Search

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic has changed various spheres of healthcare. The general practitioners (GPs) have widely replaced face-to-face consultations with telephone or video consultation (VC) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Using video consultations for health service deliveries is an entirely new way of practicing for many GPs. Yet, this transition process has largely been carried out with no formal guidelines, which may have caused implementation barriers. This study presents a rapid-cycle co-production approach to develop a guide to assist VC implementation in general practice.Objective:The aim of this paper was to describe the developmental phases of the guide and to summarize the evaluation made by general practice users.Methods:The development of a guide for VC in general practice was structured as a stepped process based on co-production and prototyping processes. We used an iterative framework based on rapid qualitative analyses and interdisciplinary collaboration. Thus, the guide was developed in small, repeated cycles of development, implementation, evaluation, and adaptation with a continuous exchange between research and practice. The data collection process was structured in three main phases. First, we made a literature review and qualitative prestudies. Second, we facilitated co-production with stakeholders through four workshops with GPs, a group interview with patient representatives, and individual revisions by general practitioners. Third, nationwide testing was conducted in five general practice clinics and was followed by an evaluation of the guide through interviews with GPs.Results:A rapid-cycle co-production approach was used to explore the needs in general practice in connection with the implementation of VC and to develop useful, relevant, and easily understandable guiding materials. Our findings suggest that a guide for VC should include advice and recommendations regarding the organization of VC, the technical setup, the appropriate target groups, patients’ use of VC, the performance of VC, and the arrangement of booking.Conclusions:The combination of co-production, prototyping, small iterations, and rapid data analysis is a suitable approach when contextually rich, hands-on guide materials are urgently needed. Moreover, this method could provide an efficient way of developing relevant guide materials for general practice to aid the implementation of new technology beyond pandemic times. However, their potential can only be realized if the generated materials are adopted and sustained in practice. Hence, such a developmental approach should involve a plan for the continued engagement of stakeholders. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed various spheres of health care. General practitioners (GPs) have widely replaced face-to-face consultations with telephone or video consultations (VCs) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Using VCs for health service delivery is an entirely new way of practicing for many GPs. However, this transition process has largely been conducted with no formal guidelines, which may have caused implementation barriers. This study presents a rapid cycle coproduction approach for developing a guide to assist VC implementation in general practice. Objective: The aim of this paper is to describe the developmental phases of the VC guide to assist general practices in implementing VCs and summarize the evaluation made by general practice users. Methods: The development of a guide for VC in general practice was structured as a stepped process based on the coproduction and prototyping processes. We used an iterative framework based on rapid qualitative analyses and interdisciplinary collaborations. Thus, the guide was developed in small, repeated cycles of development, implementation, evaluation, and adaptation, with a continuous exchange between research and practice. The data collection process was structured in 3 main phases. First, we conducted a literature review, recorded observations, and held informal and semistructured interviews. Second, we facilitated coproduction with stakeholders through 4 workshops with GPs, a group interview with patient representatives, and individual revisions by GPs. Third, nationwide testing was conducted in 5 general practice clinics and was followed by an evaluation of the guide through interviews with GPs. Results: A rapid cycle coproduction approach was used to explore the needs of general practice in connection with the implementation of VC and to develop useful, relevant, and easily understandable guiding materials. Our findings suggest that a guide for VCs should include advice and recommendations regarding the organization of VCs, the technical setup, the appropriate target groups, patients' use of VCs, the performance of VCs, and the arrangements for booking a VC. Conclusions: The combination of coproduction, prototyping, small iterations, and rapid data analysis is a suitable approach when contextually rich, hands-on guide materials are urgently needed. Moreover, this method could provide an efficient way of developing relevant guide materials for general practice to aid the implementation of new technology beyond the pandemic period.

Previous research has shown social inequality in type 2 diabetes prevalence and that socially vulnerable type 2 diabetes patients benefit less than average from health services. Based on ethnographic fieldwork carried out between February 2017 and March 2018 in a Danish specialized outpatient clinic, this article focuses on patient work among socially vulnerable type 2 diabetes patients. Through attending to the border zone between formal health care and self-care, we show that patients do a lot of work requiring skills, resources, and initiative, to access and benefit from formal care. This work is complex and implicit in the organization of care. Patients’ social situations, especially their employment situation, complicate getting patient work done. Attending to patient work and implicit tasks in care organization may help us to see how social inequality in type 2 diabetes outcomes develops, and may be combated.

Background Type 2 diabetes cluster in lower social groups and people with type 2 diabetes from lower social groups experience more complications, benefit less from health services and live shorter lives than people with type 2 diabetes from higher social groups. Different logics govern diabetes care and potentially influence the possibility of socially vulnerable type 2 diabetes patients to access and benefit from health services. In order to understand which practice and underlying logic enable socially vulnerable type 2 diabetes patients to access and benefit from diabetes care we aim to describe what professionals at a specialized diabetes clinic do to adjust services to patient’s needs and make the tasks involved in diabetes care doable for socially vulnerable patients and how this work is embedded in an organizational and moral context. Methods Ethnographic fieldwork combining participant observation and interviews was carried out between February 2017 and March 2018 in a specialized diabetes clinic located in a socially deprived area in the capital region of Denmark. Sixteen patients (9 male, 7 female, aged 35-73 years) and 12 professionals (7 doctors, 4 nurses, 1 secretary) participated in the study. We used Annemarie Mol’s concept of “the logic of care” to guide our analysis. Results Our analysis shows that the logic of care and the care practices in this clinic are characterized by a needs-based approach to treatment involving adjustment of services (permeability, timing, and content) and seeing the patient as a person with many needs. Throughout our description of selected care practices, we both characterize how health professionals practice this particular logic of care and the organizational and normative conditions that this logic is entangled with. Conclusions Practicing diabetes care based on patients’ needs involves individualization, something often described as an element of patient centred care. Our study shows that this ideal of individualization and adjustment of treatment is possible in practice. Organizational flexibility and an organizational culture that values patient needs enable needs-based care. In order for socially vulnerable type 2 diabetes patients to benefit from health services it is necessary to create conditions under which professionals can attend to these patients’ multiple and complex needs. Adjusting care to these needs demand a variety of professional efforts some of which are hardly predictable or standardisable.

