'If relevant, yes; if not, no': General practitioner (GP) users and GP perceptions about asking ethnicity questions in Irish general practice: A qualitative analysis using Normalization Process Theory

Context

The use of ethnic identifiers in health systems is recommended in several European countries as a means to identify and address heath inequities. There are barriers to implementation that have not been researched.

Objective

This study examines whether and how ethnicity data can be collected in Irish general practices in a meaningful and acceptable way.

Methods

Qualitative case study data generation was informed by Normalization Process Theory (NPT) constructs about ‘sense’ making and ‘engagement’. It consisted of individual interviews and focus group discussions based on visual participatory techniques. There were 70 informants, including 62 general practitioner (GP) users of diverse ethnic backgrounds recruited through community organisations and eight GPs identified through an inter-agency steering group. Data were analysed according to principles of thematic analysis using NPT.

Results

The link between ethnicity and health was often considered relevant because GP users grasped connections with genetic (skin colour, lactose intolerance), geographic (prevalence of disease, early years exposure), behavioural (culture/food) and social determinant (housing) factors. The link was less clear with religion. There was some scepticism and questions about how the collection of data would benefit GP consultations and concerns regarding confidentiality and the actual uses of these data (e.g. risk of discrimination, social control). For GPs, the main theme discussed was relevance: what added value would it bring to their consultations and was it was their role to collect these data? Their biggest concern was about data protection issues in light of the European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The difficulty in explaining a complex concept such as ‘ethnicity’ in the limited time available in consultations was also worrying.

Conclusions

Implementation of an ethnicity identifier in Irish general practices will require a strong rationale that makes sense to GP users, and specific measures to ensure that its benefits outweigh any potential harm. This is in line with both our participants’ views and the EU GDPR.

[Ethical dilemmas in a general practitioner's clinic due to incidental findings resulting from whole genome sequencing]

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is increasingly being used in clinical practice. As a result, various healthcare professionals now encounter ethical dilemmas that were formerly confined within the genetics clinic. In addition to autonomy and well-being of both patients and their family members, which need to be balanced carefully, a societal perspective is also vital to ensure the ethically sound introduction of whole genome sequencing into daily practice. Important choices to be made are: who is eligible for whole genome sequencing; how can informed consent be sensibly obtained, when dealing with such vast quantities of genomic information; which type of information should be offered to patients; should professionals actively search for pathogenic mutations. The rise of WGS has an impact on the moral responsibilities incumbent on healthcare professionals and necessitates a comprehensive societal debate on the advent of personalized medicine.

The dilemma of repeat weak opioid prescriptions - experiences from swedish GPs

OBJECTIVE

To explore general practitioners' (GP) experiences of dealing with requests for the renewal of weak opioid prescriptions for chronic non-cancer pain conditions.

DESIGN

Qualitative focus group interviews. Systematic text condensation analysis.

SETTING AND SUBJECTS

15 GPs, 4 GP residents and 2 interns at two rural and two urban health centres in central Sweden.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Strategies for handling the dilemma of prescribing weak opioids without seeing the patient.

RESULTS

After analysing four focus group interviews we found that requests for prescription renewals for weak opioids provoked adverse feelings in the GP regarding the patient, colleagues or the GP's inner self and were experienced as a dilemma. To deal with this, the GP could use passive as well as active strategies. Active strategies, like discussing the dilemma with colleagues and creating common routines regarding the renewal of weak opioids, may improve prescription habits and support physicians who want to do what is medically correct.

CONCLUSION

Many GPs feel umcomfortable when prescribing weak opioids without seeing the patient. This qualitative study has identified strategic approaches to deal with that issue. Key points   Opioid prescription for chronic non-cancer pain is known to cause discomfort, feelings of guilt and conflicts for the prescribing doctor. From focus group interviews with GPs we found that to deal with this:   • Doctors can use active strategies, such as confronting the patient or creating common routines together with their colleagues, or…   • They can use passive coping strategies such as accepting the situation, handing over the responsibility to the patient or choosing not to see that there is a problem.   • Opportunities for doctors to discuss prescription routines may be the best way to influence prescription habits.

