'Here to stay': changes to prescribing medication in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic in New Zealand.

INTRODUCTION The delivery of health care by primary care general practices rapidly changed in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in early 2020. AIM This study explores the experience of a large group of New Zealand general practice health-care professionals with changes to prescribing medication during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS We qualitatively analysed a subtheme on prescribing medication from the General Practice Pandemic Experience New Zealand (GPPENZ) study, where general practice team members nationwide were invited to participate in five surveys over 16 weeks from 8 May 2020. RESULTS Overall, 78 (48%) of 164 participants enrolled in the study completed all surveys. Five themes were identified: changes to prescribing medicines; benefits of electronic prescription; technical challenges; clinical and medication supply challenges; and opportunities for the future. There was a rapid adoption of electronic prescribing as an adjunct to use of telehealth, minimising in-person consultations and paper prescription handling. Many found electronic prescribing an efficient and streamlined processes, whereas others had technical barriers and transmission to pharmacies was unreliable with sometimes incompatible systems. There was initially increased demand for repeat medications, and at the same time, concern that vulnerable patients did not have usual access to medication. The benefits of innovation at a time of crisis were recognised and respondents were optimistic that e-prescribing technical challenges could be resolved. DISCUSSION Improving e-prescribing technology between prescribers and dispensers, initiatives to maintain access to medication, particularly for vulnerable populations, and permanent regulatory changes will help patients continue to access their medications through future pandemic disruption.

A mixed-methods study describing behavioral factors that influenced general practitioners' experiences using triage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, general practices were asked to expand triage and to reduce unnecessary face-to-face contact by prioritizing other consultation modes, e.g., online messaging, video, or telephone. The current study explores the potential barriers and facilitators general practitioners experienced to expanding triage systems and their attitudes towards triage during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A mixed-method study design was used in which a quantitative online survey was conducted along with qualitative interviews to gain a more nuanced appreciation for practitioners' experiences in the United Kingdom. The survey items were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework so they would capture 14 behavioral factors that may influence whether practitioners use triage systems. Items were responded to using seven-point Likert scales. A median score was calculated for each item. The responses of participants identifying as part-owners and non-owners (i.e., "partner" vs. "non-partner" practitioners) were compared. The semi-structured interviews were conducted remotely and examined using Braun and Clark's thematic analysis. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 204 participants (66% Female). Most participants (83%) reported triaging patients. The items with the highest median scores captured the 'Knowledge,' 'Skills,' 'Social/Professional role and identity,' and 'Beliefs about capabilities' domains. The items with the lowest median scores captured the 'Beliefs about consequences,' 'Goals,' and 'Emotions' domains. For 14 of the 17 items, partner scores were higher than non-partner scores. All the qualitative interview participants relied on a phone triage system. Six broad themes were discovered: patient accessibility, confusions around what triage is, uncertainty and risk, relationships between service providers, job satisfaction, and the potential for total digital triage. Suggestions arose to optimize triage, such as ensuring there is sufficient time to conduct triage accurately and providing practical training to use triage efficiently. CONCLUSIONS: Many general practitioners are engaging with expanded triage systems, though more support is needed to achieve total triage across practices. Non-partner practitioners likely require more support to use the triage systems that practices take up. Additionally, practical support should be made available to help all practitioners manage the new risks and uncertainties they are likely to experience during non-face-to-face consultations.

Use of alternative consultation forms in Danish general practice in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Attempts to manage the COVID-19 pandemic have led to radical reorganisations of health care systems worldwide. General practitioners (GPs) provide the vast majority of patient care, and knowledge of their experiences with providing care for regular health issues during a pandemic is scarce. Hence, in a Danish context we explored how GPs experienced reorganising their work in an attempt to uphold sufficient patient care while contributing to minimizing the spread of COVID-19. Further, in relation to this, we examined what guided GPs' choices between telephone, video and face-to-face consultations. METHODS: This study consisted of qualitative interviews with 13 GPs. They were interviewed twice, approximately three months apart in the initial phase of the pandemic, and they took daily notes for 20 days. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and inductively analysed. RESULTS: The GPs re-organised their clinical work profoundly. Most consultations were converted to video or telephone, postponed or cancelled. The use of video first rose, but soon declined, once again replaced by an increased use of face-to-face consultations. When choosing between consultation forms, the GPs took into account the need to minimise the risk of COVID-19, the central guidelines, and their own preference for face-to-face consultations. There were variations over time and between the GPs regarding which health issues were dealt with by using video and/or the telephone. For some health issues, the GPs generally deemed it acceptable to use video or telephone, postpone or cancel appointments for a short term, and in a crisis situation. They experienced relational and technical limitations with video consultation, while diagnostic uncertainty was not regarded as a prominent issue CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates how the GPs experienced telephone and video consultations as being useful in a pandemic situation when face-to-face consultations had to be severely restricted. The GPs did, however, identify several limitations similar to those known in non-pandemic times. The weighing of pros and cons and their willingness to use these alternatives shifted and generally diminished when face-to-face consultations were once again deemed viable. In case of future pandemics, such alternatives seem valuable, at least for a short term.