Inequality in health is increasing. People with many problems often lack energy to improve well-being and reduce their problems. This study analyses how psycho-socially challenged younger (20- to 44-year-old) patients described their own resources to reach lifestyle goals or alter life circumstances. Within the context of a randomized controlled trial, Danish participants had two structured preventive person-centred consultations with their general practitioner. Consultations focused on well-being, salutogenesis, resources, barriers and support of autonomy. Using the qualitative method: Systematic Text Condensation, we made thematic cross-analysis of patients’ goal-specific resource statements described at the first consultation. Of the 209 patients, 191 (91%) chose one or two goals for a better life next year; nearly all (179) could recall and describe which resources they would use to reach their goal. We categorized resource statements into (i) personal constitution as ‘willpower’ and ‘tenacity’; (ii) network, e.g. family; (iii) personal experience with identical or similar problems. Some patients needed to free up resources by handling psychological problems before being able to focus on lifestyle goals. The study demonstrates that patients with particular psycho-social problems could describe essential resources in a structured, salutogenic, preventive consultation with their general practitioner. Reflecting intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, these resources reflected dimensions of essential health theories like sense of coherence, self-efficacy and self-determination theory. Increased awareness of these resources seems essential for vulnerable patients by improving psychological well-being and optimism, thereby facilitating health-related changes. This may be an important step to reducing inequality in health.

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has changed various spheres of health care. General practitioners (GPs) have widely replaced face-to-face consultations with telephone or video consultations (VCs) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Using VCs for health service delivery is an entirely new way of practicing for many GPs. However, this transition process has largely been conducted with no formal guidelines, which may have caused implementation barriers. This study presents a rapid cycle coproduction approach for developing a guide to assist VC implementation in general practice. OBJECTIVE The aim of this paper is to describe the developmental phases of the VC guide to assist general practices in implementing VCs and summarize the evaluation made by general practice users. METHODS The development of a guide for VC in general practice was structured as a stepped process based on the coproduction and prototyping processes. We used an iterative framework based on rapid qualitative analyses and interdisciplinary collaborations. Thus, the guide was developed in small, repeated cycles of development, implementation, evaluation, and adaptation, with a continuous exchange between research and practice. The data collection process was structured in 3 main phases. First, we conducted a literature review, recorded observations, and held informal and semistructured interviews. Second, we facilitated coproduction with stakeholders through 4 workshops with GPs, a group interview with patient representatives, and individual revisions by GPs. Third, nationwide testing was conducted in 5 general practice clinics and was followed by an evaluation of the guide through interviews with GPs. RESULTS A rapid cycle coproduction approach was used to explore the needs of general practice in connection with the implementation of VC and to develop useful, relevant, and easily understandable guiding materials. Our findings suggest that a guide for VCs should include advice and recommendations regarding the organization of VCs, the technical setup, the appropriate target groups, patients’ use of VCs, the performance of VCs, and the arrangements for booking a VC. CONCLUSIONS The combination of coproduction, prototyping, small iterations, and rapid data analysis is a suitable approach when contextually rich, hands-on guide materials are urgently needed. Moreover, this method could provide an efficient way of developing relevant guide materials for general practice to aid the implementation of new technology beyond the pandemic period.

ObjectivePatients with multimorbidity may carry a large symptom burden. Symptoms are often what drive patients to seek healthcare and they also assist doctors with diagnosis. We examined whether symptom burden is additive in people with multimorbidity compared with people with a single morbidity.DesignThis is a longitudinal cohort study drawing on questionnaire and Danish national registry data. Multimorbidity was defined as having diagnoses from at least two out of ten morbidity groups. Associations between morbidity groups and symptom burden were estimated with multivariable models.ParticipantsIn 2012, 47 452 participants from the Danish Symptom Cohort answered a questionnaire about symptoms (36 symptoms in total), including whether symptoms were affecting their daily activities (impairment score) and their worries about present symptoms (worry score) (the highest score among the 36 symptoms on a 0–4 scale).Main outcome measureThe primary outcome was symptom burden.ResultsParticipants without morbidity reported 4.77 symptoms (out of 36 possible). Participants with one, two or three morbidities reported more symptoms than patients without morbidity (0.95 (CI 0.86 to 1.03), 1.87 (CI 1.73 to 2.01) and 2.89 (CI 2.66 to 3.12), respectively). Furthermore, they reported a higher impairment score (0.36 (0.32 to 0.39), 0.65 (0.60 to 0.70) and 1.06 (0.98 to 1.14)) and a higher worry score (0.34 (0.31 to 0.37), 0.62 (0.57 to 0.66) and 1.02 (0.94 to 1.10)) than participants without morbidity. In 45 possible combinations of multimorbidity (participants with two morbidities), interaction effects were additive in 37, 41 and 36 combinations for the number of symptoms, impairment score and worry score, respectively.ConclusionParticipants without morbidity reported a substantial number of symptoms. Having a single morbidity or multimorbidity resulted in approximately one extra symptom for each extra morbidity. In most combinations of multimorbidity, symptom burden was additive.

