BackgroundFor health services to help people plan for or prevent pregnancy, health professionals need an acceptable way to identify individuals’ preferences.ObjectiveTo assess women’s views on the acceptability of specific questions about pregnancy preferences when asked by health professionals in a variety of primary care contexts.MethodsOne-to-one in-depth interviews with 13 women aged 18–48 from across the UK, involving role-play scenarios and ranking exercises. Interviews covered a range of settings and health professionals, different question wording, and ways of asking (in person or digitally). We conducted a thematic Framework Analysis, focussing on themes relating to feelings and preferences.ResultsWomen were generally open to being asked about pregnancy preferences if they understood the rationale, it was asked in a relevant context, such as in women’s health-related consultations, and there was follow-up. After signposting, an open question, such as ‘How would you feel about having a baby in the next year?’ was preferred in a face-to-face context as it enabled discussion. While some women valued a face-to-face discussion with a health professional, for others the privacy and convenience of a digital option was preferred; methods should be tailored to the target population.ConclusionDiscussion of pregnancy preferences via a range of formats is acceptable to, and valued by, women in the UK across a range of primary care settings. Acceptability to health professionals and feasibility of implementation needs further exploration and would benefit from greater public awareness of the benefits of pregnancy planning.

Multimorbidity management poses significant challenges for general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study is to analyse the role of resilience and social support on the burden experienced by GPs in managing patients with multiple health conditions in Portugal. Cross-sectional quantitative study conducted among GPs in Portugal using an online questionnaire that included validated measurement tools: Questionnaire of Evaluation of Burden of Management of Multimorbidity in General and Family Medicine (SoGeMM-MGF), European Portuguese Version of the Resilience Scale (ER14), and the Oslo Social Support Scale-3 (OSSS-3) in Portuguese. A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the factors influencing the burden of managing multimorbidity. Two hundred and thirty-nine GPs were included, with 76.6% being female and a median age of 35 years. Most participants were specialists (66.9%) and had less than a decade of experience managing multimorbidity. Over 70% had not received specific training in multimorbidity. Female GPs and those with a higher proportion of multimorbid patients in the registries experienced higher burden levels. A multivariate regression model with moderation revealed that the effect of resilience on burden varied depending on the level of social support. Higher resilience was associated with higher burden in the "Poor Social Support" category, while it was associated with lower burden in the "Moderate Social Support" and "Strong Social Support" categories, although not statistically significant. The study highlights the importance of GPs' social support and resilience in managing the burden of multimorbidity, with poor social support potentially worsening the effects of high resilience.

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of SARS-COV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic on primary care management (frequency of monitoring activities, regular prescriptions, and test results) of older adults with common chronic conditions (diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease) and to examine whether any changes were associated with age, sex, neighbourhood income, multimorbidity, and frailty. A research database from a sub-set of McMaster University Sentinel and Information Collaboration family practices was used to identify patients ≥65 years of age with a frailty assessment and 1 or more of the conditions. Patient demographics, chronic conditions, and chronic disease management information were retrieved. Changes from 14 months pre to 14 months since the pandemic were described and associations between patient characteristics and changes in monitoring, prescriptions, and test results were analysed using regression models. The mean age of the 658 patients was 75 years. While the frequency of monitoring activities and prescriptions related to chronic conditions decreased overall, there were no clear trends across sub-groups of age, sex, frailty level, neighbourhood income, or number of conditions. The mean values of disease monitoring parameters (e.g. blood pressure) did not considerably change. The only significant regression model demonstrated that when controlling for all other variables, patients with 2 chronic conditions and those with 4 or more conditions were twice as likely to have reduced numbers of eGFR (Estimated glomerular filtration rate) measures compared to those with only 1 condition ((OR (odds ratio) = 2.40, 95% CI [1.19, 4.87]); (OR = 2.19, 95% CI [1.12, 4.25]), respectively). In the first 14 months of the pandemic, the frequency of common elements of chronic condition care did not notably change overall or among higher-risk patients.

Primary care clinicians play a critical role in diagnosis and treatment of migraine, yet barriers exist. This national survey assessed barriers to diagnosis and treatment of migraine, preferred approaches to receiving migraine education, and familiarity with recent therapeutic innovations. The survey was created by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) and Eli Lilly and Company and distributed to a national sample through the AAFP National Research Network and affiliated PBRNs from mid-April through the end of May 2021. Initial analyses were descriptive statistics, ANOVAs, and Chi-Square tests. Individual and multivariate models were completed for: adult patients seen in a week; respondent years since residency; and adult patients with migraine seen in a week. Respondents who saw fewer patients were more likely to indicate unclear patient histories were a barrier to diagnosing. Respondents who saw more patients with migraine were more likely to indicate the priority of other comorbidities and insufficient time were barriers to diagnosing. Respondents who had been out of residency longer were more likely to change a treatment plan due to attack impact, quality of life, and medication cost. Respondents who had been out of residency shorter were more likely to prefer to learn from migraine/headache research scientists and use paper headache diaries. Results demonstrate differences in familiarity with migraine diagnosis and treatment options based on patients seen and years since residency. To maximise appropriate diagnosis within primary care, targeted efforts to increase familiarity and decrease barriers to migraine care should be implemented.