Reorganisation of GP surgeries during the COVID-19 outbreak: analysis of guidelines from 15 countries.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in managing the COVID-19 outbreak. However, they may encounter difficulties adapting their practices to the pandemic. We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the pandemic from 15 countries. METHODS: A network of GPs collaborated together in a three-step process: (i) identification of key recommendations of GP surgery reorganisation, according to WHO, CDC and health professional resources from health care facilities; (ii) collection of key recommendations included in the guidelines published in 15 countries; (iii) analysis, comparison and synthesis of the results. RESULTS: Recommendations for the reorganisation of GP surgeries of four types were identified: (i) reorganisation of GP consultations (cancelation of non-urgent consultations, follow-up via e-consultations), (ii) reorganisation of GP surgeries (area partitioning, visual alerts and signs, strict hygiene measures), (iii) reorganisation of medical examinations by GPs (equipment, hygiene, partial clinical examinations, patient education), (iv) reorganisation of GP staff (equipment, management, meetings, collaboration with the local community). CONCLUSIONS: We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak from 15 countries. These guidelines focus principally on clinical care, with less attention paid to staff management, and the area of epidemiological surveillance and research is largely neglected. The differences of guidelines between countries and the difficulty to apply them in routine care, highlight the need of advanced research in primary care. Thereby, primary care would be able to provide recommendations adapted to the real-world settings and with stronger evidence, which is especially necessary during pandemics.

Survey protocol for exploring video and phone use in Aotearoa New Zealand general practice: considerations for future telehealth.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth became the most practical option for general practice consultations in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) as a result of the national lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. What is the consumer experience of access to telehealth and how do consumers and providers perceive this mode of care delivery going forward? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A national survey of general practice consumers and providers who used telehealth services since the national lockdowns in 2020 will be distributed. It is based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology framework of technology acceptance and the access to care framework. The data will be statistically analysed to create a foundation for in-depth research on the use of telehealth services in NZ general practice services, with a specific focus on consumer experiences and health outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by the Auckland Health Research Ethics Committee on 13/11/2020, reference AH2539. The survey will be disseminated online.

Reflections on leadership during the Covid pandemic.

Doctors lead, in and out of the clinical environment, from ward to board; their roles will range from dealing with risk and uncertainty, communicating with different audiences and managing crises. At the heart of leadership is the ability to make decisions; which operation to perform or treatment to give or, as during this pandemic, what policy to implement or vaccines to order. If leadership is about making decisions, successful leadership is the ability to make the right decisions. This, after all, is what distinguishes a good leader from a poor one. During this pandemic we have been able to compare different leaders, drawn from across the health, political and other sectors. This article identifies how leaders behaved during this pandemic and importantly what can be learnt from their actions.

General Practitioners' Experiences During the First Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy: A Critical Incident Technique Study.

Since February 2020, when coronavirus disease began to spread in Italy, general practitioners (GPs) were called to manage a growing number of health situations. The challenges experienced by Italian GPs remained unrevealed. This study aimed at exploring Italian GPs' care experiences and practices associated with critical incidents during the first wave of the pandemic. A qualitative study design involving the critical incident technique through an online survey was applied. Sociodemographic data and open-ended responses were collected. While participants' characteristics were analyzed through descriptive statistics, qualitative data were thematically analyzed employing the framework method. 149 GPs responded to the survey and 99 participants completed the survey (dropout rate = 33%). Eight themes emerged indicating factors related to the organization of the healthcare system and factors related to the clinical management of patients, that were perceived as impacting on the GPs' care provision. The analysis revealed difficulties in communicating with other local services. This, together with the lack of coordination among services, was reported as a major challenge. Primary care was perceived as having been undervalued and criticalities in the organization of GP courses, led in a bureaucratic fashion, posed at risk some trainees to be infected. The digital technologies adopted for remote patient consultations were seen as useful tools for daily practice helping the GPs to stay emotionally connected with their patients. Besides, the improvement in the GP-patient relationship in terms of solidarity between patients and doctors and compliance to rules, had a positive impact. Moreover, many respondents addressed the importance of professional collaboration and teamwork, in terms of both support in practical issues (to find PPE, diagnostics and guidelines) and emotional support. At the same time, the lack of resources (e.g., PPE, swabs) and of specific guidelines and protocols impacted on the care provision. Our findings suggest that GPs in Italy are at risk of being left behind within the epidemic management. Communication and coordination among services are essential and should be substantially improved, and primary care research should be initiated to collect the context-specific evidence necessary to enhance the system's preparedness to public health emergencies and the quality of primary care services.

Restructuring in a GP practice during the COVID-19 pandemic - a focus-group study. / Driftsomlegging ved et fastlegekontor under covid-19-pandemien ­ en fokusgruppestudie.

