Search

Scand J Prim Health Care 2003;21:000-000. ISSN 0281-3432 Objective - To assess organisational determinants in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Design - A cross-sectional study. Setting and subjects - 130 general practices in The Netherlands. Data were collected using questionnaires. A causal model was designed and analysed by path analysis. Main outcome measures - Relationships between preventive activities, practice management and practice characteristics. Results - Important differences between adequacy of equipment and practice organisation were found. Record-keeping was significantly better when working experience of the GPs was less than 15 years, when the practice consisted only of female GPs, and when the practice had written protocols for cardiovascular disease management and the staff held regular scheduled meetings (teamwork). Teamwork also showed a significant relation with follow-up activities. The influence of non-measured variables in the model was considerable. Conclusion - In exploring the organisational setting as a barrier to prevention and disease management, the designed model showed no major effects. Despite the wide variety of practice organisational items investigated, a strong influence of non-measured variables was evident. Teamwork in the practices proved to be related to both follow-up and record-keeping. Younger and female GPs were further predictors of adequate record-keeping. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Assessment of patients’ responsiveness to a decision support tool for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). The booklet focuses on barriers at patient level. Methods: Process evaluation of an intervention in primary care. Patients at high or potentially high-cardiovascular risk were asked by their GP to prepare themselves for a second consultation in order to participate in decisions on risk management. Outcomes: Patients’ actually having read the booklet and returning for the second consultation; comprehension and perceived relevance of the information; perceived reassurance. Results: 17 GPs, in the intervention arm of a cluster RCT, issued 276 decision support tools during the first consultation and were instructed to ask them to return for a second consultation to discuss their CVD risk. Patients had a mean age of 54 years, 47% were male and 19% actually had a high cardiovascular risk. Data on 239 patients, a mixture of returnees and non-returnees, showed that they all read the booklet; comprehension was fair to good; 85% perceived the information as relevant; 68% of the patients felt reassured by the information. Satisfaction with the first consultation was higher in the non-returnees. Conclusions: Cardiovascular prevention spread over two consultations with use of a decision support tool for patients is not easily applicable for GPs. However, based on the findings of good patients’ responsiveness, we recommend further development and implementation of decision support tools in primary care. Practice implications: Decision support for primary CV-prevention is welcomed by patients but needs further adjustment of both the GP and the organization of CV-prevention in primary care. Sharing information between professional and patient on a personal CV-risk management plan is difficult, more training is needed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The aim of this study was to assess the provision of information and advice by general practitioners (GPs) with respect to patients with hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, or cardiovascular disease. The study relied on the prospective recording of patient encounters by GPs. Performance indicators were selected from the Dutch national guidelines for general practice. The GPs (n=195) completed 5330 encounter forms. High levels of performance were found with regard to advice on smoking cessation and the provision of information (e.g. information about alarm symptoms or the aim of treatment). Low levels of performance were found with regard to advice on salt consumption, alcohol consumption, weight reduction and physical exercise for patients with hypertension. Discussion of compliance with the therapy in case of hypercholesterolaemia, advice on physical exercise in case of angina pectoris and advice on foot care in case of peripheral arterial disease also showed a substantial gap between recommended and actual care. Performance rates varied considerably across GPs. The patient and GP characteristics examined in this study contributed very little to the clinical performance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]