Objective: To explore how agenda navigation may be accomplished underway in consultations covering multiple topics, we identified and analyzed one GP’s communicative strategies. Design, setting, and subjects: A qualitative observational case study with linguistic microanalysis of an exemplary consultation between a female patient with diabetes and her male GP. We used speech act theory to identify communicative actions that indicated agenda navigation by the GP in transitions between episodes concerning ten topics. Results: Microanalysis revealed different aspects of agenda navigation by the GP using speech acts, especially ways of opening or closing an episode. The opening of episodes was characterized by speech acts accepting the patient’s request to discuss a topic, mostly at the beginning of the consultation. Speech acts to inform or to request information from the patient dominated later in the consultation. The GP closed all episodes using speech acts to instruct or appraise the patient, or to make agreements and plans. Conclusion and practice implications: Skilful agenda navigation is an important tool for consultations covering multiple issues and could be further developed for medical education. The opening and closing of episodes were vital communicative strategies supporting patient-centered communication in a complex consultation while maintaining the focus of the consultation agenda.KEY POINTS While traditional consultation models cover one health problem, GP consultations often include many patient issues in each session. Linguistic microanalysis of speech acts helped to identify communication strategies in a GP consultation with multiple topics. The GP conducted agenda navigation by distinctly opening and closing episodes concerning specific topics. Episodes were opened by accepting, informing, and requesting and closed by instruction, appraisal, making agreements, or plans.

Aim: To assess the feasibility of a patient-centered complex intervention for multimorbidity (CIM) based on general practice in collaboration with community health-care centers and outpatient clinics. Methods: Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, diagnoses of two or more of three chronic conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic heart conditions), and a hospital contact during the previous year. The CIM included extended consultations and nurse care manager support in general practice and intensified cross-sectorial collaboration. Elements included a structured care plan based on patients’ care goals, coordination of services, and, if appropriate, shifting outpatient clinic visits to general practice, medication review, referral to rehabilitation, and home care. The acceptability dimension of feasibility was assessed with validated questionnaires, observations, and focus groups. Results: Forty-eight patients were included (mean age 72.2 (standard deviation (SD) 9.5, range 52–89); 23 (48%) were men. Thirty-seven patients had two diseases; most commonly COPD and cardiovascular disease (46%), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular disease (23%), and COPD and diabetes (15%). Eleven (23%) patients had all three conditions. Focus group interviews with patients with multimorbidity identified three main themes: (1) lack of care coordination existed across health-care sectors before the CIM, (2) extended consultations provided better care coordination, and (3) patients want to be involved in planning their treatment and care. In focus groups, health-care professionals discussed two main themes: (1) patient-centered care and (2) culture and organizational change. Completion rates for questionnaires were 98% (47/48). Conclusions: Patients and health-care professionals found the CIM acceptable.

I sundhedsvæsnet organiseres hovedparten af alle interventioner omkring pa- tientkategorier eller patientpopulationer. Multisygdomsbegrebet og arbejdet med de såkaldt multisyge borgere vinder for tiden stadig større udbredelse; der opret- tes multisygdomsklinikker og multimorbiditet er blevet en del af den sundheds- politiske dagsorden. Med dette nummer undersøger vi, hvordan begrebet bruges i forskningen i dag og hvilke betydnings-systemer/praksisser, det knyttes sammen med.

Introduktionen til nummeret Multisygdom

ObjectivesAdherence to treatment has proven to require the involvement of patients in treatment and care planning. This process involves incorporating patient knowledge, or knowledge about the patients’ everyday life, into the clinical encounter. This article explores the disclosure practices of such knowledge from older adults with multimorbidity.MethodsThis was an 18-month qualitative study among 14 older adults with multimorbidity living in Denmark. A thematic analysis was applied, focusing on perceptions of patient knowledge and disclosure practices among the participating patients.ResultsOlder adults with multimorbidity have various reasons for not disclosing personal knowledge. The results present three different domains of what we termed discarded patient knowledge: (1) knowledge that had no direct biomedical relevance from participants’ perspective; (2) knowledge considered too private; and (3) knowledge assumed to position one as inferior.DiscussionThe participants made judgments on what they believed was welcome in the clinical encounter, framing their knowledge within the purview of biomedicine. Participants’ disclosure practices showed that personal knowledge is sometimes not recognized as important for health and care by participants themselves. Knowledge that could have influenced practitioners’ understanding of the problem and provided different solutions, is argued to be discarded patient knowledge.

