Search

Background:Facilitation is a widely used implementation method in quality improvement. Reviews reveal a variety of understandings of facilitation and facilitator roles. Research suggests that facilitation interventions should be flexible and tailored to the needs and circumstances of the receiving organisations. The complexity of the facilitation field and diversity of potential facilitator roles fosters a need to investigate in detail how facilitation is enacted. Hence, the purpose of this study was to explore the enactment of external peer facilitation in general practice in order to create a stronger basis for discussing and refining facilitation as an implementation method.Methods:The facilitation intervention under study was conducted in general practice in the Capital Region of Denmark in order to support an overall strategy for implementing chronic disease management programmes. We observed 30 facilitation visits in 13 practice settings and had interviews and focus groups with facilitators. We applied an explorative approach in data collection and analysis, and conducted an inductive thematic analysis.Results:The facilitators mainly enacted four facilitator roles: teacher, super user, peer and process manager. Thus, apart from trying to keep the process structured and focused the facilitators were engaged in didactic presentations and hands-on learning as they tried to pass on factual information and experienced based knowledge as well as their own enthusiasm towards implementing practice changes. While occasional challenges were observed with enacting these roles, more importantly we found that a coaching based role which was also envisioned in the intervention design was only sparsely enacted meaning that the facilitators did not enable substantial internal group discussions during their facilitation visits.Conclusion:Facilitation is a complex phenomenon both conceptually and in practice. This study complements existing research by showing how facilitation can be enacted in various ways and by suggesting that some facilitator roles are more likely to be enacted than others, depending on the context and intervention design and the professional background of the facilitators. This complexity requires caution when comparing and evaluating facilitation studies and highlights a need for precision and clarity about goals, roles, and competences when designing, conducting, and reporting facilitation interventions.

Aims: Recommendations for routine alcohol screening and brief counselling intervention in primary health care rest on results from intervention efficacy studies. By conducting a pragmatic controlled trial (PCT), we aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the WHO recommendations for screening and brief intervention (SBI) in general practice. Methods: A randomized PCT (brief counselling intervention vs no intervention) involving 39 Danish general practitioners (GPs). Systematic screening of 6897 adults led to inclusion of 906 risky drinkers, and research follow-up on 537 of these after 12–14 months. Outcome measures focused on patients' acceptance of screening and intervention and their self-reported alcohol consumption. Results: Patient acceptance of screening and intervention −10.3% ( N = 794) of the target population ( N = 7, 691) explicitly refused screening. All intervention group subjects ( N = 442) were exposed to an instant brief counselling session while only 17.9% of them (79/442) attended a follow-up consultation that was offered by their GP. Consumption Changes At one-year follow-up, average weekly consumption had increased by 0.7 drinks in both comparison groups. As secondary findings, we observed an indiscriminate absolute risk reduction (ARR = 0.08 (95% CI: −0.02; 0.18)) in male binge drinking, but adverse intervention effects for women on the secondary outcomes (binge drinking ARR = −0.30 (95% CI: −0.47; −0.09)). Conclusions: The results of brief interventions in everyday general practice performed on the basis of systematic questionnaire screening may fall short of theoretical expectations. When applied to non-selected groups in everyday general practice SBI may have little effect and engender diverse outcome. Women may be more susceptible to defensive reactions than men.

