Search

Background: Increasing numbers of primary care practitioners in refugee resettlement countries are providing care to refugees. Access to trained interpreters is a priority for these practitioners, but there are many barriers to the implementation of interpreted consultations in routine care. There is a lack of international, theoretically informed research. The purpose of this paper is to understand barriers to interpreter use in primary care consultations in four resettlement countries using Normalisation Process Theory. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with networks of primary care practitioners (PCPs) who care for refugees in Australia, Canada, Ireland and the US (n = 314). We analysed qualitative data from the survey about barriers to interpreter use (n = 178). We completed an inductive thematic analysis, iteratively developed a Normalisation Process Theory (NPT)-informed coding frame and then mapped the emergent findings onto the theory's construct about enacting interpreted consultations. Results: In all four countries, the use of an interpreter presented communication and interaction challenges between providers and patients, which can impede the goals of primary care consultations. Primary care practitioners did not always have confidence in interpreted consultations and described poor professional practice by some interpreters. There was variation across countries, and inconsistency within countries, in the availability of trained interpreters and funding sources. Conclusion: There are shared and differential barriers to implementation of interpreted consultations in a consistent and sustained way in the four countries studied. These findings can be used to inform country-specific and international level policies and interventions focusing on improving skills and resources for interpreted consultations to improve implementation of interpreted primary care consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although patient-centred care has become increasingly important across all medical specialties, when it comes to end of life care, research has shown that treatments ordered are not often concordant with people's expressed preferences. Patient and family engagement in Advance Care Planning (ACP) in the primary care setting could improve the concordance between patients' wishes and the healthcare received when patients cannot speak for themselves. The aim of this study was to better understand the barriers faced by older patients regarding talking to their family members and family physicians about ACP. Methods: In this multi-site cross-sectional study, three free text questions regarding reasons patients found it difficult to discuss ACP with their families or their family physicians were part of a self-administered questionnaire about patients' knowledge of and engagement in ACP. The questionnaire, which included closed ended questions followed by three probing open ended questions, was distributed in 20 family practices across 3 provinces in Canada. The free text responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and form the basis of this paper. Results: One hundred two participants provided an analyzable response to the survey when asked why they haven't talked to someone about ACP. Two hundred fifty-four answered the question about talking to their physician and 340 answered the question about talking to family members. Eight distinct themes emerged from the free text response analysis: 1. They were too young for ACP; 2. The topic is too emotional; 3. The Medical Doctor (MD) should be responsible for bringing up ACP 4. A fear of negatively impacting the patient-physician relationship; 5. Not enough time in appointments; 6. Concern about family dynamics; 7. It's not a priority; and 8. A lack of knowledge about ACP. Conclusions: Patients in our sample described many barriers to ACP discussions, including concerns about the effect these discussions may have on relationships with both family members and family physicians, and issues relating to patients' knowledge and interpretation of the importance, responsibility for, or relevance of ACP itself. Family physicians may be uniquely placed to leverage the longitudinal, person- centred relationship they have with patients to mitigate some of these barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Goal setting is a recommended approach in clinical care that can help individuals with multi-morbidities and their caregivers manage chronic conditions. In this paper, the types of goals that were important for older persons with multi-morbidities were explored from the perspectives of patients, their caregivers and physicians. Comparisons of goals were made across each patient, caregiver and physician triad to determine alignment. Methods: The study was a qualitative descriptive study facilitated through semi-structured one-on-one interviews. The study took place between May and October 2012 at a Family Health Team located in Ontario, Canada. The sample included 28 family medicine patients, their informal caregivers and family physicians. Socio-demographic data were analyzed via descriptive statistics in SPSS Version 17. Open ended questions pertaining to patient goals of care were analyzed thematically using NVivo9. Themes were derived on patient care goals for each of the participant groups (patients, caregivers and family physicians). Following this, alignment of goals across each of the triads was examined. Goal alignment was defined as concurrence on at least one goal by all three parties in a particular triad (i.e., patient, caregiver and family physician). Results: Just over half of the patients were male (56%); they had an average age of 82.3 years and 4.61 health conditions. Most of the caregivers were female (82%); and 61% were a spouse of the care recipient. At the aggregate level, common goals expressed among patients, caregivers and family physicians were the maintenance of functional independence of patients and the management of their symptoms or functional challenges. Despite these common goals at the aggregate level, little alignment of goals was found when looking across patient-caregiver and physician triads. Lack of alignment tended to occur when patients had unstable or declining functional or cognitive health; when safety threats were noted; and when enhanced care services were required. Conclusions: The data suggest that goal divergence tends to occur when patients are less medically stable. While goal divergence may be expected due to the different roles and responsibilities of each of the players involved, these perspectives should be illuminated when building care plans. Further research is required to observe the extent to which goal setting occurs in family practice as well as how it can be embedded as a standard of practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]