Introduction: The prevalence of multimorbidity is high in Denmark. Care provision in multimorbid patients is often characterized to be fragmented, the quality level is not satisfactory, and patients suffer from both disease and treatment burden. We previously reported a patient centered organizational model aiming to improve quality and coordination of care for complex multimorbid patients followed in general practice in Denmark. The basic elements of the model are: extension of consultation time in general practice; establishment of a care manager function; improved inter-sectorial communication of care plans; increased rates of referrals to rehabilitation and medication review; transfer of ambulatory controls to general practice. The objective of this study is to assess feasibility of the organizational model for further evaluation in a RCT. Methods: The model was implemented in a large general practice clinic in Copenhagen. The patients were selected from a patient list generated by the practice’s IT provider. Data on chronic conditions, demographics, and medical measures was collected. Patients answered PACIC and EDQ5 questionnaires. Further, focus group interviews were performed with patients and professionals to obtain information on important subjects such as patient centeredness, level of integration of care, information flow, and medication satisfactory and safety. Results: Forty-six patients with at least two of the three selected chronic conditions (diabetes, heart and lung disease) were included in the study. The mean (SD) age of the included patients was 72 years (9,3); 48% were men. The PACIC questionnaire showed fair perceived quality of care, the EDQ5 questionnaire showed very low health related quality of life. Focus group interviews with the patients revealed that they were satisfied with longer consultation time; perception of the care coordination initiatives depended on the practice personnel involved. Focus group interviews with the professionals pointed towards communication barriers between general practice and ambulatories; emphasized the importance of patient centered approach to realize patients’ daily life problems; and elucidated ambiguity of longer consultation time as both necessary for good care quality and often practically impossible on a daily basis. Discussion: Studies show that organizational innovations in general practice, such as extended consultation time or patient care reviews, can improve continuity of care for patients with multimorbidity. Conclusions: The developed patient centered organizational model for multimorbidity based in general practice in Denmark should undergo a focused revision for a RCT assessment. Lessons learned: The development of feasible organizational innovations in existing health- and social care systems is a task that requires collaborative actions and several iterations. Limitations: The developed model was tested in one large general practice clinic where several GPs, nurses and other practice personnel collaborate. As general practices in Denmark are heterogeneous, precautions should be taken with respect to generalization of the conclusions. Suggestions for future research: Model refinements and improvements important in the second iteration have been proposed: improve time allocation between GPs and practice personnel; share patients electronic medical records between professionals the different health organizations and social care sector; develop collaboration between the different organizations; and implement of strong leadership.

Background Research shows that many people with cardiac disease decline cardiac rehabilitation. There is little or no knowledge on how health professionals respond to these people. Objectives To investigate how nurses respond to people who do not wish to participate in cardiac rehabilitation and what influences the nurses´ approach towards these people. Design A qualitative study involving interviews and video-recordings using an analysis inspired by ethnographic principles and categorisation theory. Setting A rehabilitation clinic at a large hospital in the Capital Region of Denmark. Participants Five cardiac nurses and 28 people with cardiac disease. Methods We video-recorded the first consultation people with cardiac disease attended regarding cardiac rehabilitation, where the nurses followed up on these people's recovery, medication, lifestyle and need for rehabilitation. We conducted semi-structured interviews with the cardiac nurses. We asked the nurses about the purpose of the first rehabilitation consultation and how they handle people with cardiac disease who say no to rehabilitation. The nurses were shown video-clips with the people they had talked to in their consultation in order to facilitate a dialogue. Results When people with cardiac disease were reluctant to participate in rehabilitation, the nurses made an individual assessment of how much effort to put into motivating them, taking a complex range of factors into account. The effort among the nurses towards people with cardiac disease who decline rehabilitation was smaller in cases when the nurses believed an individual would benefit less from rehabilitation or have difficulty participating. It was important for the nurses to balance their motivational efforts with showing respect for people's autonomy. Conclusion Even when nurses endorse rehabilitation, some people with cardiac disease decline rehabilitation. The nurses' recommendation of the rehabilitation programme is influenced by the knowledge they obtain about the people with cardiac disease during consultations.

Patients' experience of symptoms does not follow the body-mind divide that characterizes the classification of disease in the health care system. Therefore, understanding patients in their entirety rather than in parts demands a different theoretical approach. Attempts have been made to formulate such approaches but many of these, such as the biopsychosocial model, are still basically dualistic or methodologically reductionist. In primary care, patients often present with diffuse symptoms, making primary care the ideal environment for understanding patients' undifferentiated symptoms and disease patterns which could readily fit both bodily and mental categories. In this article we discuss theoretical models that have attempted to overcome this challenge: The psychosomatic approach could be called holistic in the sense of taking an anti-dualistic stance. Primary care theorists have formulated integrative views but these have not gained a foothold in primary care medicine. McWhinney introduced a new metaphor, 'the body-mind', and Rudebeck advocated cultivating 'bodily empathy'. These views have much in common with both phenomenological thinking and mentalization, a psychological concept for understanding others. In the process of understanding patients there is a need for the physician to enter an intersubjectivity that aims at understanding the patient's experiences and sensations without initially jumping to diagnostic conclusions or into a division into mental and physical phenomena. Mentalization theory could form the basis of an approach to a more comprehensive understanding of patients. The success of such an approach is, however, dependent upon structural and organizational conditions that do not counteract it.