Background: Many patients consider the interface between secondary and primary care difficult, and in particular, the transition of care between these different parts of the healthcare system presents problems. This interface has long been recognized as a critical point for quality of care. The purpose of our study is to formulate solutions to problems identified by cancer patients and healthcare professionals during the transition from hospital back to general practice on completion of primary treatment for cancer. Methods: A qualitative study based on focus groups at a seminar for professionals in both primary and secondary healthcare. Participants discussed solutions to problems which had previously been identified in patient interviews and in focus groups with general practitioners (GPs), hospital doctors, and nursing staff. The data were analyzed using framework analysis. Results: Solutions, endorsed by all groups at the seminar to improve transition back to general practice after primary treatment for cancer, were: 1) To add nurses' discharge letters addressing psychosocial matters to medical discharge letters; 2) To send medical discharge letters earlier from some hospital departments to GPs; 3) To provide plans and future affiliations for patients when they leave a department, and 4) To arrange a return visit to general practice dedicated to discussion of the patients' cancer disease and the treatment experience. Conclusions: The transition of care of cancer patients appears too complex to be coordinated by administrative standards alone. We recommend that healthcare professionals are more engaged and present in the coordination of care across organizational boundaries.

Objective To determine the effectiveness of programmes of screening in general practice for excessive alcohol use and providing brief interventions. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that used screening as a precursor to brief intervention. Setting General practice. Main outcome measures Number needed to treat, proportion of patients positive on screening, proportion given brief interventions, and effect of screening. Results The eight studies included for meta-analysis all used health questionnaires for screening, and the brief interventions included feedback, information, and advice. The studies contained several sources of bias that might lead to overestimates of the effects of intervention. External validity was compromised because typically three out of four people identified by screening as excessive users of alcohol did not qualify for the intervention after a secondary assessment. Overall, in 1000 screened patients, 90 screened positive and required further assessment, after which 25 qualified for brief intervention; after one year 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 3.4) reported they drank less than the maximum recommended level. Conclusions Although even brief advice can reduce excessive drinking, screening in general practice does not seem to be an effective precursor to brief interventions targeting excessive alcohol use. This meta-analysis raises questions about the feasibility of screening in general practice for excessive use of alcohol.

Studies have suggested that wine drinkers are at lower risk of death than beer or spirits drinkers. The aim of this study is to examine whether the risk of becoming a heavy or excessive drinker differs among individuals who prefer different types of alcoholic beverages.In a longitudinal study of 10,330 moderate drinkers from Copenhagen, Denmark, we used logistic regression analyses to address the risk of becoming a heavy or excessive drinker (above 14 and 21 drinks per week, respectively, for women and above 21 and 35 drinks per week for men) according to preference of wine, beer, or spirits.Compared with those who preferred wine, those who preferred beer tended to have increased risk of becoming heavy and excessive drinkers. Women who preferred beer had odds ratios of 1.14 (95% CI = 0.87-1.50) for becoming heavy drinkers and 1.50 (95% CI = 0.93-2.43) for becoming excessive drinkers. For men who preferred beer the ORs were 1.16 (95% CI = 0.84-1.58) and 1.81 (95% CI = 0.85-3.82).The finding that moderate wine drinkers appear to be at lower risk of becoming heavy and excessive drinkers may add to the explanation of the reported beverage-specific differences in morbidity and mortality.

Background The visions of more integrated care have created new roles and accountabilities for organizations and professionals. Thus, professionals are increasingly expected to engage in boundary spanning activities in order to facilitate inter-organizational and inter-sectoral collaboration. However, this task can be difficult for individual actors and it is important to investigate the work and challenges of boundary spanners in various settings. This study explores the challenges related to a new boundary spanning role for general practitioners employed to facilitate collaboration between the municipalities and general practice. Methods The study is based on semi-structured interviews with ten general practitioners acting as municipal practice consultants in the Capital Region of Denmark. The transcribed interviews were analyzed in several steps organizing the material into a set of coherent and distinct categories covering the different types of challenges experienced by the informants. Results The main challenges of the general practitioners acting as boundary spanners were: 1) defining and negotiating the role in terms of tasks and competencies; 2) representing and mobilizing colleagues in general practice; 3) navigating in an unfamiliar organizational context. Conclusions The results support previous studies in emphasizing the difficult and multifaceted character of the boundary spanning role. While some of these challenges are not easily dealt with due to their structural causes, organizations employing boundary spanners should take note of these challenges and support their boundary spanners with matching resources and competencies.