BACKGROUND: Outside the cities, the medical services in the municipality are often centred around one GP practice. The local medical service is key to the municipality's healthcare preparedness. We wished to investigate how the healthcare personnel perceived the restructuring at their GP practice during the COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020, and the factors that facilitated and impeded the process. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The article is based on a focus group interview that was conducted with eight nurses and medical secretaries at Otta GP practice in June 2020. The interview was transcribed and analysed using systematic text condensation. RESULTS: The informants described a chaotic and demanding situation, in which they had to deal with their own as well as the patients' fears. They found crisis management to be difficult in a situation where the leadership in the municipality were unaware of the challenges of the GP practice. Lack of guidelines from the authorities at the start of the outbreak gave rise to considerable uncertainty. Through collaboration and flexibility, the practice arrived at new ways of working in order to safeguard its running. This gave a strong feeling of coping and fellowship, and a greater awareness of the informants' own importance in the front line of crisis management. INTERPRETATION: The study elucidates the role of support staff in the face of a crisis for the GP practice. Competent employees with the latitude and tools to tackle the challenges quickly guided the practice from chaos to a new type of working day. The municipality could have supported the process by ensuring the necessary resources and general guidelines for prioritisation of tasks.

How GPs adapted their practices and organisations at the beginning of COVID-19 outbreak: a French national observational survey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how general practitioners (GPs) adapted their practices to secure and maintain access to care in the epidemic phase. A secondary objective was to explore if GPs' individual characteristics and type of practice determined their adaptation. DESIGN: Observational study using an online questionnaire. Organisational changes were measured by a main question and detailed in two specific outcomes. To identify which GPs' characteristics impacted organisational changes, successive multivariate logistic modelling was performed. First, we identified the GPs' characteristics related to organisational changes with a univariate analysis. Then, we tested the adjusted associations between this variable and the following GPs' characteristics: age, gender and type of practice. SETTING: The questionnaire was administered online between 14 March and 21 March 2020. Practitioners were recruited by email using the contact lists of different French scientific GP societies. PARTICIPANTS: The target population was GPs currently practising in France (n=46 056). We obtained a total of 7481 responses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: Proportion of GPs who adapted their practice. Secondary outcome: GPs' characteristics related to organisational changes. RESULTS: Among the 7481 responses, 5425 were complete and were analysed. 3849 GPs (70.9%) changed their activity, 3605 GPs (66.5%) increased remote consultations and 2315 GPs (42.7%) created a specific pathway for probable patients with COVID-19. Among the 3849 GPs (70.9%) who changed their practice, 3306 (91.7%) gave more answers by phone, 996 (27.6%) by email and 1105 (30.7%) increased the use of video consultations. GPs working in multi-professional group practices were more likely to have changed their activity since the beginning of the epidemic wave than GPs working in mono-professional group or single medical practices (adjusted OR: 1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.56, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: French GPs adapted their practices regarding access to care for patients in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic. This adaptation was higher in multi-professional group practices.

A national survey of COVID-19 challenges, responses and effects in Australian general practice.

METHOD: A national cross-sectional online survey of Australian general practitioners was conducted in April and May 2020, with 572 respondents. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic in Australia has resulted in major changes to general practice business models. Most practices have experienced increased workload and reduced income. DISCUSSION: Australian general practices have undertaken major innovation and realignment to respond to staff safety and patient care challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Increased administration, reduced billable time, managing staffing and pivoting to telehealth service provision have negatively affected practice viability. Major sources of information for general practice are primary care-specific, but many practices turn to colleagues for support and resources.

General practice's early response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in multiple changes in the delivery of general practice services. In response to the threat of the pandemic and in order to keep their businesses safe and viable, general practices have rapidly moved to new models of care, embraced Medicare-funded telehealth and responded to uncertain availability of personal protective equipment with innovation. These changes have shown the adaptability of general practice, helped keep patients and practice staff safe, and undoubtedly reduced community transmission and mortality. The pandemic, and the response to it, has emphasised the potential dangers of existing fragmentation within the Australian health system, and is affecting the viability of general practice. These impacts on primary care highlight the need for improved integration of health services, should inform future pandemic planning, and guide the development of Australia's long-term national health plan.

Turning on a dime-pre- and post-COVID-19 consultation patterns in an urban general practice.

AIMS: To investigate changes in general practice consultation patterns in response to reduced face-to-face patient contact during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective before and after case notes review study of one urban general practice to investigate patient contact in the first two weeks of New Zealand general practices' COVID-19 response in 2020, compared to the same period in 2019. RESULTS: Twenty percent of patients had contact with the practice in both samples, with similar proportions by age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation and presence of multimorbidity or mental health diagnoses. Similar numbers of acute illness, accident-related and prevention patient contacts occurred in both samples, with more long-term condition-related contact in 2020. While 70% of patient contacts were face-to-face in 2019, 21% were face-to-face in 2020. Most acute illness, accident-related and long-term condition-related contacts were able to be provided through virtual means, but most prevention-related contacts were face-to-face. CONCLUSIONS: This single practice study showed total patient contact was similar over both sample periods, but most contact in 2020 was virtual. Further longitudinal multi-practice studies to confirm these findings and describe future consultation patterns are needed to inform general practice service delivery post-COVID-19.