Primary health care research & development
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Sep 2015
Multicenter StudyThe assessment and treatment of back and neck pain: an initial investigation in a primary care practice-based research network.
The purpose of this study was to conduct an exploratory examination of the current state of non-malignant acute and chronic back and neck pain assessment and management among primary care providers in a multi-site, practice-based research network. ⋯ Over a two-week period, 24 practitioners in a multi-site practice-based research network completed 196 data cards about 39 patients experiencing acute back and neck pain and 157 patients suffering from chronic back and neck pain. Findings There were significant differences between the patients experiencing acute and chronic pain in regards to practitioner evaluation, current medication management and current treatment for depression. In addition, diagnostics differed between patients experiencing acute versus chronic back and neck pain. Further, primary care providers' review of online drug monitoring program reports during the current visit was associated with current medication management using short term opioids, long-term opioids or tramadol. Most research examining acute and chronic pain focuses on the low back. Additional research needs to be conducted to explore and compare acute and chronic pain across the whole spine.
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Sep 2015
Medication decision making and patient outcomes in GP, nurse and pharmacist prescriber consultations.
Aim The aims of this study were twofold: (a) to explore whether specific components of shared decision making were present in consultations involving nurse prescribers (NPs), pharmacist prescribers (PPs) and general practitioners (GPs) and (b) to relate these to self-reported patient outcomes including satisfaction, adherence and patient perceptions of practitioner empathy. ⋯ Analysis of audio-recordings of consultations in primary care in South England between patients and GPs, NPs and PPs. Analysis of patient questionnaires completed post consultation. Findings A total of 532 consultations were audio-recorded with 20 GPs, 19 NPs and 12 PPs. Prescribing decisions occurred in 421 (79%). Patients were given treatment options in 21% (102/482) of decisions, the prescriber elicited the patient's treatment preference in 18% (88/482) and the patient expressed a treatment preference in 24% (118/482) of decisions. PPs were more likely to ask for the patient's preference about their treatment regimen (χ 2=6.6, P=0.036, Cramer's V=0.12) than either NPs or GPs. Of the 275 patient questionnaires, 192(70%) could be matched with a prescribing decision. NP patients had higher satisfaction levels than patients of GPs or PPs. More time describing treatment options was associated with increased satisfaction, adherence and greater perceived practitioner empathy. While defining, measuring and enabling the process of shared decision making remains challenging, it may have patient benefit.