BACKGROUND: The Danish health care sector is reorganising based on disease management programmes designed to secure integrated and high quality chronic care across hospitals, general practitioners and municipalities. The disease management programmes assign a central role to general practice; and in the Capital Region of Denmark a facilitator-based intervention was undertaken to support the implementation of the programmes in general practice. The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of this semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention.METHOD: The study was a stepped-wedge, randomised, controlled trial among general practices in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention group was offered three one-hour visits by a facilitator. The intervention was semi-tailored to the perceived needs as defined by each general practice, and the practices could choose from a list of possible topics. The control group was a delayed intervention group. The primary outcome was change in the number of annual chronic disease check-ups. Secondary outcomes were: changes in the number of annual check-ups for type 2 diabetes (DM2) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); changes in the number of spirometry tests, changes in the use of ICPC diagnosis coding and patient stratification; sign-up for a software program for patient overview; and reduction in number of practices with few annual chronic disease check-ups.RESULTS: We randomised 189 general practices: 96 practices were allocated to the intervention group and 93 to the delayed intervention group. For the primary outcome, 94 and 89 practices were analysed. Almost every outcome improved from baseline to follow-up in both allocation groups. At follow-up there was no difference between allocation groups for the primary outcome (p = 0.1639). However, some secondary outcomes favoured the intervention: a higher reported use of ICPC diagnosis coding for DM2 and COPD (p = 0.0050, p = 0.0243 respectively), stratification for COPD (p = 0.0185) and a faster initial sign-up rate for the software program.CONCLUSION: The mixed results from this study indicate that a semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention of relatively low intensity is unlikely to add substantially to the implementation of disease management programmes for DM2 and COPD in a context marked by important concurrent initiatives (including financial incentives and mandatory registry participation) aimed at moving all practices towards changes in chronic care.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01297075.

To explore the reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice.Qualitative interviews with general practitioners and members of the project group.General practice clinics in the Region of Northern Jutland in Denmark.Twelve general practitioners.The experiences and reflections of the involved professionals with regard to system use and non-use.While most respondents were initially positive towards the idea of reporting and learning from patient safety incidents, they actually reported very few incidents. The major reasons for the low reporting rates are found to be a perceived lack of practical usefulness, issues of time and effort in a busy clinic with competing priorities, and considerations of appropriateness in relation to other professionals.The results suggest that the visions of formal, comprehensive, and systematic reporting of (and learning from) patient safety incidents will be quite difficult to realize in general practice. Future studies should investigate how various ways of organizing incident reporting at the regional level influence local activities of reporting and learning in general practice.

The objective of this study was to analyse Danish general practitioners' (GPs) a priori attitudes and expectations towards a nationwide mandatory accreditation programme.This study is based on a nationwide electronic survey comprising all Danish GPs (n = 3,403).A total of 1,906 (56%) GPs completed the questionnaire. In all, 861 (45%) had a negative attitude towards accreditation, whereas 429 (21%) were very positive or posi-tive. The negative attitudes towards accreditation were associated with being older, male and with working in a singlehanded practice. A regional difference was observed as well. GPs with negative expectations were more likely to agree that accreditation was a tool meant for external control (odds ratio (OR) = 1.87 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18-2.95)), less likely to agree that accreditation was a tool for quality improvement (OR = 0.018 (95% CI: 0.013-0.025)), more likely to agree that it would affect job satisfaction negatively (OR = 21.88 (95% CI: 16.10-29.72)), and they were generally less satisfied with their present job situation (OR = 2.51 (95% CI: 1.85-3.41)).Almost half of the GPs had negative attitudes towards accreditation.The three Research Units for General Practice in Odense, Aarhus and Copenhagen initiated and funded this study.The survey was recommended by the Danish Multipractice Committee (MPU 02-2015) and evaluated by the Danish Data Agency (2015-41-3684).