Ethical considerations in recruiting primary care patients to research studies

BACKGROUND

How patients are selected and subsequently invited to take part in research has important implications for gaining informed, voluntary consent.

OBJECTIVE

This article identifies and discusses common ethical issues that are faced by researchers when recruiting patients from primary care settings.

DISCUSSION

Recruiting primary care patients for research studies should be guided by the core ethical values of merit and integrity, respect, justice and beneficence. Issues of patient privacy and risk of coercion are major concerns when selecting and recruiting primary care patients, but the ethical issues will depend on the type of research and the potential risks to participants. The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, and Australian privacy laws and principles, should be reviewed to ensure recruitment meets contemporary ethical standards prior to submitting a study protocol for ethical review.

The length and content of general practice consultation in two urban districts of Beijing: a preliminary observation study

Background

Community health service center (CHSC) and community health service station (CHSS) are the main institutions where general practitioners (GPs) deliver primary care in the urban area of China. Motivated by incentive policies, visits to community health service institutions (CHSIs) increased gradually in recent years, but concerns had been raised on the quality of general practice consultation. This is a preliminary study aimed to investigate the existing problems of general practice consultation in Beijing and provide practical evidence for developing relevant policies.

Methods

Six GPs from 2 CHSCs and 3 CHSSs were selected by purposive sampling. The GPs were observed for 4 or 5 consecutive days during January 2013 to March 2013. The length and content of consultations were recorded in structured observation forms. Quantitative description was applied to describe the median, percentage and frequency of variables.

Results

A total of 1135 consultations were observed. The most frequent reason for consultations was specific prescription (61.6%), followed by presenting symptoms (20.7%), check-up (9.1%), counseling (5.4%), transfusion & injection (3.0%) and sickness certificate (0.2%). The median consultation length of all consultations was 2.0 minutes. The GPs prescribed in 81.0% of the consultations, on the other hand, history taking, physical examination, explanation of illness and health education only took place in 27.0%, 28.0%, 21.9% and 17.7% of the consultations respectively.

Conclusions

The adequacy of consultation length in CHSIs is in doubt. Most patients visited the CHSIs for prescription renewal. Health promotion e.g. health education are not adequately provided in consultations. The quality of general practice consultations was jeopardized by the large amount of patient flow for medicine renewal. Policies should be adjusted to reduce unnecessary consultations. Further studies are in need to evaluate the outcome and influencing factors of general practice consultation in China.

General practice ethics: text messages and boundaries in the GP-patient relationship

Virtual forms of communication (eg texting) can support patients and may contribute to better care. However, these informal communication methods may intrude on the doctor’s leisure time and undermine standards of care if they replace face-to-face consultations.Texting may cross boundaries in potentially unprofessional ways, especially when particular patients are favoured with this privilege. It may disadvantage patients who are not favoured or who are not comfortable using mobile technology. We also note that GPs cannot control the distribution of their number or recall it without the inconvenience of changing the number once it has been disclosed.Virtual communication is an integral part of the way we live, despite the potential pitfalls. Each form (social media, electronic messaging systems, video consultations, mobile phones, etc) has its advantages and disadvantages. This makes it important for practices to develop policies supporting the responsible use of virtual communication. Such policies should:clarify (for patients and GPs) when its use is appropriate accommodate doctors’ individual preferences regarding technology provide guidance regarding GPs’ duties, especially for interactions that do not allow full evaluation of patients.GPs may wish to have specific criteria for providing patients with this degree of access, set very clear indications and contraindications to its use, explain the potential pitfalls, and ensure that text messages augment good care rather than replace it.

[Medicine and Law: abdication of therapy by practitioners at the end of life]

The question, how and when an individual decision for and end of medical treatment or abdication of therapy should be made remains difficult. Ethical considerations have to be taken into account with respect to a humane and dignified decease. The goal of our manuscript there for is to achieve more certainty with respect to juridical and legal preconditions and frameworks. The conditions in Switzerland support general practitioners and family doctors to fulfill patients' requests, wishes and wills in an outpatient setting. An awareness and sensitization for a dignified and humane care at the end of life - despite social changes and an increased importance of health economics - as well increasing support of outpatient palliative care become more and more important. Existing legal certainty and security of practitioners, therefore, will be outlined in the following.

