

A descriptive study, conducted between August 2014 and May 2015, used interviews from a sample of 30 Flemish GPs. Data were analyzed following the principles of thematic analysis.

Results

COPD management was patient-centered, focusing on immediate symptom relief and reducing future risks through pharmacotherapy and proper patient education. Deviations from the CPGs were noted, with only a few GPs performing spirometry themselves. Conditions to prescribe respiratory physiotherapy were not well known. Some GPs remained unconvinced about the (cost-)effectiveness of respiratory physiotherapy despite the fast-expanding scientific evidence. Interprofessional care was limited to GP-respiratory physician (re)-referral and communication. GPs showed a reactive attitude towards interprofessional collaboration for non-pharmacological therapies, which is not in line with the proactive approach recommended in CPGs.

Conclusion

GPs managed COPD patients mainly by reducing symptoms with pharmacological therapy. Integrated care regarding non-pharmacological treatments was not well implemented due to the obstacles in interprofessional collaboration. Future care models incorporating personalized care planning could provide a solution to manage COPD's complex healthcare demands.

Evaluation of a Digital COPD Education Program for Healthcare Professionals in Long-Term Care – A Mixed Methods Study

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a structured visual assessment after stroke in municipal health care services

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Visual impairments (VIs) affect 60% of stroke survivors, and have negative consequences for rehabilitation and post-stroke life. VIs after stroke are often overlooked and undertreated due to lack of structured routines for visual care after stroke. This study aims to identify and assess barriers and facilitators to the implementation of structured visual assessment after stroke in municipal health care services. The study is part of a larger knowledge translation project.

METHODS

Eleven leaders and municipal interdisciplinary health care professionals participated in qualitative interviews. During two workshops, results from the interviews were discussed with 26 participants from municipal health care services and user representatives. Data from interviews and workshops were collected before the intervention was implemented and analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis identified individual and contextual barriers and facilitators. The individual barriers were related to the participants' experiences of having low competence of visual functions and vision assessment skills. They considered themselves as generalists, not stroke experts, and some were reluctant of change because of previous experiences of unsuccessful implementation projects. Individual facilitators were strong beliefs that including vision in stroke care would improve health care services. If experienced as useful and evidence based, the new vision routine would implement easier. Contextual barriers were experiences of unclear responsibility for vision care, lack of structured interdisciplinary collaboration and lack of formal stroke routines. Time constraints and practical difficulties with including the vision tool in current medical records were also expressed barriers. Contextual facilitators were leader support and acknowledgement, in addition to having a flexible work schedule.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that improving competence about VIs after stroke and skills in assessing visual functions are particularly important to consider when planning implementation of new vision routines in municipal health care services. Increased knowledge about the consequences of living with VIs after stroke, and the motivation to provide best possible care, were individual facilitators for changing clinical practice. Involving knowledge users, solutions for integrating new knowledge in existing routines, along with easily accessible supervision in own practise, are essential facilitators for promoting a successful implementation.