Objective is to explore how multimorbidity is defined in the scientific literature, with a focus on the roles of diseases, risk factors, and symptoms in the definitions.DESIGN: Systematic review.METHODS: MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for relevant publications up until October 2013. One author extracted the information. Ambiguities were resolved, and consensus reached with one co-author. Outcome measures were: cut-off point for the number of conditions included in the definitions of multimorbidity; setting; data sources; number, kind, duration, and severity of diagnoses, risk factors, and symptoms. We reviewed 163 articles. In 61 articles (37%), the cut-off point for multimorbidity was two or more conditions (diseases, risk factors, or symptoms). The most frequently used setting was the general population (68 articles, 42%), and primary care (41 articles, 25%). Sources of data were primarily self-reports (56 articles, 42%). Out of the 163 articles selected, 115 had individually constructed multimorbidity definitions, and in these articles diseases occurred in all definitions, with diabetes as the most frequent. Risk factors occurred in 98 (85%) and symptoms in 71 (62%) of the definitions. The severity of conditions was used in 26 (23%) of the definitions, but in different ways. The definition of multimorbidity is heterogeneous and risk factors are more often included than symptoms. The severity of conditions is seldom included. Since the number of people living with multimorbidity is increasing there is a need to develop a concept of multimorbidity that is more useful in daily clinical work. Key points The increasing number of multimorbidity patients challenges the healthcare system. The concept of multimorbidity needs further discussion in order to be implemented in daily clinical practice. Many definitions of multimorbidity exist and most often a cut-off point of two or more is applied to a range of 4-147 different conditions. Diseases are included in all definitions of multimorbidity. Risk factors are often included in existing definitions, whereas symptoms and the severity of the conditions are less frequently included.

Background: Getting the right diagnosis is supposed to provide an explanation of a patient’s health problem and inform health care decisions. As a core element of clinical reasoning, diagnosis deserves systematic and transparent analysis. Conceptual tools can make doctors become aware of and explore diagnostic knowing. Methods: We demonstrate diagnostic knowing analysed as interpretative and contextualised activity. Our analysis is based on Lonergan’s theory of knowing, constituting the cognitive structures as experiencing, understanding, and judging, in a general practice case. Findings: Analysis makes the complexity of diagnostic knowing in this context more transparent, in this case concluding with four diagnostic labels: a corn, constipation, headache and atrial fibrillation. We demonstrate how a medically significant diagnosis does not necessarily evolve deductively from complaints. The opening lines from the patient give ideas of where to look for possible explanations – questions for understanding – rather than diagnostic hypotheses. Such questions emerge from the GP’s experiences from meeting the patient, including imaginations and interpretations. When ideas and questions regarding diagnoses have been developed, they may be judged and subjected to reflection. Questioning may also emerge as transitory concerns, not extensively ruled out. Lonergan’s theory demonstrated a strong fit with these aspects of diagnostic knowing in general practice. Implications: Analysis demonstrated systematic, transparent approaches to diagnostic knowing, relevant for clinical teaching. We argue that an interpretative understanding of diagnosis can change clinical practice, complementing hypothetico-deductive strategies by recognising additional substantial diagnostic modes and giving access to scholarly reflection. Key Points Diagnosis is a core element of clinical reasoning, deserving systematic and transparent analysis beyond hypothetico-deductive reasoning or pattern recognition Diagnostic knowing in general practice is a special instance of all human knowing with subjectivity, interpretation and reflexivity as essential elements Lonergan’s theory for knowing based on experiencing, understanding, and judging allowed us to map, decode and recognise advanced acts of clinical reasoning We share our experiences of how these concepts gave us a tool for systematic analysis of the complexities taking place in the GP’s office on an ordinary day publishedVersion

Aims To explore the effect of structured personal care on diabetes symptoms and self-rated health over 14 years after diabetes diagnosis while patients are gradually diagnosed with other chronic conditions (multimorbidity). Methods Post hoc analysis of the Danish randomized controlled trial Diabetes Care in General Practice including 1381 patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. The effect of structured personal care compared with routine care on diabetes symptoms and self-rated health was analysed 6 and 14 years after diagnosis with a generalized multilevel Rasch model. Results Structured personal care reduced the overall likelihood of reporting diabetes symptoms at the end of the intervention (OR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64–0.97), but this effect was not explained by glycaemic control or multimorbidity. There was no effect of the intervention on diabetes symptoms after 14 years or on self-rated health after 6 years or 14 years. Conclusions Structured personal care had a beneficial effect on diabetes symptoms 6 years after diagnosis, but not on self-rated health at either follow up point. To optimally manage patients over time it is important to supplement clinical information by information provided by the patients.

Objective. To explore views and attitudes among general practitioners (GPs) and researchers in the field of general practice towards problems and challenges related to treatment of patients with multimorbidity. Setting. A workshop entitled Patients with multimorbidity in general practice held during the Nordic Congress of General Practice in Tampere, Finland, 2013. Subjects. A total of 180 GPs and researchers. Design. Data for this summary report originate from audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim plenary discussions as well as 76 short questionnaires answered by attendees during the workshop. The data were analysed using framework analysis. Results. (i) Complex care pathways and clinical guidelines developed for single diseases were identified as very challenging when handling patients with multimorbidity; (ii) insufficient cooperation between the professionals involved in the care of multimorbid patients underlined the GPs’ impression of a fragmented health care system; (iii) GPs found it challenging to establish a good dialogue and prioritize problems with patients within the timeframe of a normal consultation; (iv) the future role of the GP was discussed in relation to diminishing health inequality, and current payment systems were criticized for not matching the treatment patterns of patients with multimorbidity. Conclusion. The participants supported the development of a future research strategy to improve the treatment of patients with multimorbidity. Four main areas were identified, which need to be investigated further to improve care for this steadily growing patient group. OBJECTIVE: To explore views and attitudes among general practitioners (GPs) and researchers in the field of general practice towards problems and challenges related to treatment of patients with multimorbidity.SETTING: A workshop entitled Patients with multimorbidity in general practice held during the Nordic Congress of General Practice in Tampere, Finland, 2013.SUBJECTS: A total of 180 GPs and researchers.DESIGN: Data for this summary report originate from audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim plenary discussions as well as 76 short questionnaires answered by attendees during the workshop. The data were analysed using framework analysis.RESULTS: (i) Complex care pathways and clinical guidelines developed for single diseases were identified as very challenging when handling patients with multimorbidity; (ii) insufficient cooperation between the professionals involved in the care of multimorbid patients underlined the GPs' impression of a fragmented health care system; (iii) GPs found it challenging to establish a good dialogue and prioritize problems with patients within the timeframe of a normal consultation; (iv) the future role of the GP was discussed in relation to diminishing health inequality, and current payment systems were criticized for not matching the treatment patterns of patients with multimorbidity.CONCLUSION: The participants supported the development of a future research strategy to improve the treatment of patients with multimorbidity. Four main areas were identified, which need to be investigated further to improve care for this steadily growing patient group.