Moral hazard and supplier-induced demand: empirical evidence in general practice

Changes in cost sharing and remuneration system in the Netherlands in 2006 led to clear changes in financial incentives faced by both consumers and general practitioner (GPs). For privately insured consumers, cost sharing was abolished, whereas those socially insured never faced cost sharing. The separate remuneration systems for socially insured consumers (capitation) and privately insured consumers (fee-for-service) changed to a combined system of capitation and fee-for-service for both groups. Our first hypothesis was that privately insured consumers had a higher increase in patient-initiated GP contact rates compared with socially insured consumers. Our second hypothesis was that socially insured consumers had a higher increase in physician-initiated contact rates. Data were used from electronic medical records from 32 GP-practices and 35336 consumers in 2005-2007. A difference-in-differences approach was applied to study the effect of changes in cost sharing and remuneration system on contact rates. Abolition of cost sharing led to a higher increase in patient-initiated utilisation for privately insured consumers in persons aged 65 and older. Introduction of fee-for-service for socially insured consumers led to a higher increase in physician-initiated utilisation. This was most apparent in persons aged 25 to 54. Differences in the trend in physician-initiated utilisation point to an effect of supplier-induced demand. Differences in patient-initiated utilisation indicate limited evidence for moral hazard.

The informal curriculum - general practitioner perceptions of ethics in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Australian medical students should graduate with an understanding of the principles of medical law and ethics, and their application to clinical settings. Although student perspectives have been studied previously, the teacher experience of ethical issues also needs to be understood, particularly in the general practice setting.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 13 general practitioner teachers. They were asked to reflect on common and/or important ethical issues in their day-to-day practice. An inductive thematic analysis of the data was performed by two investigators, who reached a consensus on major themes using an iterative, dialogic process.

RESULTS

Participants reported negotiating ethical issues frequently. Major themes included patient-doctor relationships, professional differences, truth-telling, ethically 'grey' areas and the personal demands of ethical decision making.

DISCUSSION

General practitioners in this study describe sometimes needing to apply judgement and compromise in situations involving legal or ethical issues, in order to act in the best interests of patients and to successfully negotiate the patient-doctor relationship. Students learning in this clinical context may perceive mixed messages and ethical lapses in these challenging 'grey' areas. The ethical acumen and emotional resilience of both students and clinical teachers may be enhanced by ongoing reflective discussion with colleagues.

HoMER - an opportunity or threat to general practice research?

The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Harmonisation of Multicentre Ethical Review (HoMER) project aims to implement a 'single ethical review', where the outcome of an ethical and scientific review by a single recognised Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) will enable multiple institutions to decide whether or not to participate in a given study. The desired process will include agreement on time frames, authority of the reviewing HREC, respect among the jurisdictions, verification by independent organisations, and compliance with the national statement and relevant statutory and administrative frameworks. However, there appears to be little discourse on the implications for general practice research in the research community.

Medical ethics: four principles, two decisions, two roles and no reasons

The 'four principle' view of medical ethics has a strong international pedigree. Despite wide acceptance, there is controversy about the meaning and use of the principles in clinical practice as a checklist for moral behaviour. Recent attempts by medical regulatory authorities to use the four principles to judge medical practitioner behaviour have not met with success in clarifying how these principles can be incorporated into a legal framework. This may reflect the philosophical debate about the relationship between law and morals. In this paper, legal decisions from two cases in which general practitioners have been charged with professional shortcomings are discussed. Difficulties with the application of the four principles (autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice) to judge medical practitioner behaviour are highlighted. The four principles are relevant to medical practitioner behaviour, but if applied as justifications for disciplinary decisions without explanation, perverse results may ensue. Solutions are suggested to minimise ambiguities in the application of the four principles: adjudicators should acknowledge the difference between professional and common morality and the statutory requirement to give decisions with reasons.