BackgroundOlder patients with multimorbidity are under-represented in experimental research.ObjectiveTo explore the barriers and facilitators to general practitioner (GP) and older patient recruitment and retention in a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT).MethodThis descriptive study uses qualitative and quantitative data from a cluster RCT, designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a medicines optimization intervention. The SPPiRE cluster RCT enrolled 51 general practices and 404 patients aged ≥65 years and prescribed ≥15 medicines. Quantitative data were collected from all recruited practices and 32 additional practices who were enrolled, but unable to recruit sufficient participants. Qualitative data were collected from purposive samples of intervention GPs (18/26), patients (27/208), and researcher logs and analysed thematically using inductive coding.ResultsEnrolment rates for practices and patients were 37% and 25%, respectively. Barriers to GP recruitment were lack of resources and to patient recruitment were difficulty understanding trial material and concern about medicines being taken away. GPs’ primary motivation was perceived importance of the research question, whereas patients’ primary motivation was trust in their GP. All general practices were retained. Thirty-five patients (8.6%) were lost to follow-up for primary outcomes, mainly because they had died and 45% did not return patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).ConclusionPatient retention for the primary outcome was high, as it was collected directly from patient records. Patient completion of PROM data was poor, reflecting difficulty in understanding trial material. Recruiting older patients with multimorbidity to clinical trials is possible but requires significant resource and planning.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12752680.

In September 2021, Family Practice joined with over 200 medical journals publishing a joint editorial which called climate change “the greatest threat to public health.”1 In 2023, we have decided that it is time to do more. As far as we know this is the first ever special edition on Climate Crisis in a Family Medicine journal: however given current trajectories for planetary warming, it is unlikely to be the last. Primary care clinicians working in 2023 are on the frontline, dealing with the healthcare impacts of record-breaking flooding, wildfires, and heatwaves. The physical and mental health impacts of Australian bushfires are explored in this issue in both older adults2 and new mothers3 with an emphasis on learnings and opportunities for primary care. The climate crisis has specific impacts on rural communities that are explored in an international review which also outlines key issues for healthcare utilization.4 Further, the disproportionate impact of the climate crisis for socioeconomically ­disadvantaged groups is explored by Blane et al.5 and medical-legal partnerships are highlighted by Anderson et al. for their role in mitigating climate impacts in disadvantaged populations.6

Online health information (OHI) has been shown to influence patients' health decisions and behaviours. OHI about statins has created confusion among healthcare professionals and the public. This study explored the views and experiences of patients with high cardiovascular risk on OHI-seeking about statins and how OHI influenced their decision. This was a qualitative study using semi-structured in-depth interviews. An interpretive description approach with thematic analysis was used for data analysis. An urban primary care clinic in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Patients aged 18 years and above who had high cardiovascular risk and sought OHI on statins were recruited. A total of 20 participants were interviewed. The age of the participants ranged from 38 to 74 years. Twelve (60%) participants took statins for primary cardiovascular disease prevention. The duration of statin use ranged from 2 weeks to 30 years. Six themes emerged from the data analysis: (i) seeking OHI throughout the disease trajectory, (ii) active and passive approaches to seeking OHI, (iii) types of OHI, (iv) views about statin-related OHI, (v) influence of OHI on patients' health decisions, and (vi) patient-doctor communication about OHI. This study highlights the changing information needs throughout patient journeys, suggesting the opportunity to provide needs-oriented OHI to patients. Unintentional passive exposure to OHI appears to have an influence on patients' adherence to statins. The quality of patient-doctor communication in relation to OHI-seeking behaviour remains a critical factor in patient decision-making.

In the

Paracetamol and ibuprofen are the most preferred analgesics for pain and fever management in children. Prescribing of these drugs in supratherapeutic doses may predispose to their toxicity. We aimed to compare prescribing patterns and potential overdosing of paracetamol and ibuprofen in primary care for <12-year-old children. We analysed paracetamol- and ibuprofen-containing prescriptions (PCPs, n = 173,575 and ICPs, n = 145,655) of 1- to 11-year-old children, issued by 3:1 systematically sampled primary care physicians (n = 1,431) in Istanbul during 2016. We compared drug use parameters and prescriptions surpassing daily and single-use dose limits for paracetamol and ibuprofen. We identified that 29.9% of PCPs and 20.8% of ICPs were generated for those aged 1-2 years. Concomitant analgesic use was higher in ICPs than in PCPs (15.1% vs. 12.8%). We found that 4.4% of PCPs and 3.1% of ICPs exceeded maximum daily dose limit of paracetamol and ibuprofen, respectively (P < 0.001). This was more common in girls (5.1% and 3.3%, respectively) and at 1 year of age in both groups (9.2% and 8.5%, respectively). Single-use supratherapeutic dosing was encountered in 16.5% of PCPs and 13.2% of ICPs (P < 0.001, pessimistic model) and in 8.6% of PCPs and 10.6% of ICPs (P < 0.001, optimistic model). Paracetamol and ibuprofen were generally used in primary care for similar clinical conditions with subtle differences. However, more pronounced in younger children and girls, potential overdosing seems to be more practiced for paracetamol than ibuprofen both in terms of maximal daily and single-use setting.

Recent evidence suggests that the first consultation with a general practitioner (GP) for symptoms of depression may be more than just a vehicle for assessment and management planning (as current guidelines imply). To identify what patients find helpful, or otherwise, in their first consultation for low mood with a GP. A cross-sectional questionnaire and interview study of patients with low mood who had recently consulted their GP, in the North of England. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding the consultation, and a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), within 2 weeks. They were also invited to take part in a face-face interview with a researcher. Both sources of data were subjected to qualitative thematic analysis. Thirty-seven questionnaires were returned; 5 interviews took place. The majority of participants felt better after consulting a GP for the first time for low mood. The factors most commonly cited as helpful were "being listened to" and "understanding or empathy from the GP." Others included "admitting the problem," "being reassured of normality," and "being provided with optimism or hope for change." The most commonly reported difficulty was the patients' struggle to express themselves. Patients often felt that GP follow-up was inadequate. These results suggest that the therapeutic benefit of the GP consultation is under-recognized in current guidelines. The results of our study will provide crucial information as to how such consultations can be tailored to improve patient satisfaction.