Jessica Drinkwater

How QOF is shaping primary care review consultations: a longitudinal qualitative study

BackgroundLong-term conditions (LTCs) are increasingly important determinants of quality of life and healthcare costs in populations worldwide. The Chronic Care Model and the NHS and Social Care Long Term Conditions Model highlight the use of consultations where patients are invited to attend a consultation with a primary care clinician (practice nurse or GP) to complete a review of the management of the LTC. We report a qualitative study in which we focus on the ways in which QOF (Quality and Outcomes Framework) shapes routine review consultations, and highlight the tensions exposed between patient-centred consulting and QOF-informed LTC management.MethodsA longitudinal qualitative study. We audio-recorded consultations of primary care practitioners with patients with LTCs. We then interviewed both patients and practitioners using tape-assisted recall. Patient participants were followed for three months during which the research team made weekly contact and invited them to complete weekly logs about their health service use. A second interview at three months was conducted with patients. Analysis of the data sets used an integrative framework approach.ResultsPractitioners view consultations as a means of ‘surveillance’ of patients. Patients present themselves, often passively, to the practitioner for scrutiny, but leave the consultation with unmet biomedical, informational and emotional needs. Patients perceived review consultations as insignificant and irrelevant to the daily management of their LTC and future healthcare needs. Two deviant cases, where the requirements of the ‘review’ were subsumed to meet the patient’s needs, focused on cancer and bereavement.ConclusionsRoutine review consultations in primary care focus on the biomedical agenda set by QOF where the practitioner is the expert, and the patient agenda unheard. Review consultations shape patients’ expectations of future care and socialize patients into becoming passive subjects of ‘surveillance’. Patient needs outside the narrow protocol of the review are made invisible by the process of review except in extreme cases such as anticipating death and bereavement. We suggest how these constraints might be overcome.

Juggling confidentiality and safety: A qualitative study of how general practice clinicians document domestic violence in families with children

Background Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) and child safeguarding are interlinked problems, impacting on all family members. Documenting in electronic patient records (EPRs) is an important part of managing these families. Current evidence and guidance, however, treats DVA and child safeguarding separately. This does not reflect the complexity clinicians face when documenting both issues in one family. Aim To explore how and why general practice clinicians document DVA in families with children. Design and setting A qualitative interview study using vignettes with GPs and practice nurses (PNs) in England. Method Semi-structured telephone interviews with 54 clinicians (42 GPs and 12 PNs) were conducted across six sites in England. Data were analysed thematically using a coding frame incorporating concepts from the literature and emerging themes. Results Most clinicians recognised DVA and its impact on child safeguarding, but struggled to work out the best way to document it. They described tensions among the different roles of the EPR: a legal document; providing continuity of care; information sharing to improve safety; and a patient-owned record. This led to strategies to hide information, so that it was only available to other clinicians. Conclusion Managing DVA in families with children is complex and challenging for general practice clinicians. National integrated guidance is urgently needed regarding how clinicians should manage the competing roles of the EPR, while maintaining safety of the whole family, especially in the context of online EPRs and patient access.

'I wouldn't push that further because I don't want to lose her': A multiperspective qualitative study of behaviour change for long-term conditions in primary care

Health outcomes for long‐term conditions (LTCs) can be improved by lifestyle, dietary and condition management‐related behaviour change. Primary care is an important setting for behaviour change work. Practitioners have identified barriers to this work, but there is little evidence examining practices of behaviour change in primary care consultations and how patients and practitioners perceive these practices.

A motivational intervention for patients with COPD in primary care: qualitative evaluation of a new practitioner role

BackgroundLong-term conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are growing challenges for health services. Psychosocial co-morbidity is associated with poorer quality of life and greater use of health care in these patients but is often un-diagnosed or inadequately treated in primary care, where most care for these patients is provided. We developed a brief intervention, delivered by ‘liaison health workers’ (LHWs), to address psychosocial needs in the context of an integrated approach to physical and mental health. We report a qualitative study in which we characterize the intervention through the experience of the patients receiving it and examine how it was incorporated into primary care.MethodsQualitative study using patient and practice staff informants. We audio-recorded interviews with 29 patients offered the intervention (three had declined it or withdrawn) and 13 practice staff (GPs, nurses and administrators). Analysis used a constant comparative approach.ResultsMost patients were enthusiastic about the LHWs, describing the intervention as mobilizing their motivation for self-management. By contrast with other practitioners, patients experienced the LHWs as addressing their needs holistically, being guided by patient needs rather than professional agendas, forming individual relationships with patients and investing in patients and their capacity to change. Practices accommodated and accepted the LHWs, but positioned them as peripheral to and separate from the priority of physical care.ConclusionsDespite being a short-term intervention, patients described it as having enduring motivational benefits. The elements of the intervention that patients described map onto the key features of motivating interventions described by Self-Determination Theory. We suggest that the LHWs motivated patients to self-management by: (i) respecting patients’ competence to decide on needs and priorities; (ii) forming relationships with patients as individuals; and (iii) fostering patients’ sense of autonomy. While truly integrated primary care for patients with long-term conditions such as COPD remains elusive, existing practice staff might adopt elements of the LHWs’ approach to enhance motivational change in patients with long-term conditions such as COPD.