Objective: This paper investigated patients’ experiences of disease and self-care as well as perceptions of the general practitioner’s role in supporting patients with impaired self-care ability. Design: Qualitative interviews with 13 patients with type 2 diabetes, concurrent chronic diseases, and impaired self-care ability assessed by a general practitioner. We analyzed our data using systematic text condensation. The shifting perspectives model of chronic illness formed the theoretical background for the study. Results: Although most patients experienced challenges in adhering to recommended self-care activities, many had developed additional, personal self-care routines that increased wellbeing. Some patients were conscious of self-care trade-offs, including patients with concurrent mental disorders who were much more attentive to their mental disorder than their somatic diseases. Patients’ perspectives on diseases could shift over time and were dominated by emotional considerations such as insisting on leading a normal life or struggling with limitations caused by disease. Most patients found support in the ongoing relationship with the same general practitioner, who was valued as a companion or appreciated as a trustworthy health informant. Conclusion: Patient experiences of self-care may collide with what general practitioners find appropriate in a medical regimen. Health professionals should be aware of patients’ prominent and shifting considerations about the emotional aspects of disease. Patients valued the general practitioner’s role in self-care support, primarily through the long-term doctor-patient relationship. Therefore, relational continuity should be prioritized in chronic care, especially for patients with impaired self-care ability who often have a highly complex disease burden and situational context. Key points Little is known about the perspectives of disease and self-care in patients with a doctor-assessed impaired ability of self-care. • Although patients knew the prescribed regimen they often prioritized self-care routines that increased well-being at the cost of medical recommendations. • Shifting emotional aspects were prominent in patients’ considerations of disease and sustained GPs’ use of a patient-centred clinical method when discussing self-care. • Relational continuity with general practitioners was a highly valued support and should be prioritized for patients with impaired self-care.

Background: It is not known how general practitioners (GPs) perceive the concept of self-care and how they assess self-care ability in patients with multiple chronic conditions. As a part of the strategy to improve the care of people living with chronic conditions, disease management programs in Denmark require GPs and other health care workers to assess and support patients' self-care ability. The aim of the present study was to explore GPs' perceptions and assessment of self-care ability in patients with multiple chronic conditions who have difficulty following a given treatment. Methods: A qualitative study conducted through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 12 GPs in rural areas of Denmark with economically disadvantaged populations. The interviews involved 36 complex patient cases selected by the GPs themselves. Our analysis followed the principles of systematic text condensation. Results: Most GPs in our study had a health-related perception of self-care, but some had a broader perception encompassing the situational context of the patient's life. The GPs' assessments of patients' self-care ability were based on information from the ongoing and often long-term relationships with the patients. GPs identified four major factors that influenced patients' self-care ability, which accumulated and fluctuated over time: multimorbidity, cognitive resources, material resources, and the patients' social contexts. Conclusions: The GPs in this study had dual perceptions of self-care, related to both the chronic health conditions and to the broader situational contexts of their patients' lives. GPs' assessments of self-care ability depended largely on their experiences from the doctor-patient relationship, and they emphasized that the factors affecting self-care ability were highly dynamic over the patient's lifetime. However, these findings might be resisted by the Danish disease management programs, which tend to have a static and more narrow, health-related view of patient self-care. The Danish programs require GPs to assess self-care ability upfront at the beginning of treatment and do not consider whether a relationship with the patient is established. If GPs' perceptions and assessments of self-care ability are not included in chronic disease management models, there is a risk that they vill be insufficiently implemented in general practice.

In general practice, an accurate and rapid diagnosis could be obvious (herpes zoster), or essential (sepsis). More often, however, diagnosis in general practice is characterised by uncertainty. This may be because time is necessary for a particular condition to declare itself, or alternatively, that the problem will be self-limiting. The picture may be clouded by multimorbidity, as well as by culturally-shaped perceptions, interpretations, and presentations of symptoms.1 We argue, however, that diagnostic uncertainty is not, as Jones has suggested, the new Achilles’ heel of general practice, to avoid at all cost.2 We maintain instead that uncertainty typifies the nature and complexity of clinical knowledge, and is particularly salient in general practice.3 Diagnostic uncertainty deserves attention; not as evidence of sloppy practice, or professional failure, but as an inherent feature of, and condition for, advanced medical diagnosis. The nature of clinical knowledge rests on interpretation and judgment of bits and pieces of information which will always be partial and situated.4 In this commentary, we argue that the quality of diagnosis in general practice is compromised by believing that uncertainty can, and should, be eliminated. On the contrary, we suggest, appropriate management of intrinsic uncertainty is a core clinical skill, which cannot be obtained from an essentialist attitude to knowledge where certainty is taken for granted as the standard. Only by embracing uncertainty as a predictable and inevitable companion of general practice,5 will the GP be able to …