Training on domestic violence and child safeguarding in general practice: a mixed method evaluation of a pilot intervention

BackgroundChildren’s exposure to domestic violence is a type of child maltreatment, yet many general practice clinicians remain uncertain of their child safeguarding responsibilities in the context of domestic violence. We developed an evidence-based pilot training on domestic violence and child safeguarding for general practice teams. The aim of this study was to test and evaluate its feasibility, acceptability and the direction of change in short-term outcome measures.MethodsWe used a mixed method design which included a pre-post questionnaire survey, qualitative analysis of free-text comments, training observations, and post-training interviews with trainers and participants. The questionnaire survey used a validated scale to measure participants’ knowledge, confidence/ self-efficacy, and beliefs/ attitudes towards domestic violence and child safeguarding in the context of domestic violence.ResultsEleven UK general practices were recruited (response rate 55%) and 88 clinicians attended the pilot training. Thirty-seven participants (42%) completed all pre-post questionnaires and nine were interviewed. All training sessions were observed. All six trainers were interviewed. General practice clinicians valued the training materials and teaching styles, opportunities for reflection and delivery by local trainers from both health and children’s social services. The training elicited positive changes in total outcome score and knowledge and confidence/ self-efficacy sub scores which remained at 3-month follow up. However, the mean sub score of beliefs and attitudes did not change and the qualitative results were mixed. Two interviewees described changes in their clinical practice. Participants’ suggestions for improving the training included incorporating more ethnic and class diversity in the material, using cases with multiple socio economic disadvantages, and addressing multi-agency collaboration in the context of changing and under-resourced services for children.ConclusionsThe pilot training for general practice on child safeguarding in the context of domestic violence was feasible and acceptable. It elicited positive changes in clinicians’ knowledge and confidence/ self-esteem. The extent to which clinical behaviour changed is unclear, but there are indications of changes in practice by some clinicians. The pilot training requires further refinement and evaluation before implementation.

Can a medical student be of use while still learning

A third year medical student gave feedback that she felt frustrated by ward work in Manchester. Specifically, she felt that she was not part of the team and not productive. This prompted a senior consultant and me to experiment with making students’ time spent on wards more interesting and productive. Traditionally, medical student teaching has been by apprenticeship. However, from my experience, the increasing numbers of students and concern about litigation mean that the ward is becoming a place where students observe but do not practise. They are no longer seen as part of the team, with a contribution to make. I pursued a career in medicine because I wanted to be helpful; feeling unable to contribute has disempowered me, and left me frustrated and demotivated.

Viewpoint: I am a doctor

I recently had a conversation with an old trainer of mine about work–life balance. She said she finds this concept difficult because being a doctor is part of who she is, both in and out of work. She pointed out that, when asked what you do, most doctors say, ‘I am a doctor’, not ‘I work as a doctor’. So, this week when I went to see I, Daniel Blake , I wasn’t surprised to come out reflecting on what the film meant to me as a doctor. I’d been told it’s a film about a man struggling with the benefits system. But for me, it’s about Dan, a man who has had a significant heart attack and is given unthinking advice from his doctor. Early in the film you see Dan with his doctor. …

The AA: what we should learn from the 4th emergency service.

I am the worst type of car owner. I have never cleaned my car (I wait for the complementary clean following an MOT). I don’t understand how they work. I know from the road works signs that I should check my tyres, fuel, and oil regularly, but I don’t. I am a bad car owner. Instead, I have AA membership. So when a red warning light flashes up on the dashboard, I am alarmed, but don’t panic. After a quick call to the garage I am informed it is likely to be the ‘alternator’ and I should stop somewhere safe. I have no idea what an alternator is, but red means bad, so I stop. Just 30 minutes later, Tim, the AA man arrives. Within 2 …