Aim To investigate the predictive value of both patients' motivation and effort in their management of Type 2 diabetes and their life circumstances for the development of foot ulcers and amputations. Methods This study was based on the Diabetes Care in General Practice study and Danish population and health registers. The associations between patient motivation, effort and life circumstances and foot ulcer prevalence 6 years after diabetes diagnosis and the incidence of amputation in the following 13 years were analysed using odds ratios from logistic regression and hazard ratios from Cox regression models, respectively. Results Foot ulcer prevalence 6 years after diabetes diagnosis was 2.93% (95% CI 1.86–4.00) among 956 patients. General practitioners' indication of ‘poor’ vs ‘very good’ patient motivation for diabetes management was associated with higher foot ulcer prevalence (odds ratio 6.11, 95% CI 1.22–30.61). The same trend was seen for ‘poor’ vs ‘good’ influence of the patient's own effort in diabetes treatment (odds ratio 7.06, 95% CI 2.65–18.84). Of 1058 patients examined at 6-year follow-up, 45 experienced amputation during the following 13 years. ‘Poor’ vs ‘good’ influence of the patients’ own effort was associated with amputation (hazard ratio 7.12, 95% CI 3.40–14.92). When general practitioners assessed the influence of patients’ life circumstances as ‘poor’ vs ‘good’, the amputation incidence increased (hazard ratio 2.97, 95% CI 1.22–7.24). ‘Poor’ vs ‘very good’ patient motivation was also associated with a higher amputation incidence (hazard ratio 7.57, 95% CI 2.43–23.57), although not in fully adjusted models. Conclusions General practitioners' existing knowledge of patients' life circumstances, motivation and effort in diabetes management should be included in treatment strategies to prevent foot complications.

To identify frames of interaction that allow smoking cessation advice in general practice consultations.Qualitative study based on individual in-depth interviews with GPs and their patients. Each of the GPs' consultations were observed during a three-day period. Interviews primarily addressed the consultations that had been observed. The concept of "frames" described by Goffman was deployed as an analytic tool.Danish general practice.Six GPs and 11 of their patients.Both GPs and patients evaluated potential issues to be included during consultations by relevance criteria. Relevance criteria served the purpose of limiting the number of issues in individual consultations. Issues could be included if they connected to something already communicated in a consultation. Smoking cessation advice was subject to these relevance criteria and was primarily discussed if it posed a particular risk to a particular patient. Smoking cessation advice also occurred in conversations addressing the patient's well-being. If occurring without any other readable frame, smoking cessation advice was apt to be perceived by patients as part of a public campaign.Relevance criteria in the shape of communication of particular risks to particular patients and small-talk about well-being reflect the concept of "frames" by Goffman. Criteria of relevance limit the number of issues in individual consultations. Relevance criteria may explain why smoking cessation advice has not yet been implemented in many more consultations.

BackgroundAs in other countries, Danish health authorities have introduced disease management programmes (DMPs) to improve care quality. These contain clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and guidelines for patient stratification based on doctors’ assessments of disease severity and self-care. However, these programmes are challenged when patients have complex chronic conditions.AimTo explore how GPs experience the clinical applicability of disease management programmes for patients with multiple chronic conditions and lowered self-care ability.Design & settingA qualitative study from general practice, conducted in rural areas of Denmark with economically disadvantaged populations.MethodData were collected through case-based, semi-structured interviews with 12 GPs. The principles of systematic text condensation were used in the analysis.ResultsGPs found DMPs inadequate, particularly for patients with multiple conditions and lowered self-care ability. Their experience was that adhering to multiple programmes’ CPGs resulted in too much medication, conflicting treatments, an overload of appointments, and fragmented health care. They disregarded stratifying according to guidelines because they deemed stratification criteria to reflect neither patients’ need for self-care support, nor flexible referral options to hospitals and municipalities. Therefore, GPs were often solely responsible for treatment of patients with very complex chronic conditions.ConclusionGPs found DMPs to be of limited clinical applicability due to challenges related to CPGs, patient stratification, and lack of adequate health services to support patients with complex healthcare needs. To increase the benefits of these programmes, they should be more flexible, and adjusted to the needs of patients with multiple chronic conditions and lowered self-care ability.

Objective The aim of this paper is to describe how the process of developing and maintaining trust is related to how and if smoking cessation advice is given in general practice consultations. Methods The study consisted of interviews with six Danish GPs and with 11 of their patients, on the basis of observations of their consultations. Results According to the findings of this study, both the GPs and the patients expected GPs to demonstrate in interaction with the patients their intent to evaluate and possibly resolve the patient's health problem. The GPs were also expected to show that they recognized the patient's health problem. Both GPs and patients felt that this would help to develop patients’ trust in their GPs. Smoking cessation advice during consultations could negate these demonstrations of GPs intents. Smoking cessation advice, however, could demonstrate interest and a desire to help and so develop trust. Conclusion Smoking cessation advice has the potential both to put trust under strain and to strengthen trust. The outcome depends on whether the advice conforms to what both patients and GPs expect from the interaction in general practice consultations. Practice implications To develop and maintain patients’ trust GPs should consider the specific expectations from the interaction with patients during consultations when giving smoking cessation advice.

Objective To describe consultations in Danish general practice as a context for a mass strategy of smoking cessation advice. Methods The focus of the study was on consultations for health problems that were not related to smoking. Interviews with eleven patients and their six GPs were grounded in observation of their own consultations. Results Patients and GPs agreed that the GP should adopt an attitude of moral acceptance towards patients. Ideals of moral acceptance of patients in general practice consultations were challenged by the prevailing negative moral values associated with smoking. A general aim of mutuality in the conversation in consultations could not always be achieved in smoking cessation advice. Achieving mutuality was especially a problem when smoking cessation advice was repeated at short intervals. Conclusion Two elements of Danish general practice consultations were challenged by smoking cessation advice to patients without smoking-related illness: the ideal of moral acceptance of patients in general practice consultations held by GPs and patients and the wish for mutuality in the conversation during consultations. Practice implications A conversation about smoking based on motivational interviewing would fit in the context of Danish general practice. Relieving the conversation of blocks due to moral implications, however, is still a challenge.

Sample sizes must be ascertained in qualitative studies like in quantitative studies but not by the same means. The prevailing concept for sample size in qualitative studies is “saturation.” Saturation is closely tied to a specific methodology, and the term is inconsistently applied. We propose the concept “information power” to guide adequate sample size for qualitative studies. Information power indicates that the more information the sample holds, relevant for the actual study, the lower amount of participants is needed. We suggest that the size of a sample with sufficient information power depends on (a) the aim of the study, (b) sample specificity, (c) use of established theory, (d) quality of dialogue, and (e) analysis strategy. We present a model where these elements of information and their relevant dimensions are related to information power. Application of this model in the planning and during data collection of a qualitative study is discussed.

The aim of this article is to present a conceptual review and analysis of symptom understanding. Subjective bodily sensations occur abundantly in the normal population and dialogues about symptoms take place in a broad range of contexts, not only in the doctor's office. Our review of symptom understanding proceeds from an initial subliminal awareness by way of attribution of meaning and subsequent management, with and without professional involvement. We introduce theoretical perspectives from phenomenology, semiotics, social interactionism, and discourse analysis. Drew Leder's phenomenological perspectives deal with how symptom perception occurs when any kind of altered balance brings forward a bodily attention. Corporeality is brought to explicit awareness and perceived as sensations. Jesper Hoffmeyer's biosemiotic perspectives provide access to how signs are interpreted to attribute meaning to the bodily messages. Symptom management is then determined by the meaning of a symptom. Dorte E. Gannik's concept "situational disease" explains how situations can be reviewed not just in terms of their potential to produce signs or symptoms, but also in terms of their capacity to contain symptoms. Disease is a social and relational phenomenon of containment, and regulating the situation where the symptoms originate implies adjusting containment. Discourse analysis, as presented by Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell, provides a tool to notice the subtle ways in which language orders perceptions and how language constructs social interaction. Symptoms are situated in culture and context, and trends in modern everyday life modify symptom understanding continuously. Our analysis suggests that a symptom can only be understood by attention to the social context in which the symptom emerges and the dialogue through which it is negotiated.

Objective. The aim of this study is to analyse the interaction between patients and GPs in preventive consultations with an emphasis on how patients answer GPs’ questions about lifestyle, and the conditions these answers impose on the process of establishing agreement about lifestyle as a problem or not. Design. Six general practitioners (GPs) video-recorded 15 annual preventive consultations. From these, 32 excerpts of discussions about lifestyle were analysed using conversation analysis (CA). Results. GPs used an interview format to assess risk in patients’ lifestyles. In some cases patients adhered to this format and answered the GPs’ questions, but in many cases patients gave what we have termed “anticipatory answers”. These answers indicate that the patients anticipate a response from their GPs that would highlight problems with their lifestyle. Typically, in an anticipatory answer, patients bypass the interview format to give their own evaluation of their lifestyle and GPs accept this evaluation. In cases of “no-problem” answers from patients, GPs usually encouraged patients by adding support for current habits. Conclusion. Patients anticipated that GPs might assess their lifestyles as problematic and they incorporated this possibility into their responses. They thereby controlled the definition of their lifestyle as a problem or not. GPs generally did not use the information provided in these answers as a resource for further discussion, but rather relied on standard interview procedures. Staying within the patients’ frame of reference and using the patients’ anticipatory answers might provide GPs with a better point of departure for discussion regarding lifestyle.

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 explore how patients enact presentations of self in consultations dealing with lifestyle in general practice. Methods We conducted a qualitative observational study with thematic, cross-case analysis of video-recorded consultations inspired by discourse analysis. Results Patients presented themselves with an orientation toward responsibility in dialog about lifestyle. They described how they were taking care of themselves and doing their best. In this respect, they demonstrated their achievements as matters of honor. If one lifestyle issue was considered problematic, in some cases patients shifted attention to another, of which they were more proud. In areas where they were not doing well, some patients revealed shame for not acting responsibly. In such cases, patients spoke of themselves in terms of self-deprecation or admitted not living up to expected standards. Conclusion Negotiations of shame and honor, revolving around personal responsibility, are embedded in clinical discourse about lifestyle. Patients take a proactive role in presenting and defending the self against shame. Practice implications GPs should pay more attention to the tacit role of shame in consultations. Failure to do so could lead to distance and hostility while a strategy to acknowledge the impact of shame could help develop and strengthen the doctor–patient relationship.