Patient and GP experiences of pathways to diagnosis of a second primary cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: More people are surviving a first primary cancer and experiencing a second, different cancer. However, little is known about the diagnostic journeys of patients with second primary cancer (SPC). This study explores the views of patients and general practitioners (GPs) on their experiences of pathways to diagnosis of SPC, including the influence of a previous diagnosis of cancer on symptom appraisal, help-seeking and referral decisions. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with patients with a SPC diagnosis and case-linked GP interviews in a Scottish primary care setting. In-depth face to face or telephone interviews were conducted, underpinned by a social constructionist approach. Interviews were transcribed and Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis undertaken. Three analysts from the research team read transcripts and developed the coding framework using QSR NVivo version 10, with input from a fourth researcher. Themes were developed from refined codes and interpreted in the context of existing literature and theory. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 23 patients (aged 43-84 years) with a SPC diagnosis, and 7 GPs. Five patient themes were identified: Awareness of SPC, symptom appraisal and help-seeking, pathways to diagnosis, navigating the healthcare system, and impact of SPC. GPs interviews identified: experience and knowledge of SPC and referrals and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Insights into the pathway to diagnosis of SPC highlights the need for increased awareness of and vigilance for SPC among patients and healthcare providers (HCPs), and emotional support to manage the psychosocial burden.

The Indonesian Mental Health Act: psychiatrists' views on the act and its implementation.

In 2014, the Indonesian government passed the Mental Health Act (MHA) to address the country's complex mental health situation. The implementation of the MHA has been slow, and little is known about how the MHA is perceived by mental healthcare providers within local settings. This study aimed to obtain insight into psychiatrists' views on the MHA, including on how it affected their clinical practice and on challenges of translating the MHA into practice. The study was conducted in Bali, and 27 psychiatrists (15 men and 12 women) participated in a semi-structured interview. Thematic analysis indicated four overarching themes: raising the profile of mental health, developing a shared understanding of mental illness, integrating psychiatric practice with other services and views on implementation of the MHA into practice. Overall, the psychiatrists viewed the MHA as a step in the right direction to improve mental health services and to create awareness at local and national levels. However, there was consensus that the meaning of the MHA's concepts of mental problems and disorders were not compatible with psychiatric everyday practice or their patients' understandings. As a result, many assumed that the MHA was targeted at government and policy officials. Furthermore, there was a perceived lack of clarity on issues relating to collaborating with other services and unequal access to resources among regencies that impacted on their clinical practice in a negative way. Moreover, a few psychiatrists raised concerns that local beliefs and practices were not acknowledged in the MHA. According to the participants, mental health remained a highly political issue and without national support, mental health would remain a low priority. In conclusion, insights into providers' perspectives contribute to developing an evidence-base that can inform the implementation process of the MHA in Indonesia, and possibly elsewhere, into local level guidelines and regulations.

Comparing the content and quality of video, telephone, and face-to-face consultations: a non-randomised, quasi-experimental, exploratory study in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Growing demands on primary care services have led to policymakers promoting video consultations (VCs) to replace routine face-to-face consultations (FTFCs) in general practice. AIM: To explore the content, quality, and patient experience of VC, telephone (TC), and FTFCs in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Comparison of audio-recordings of follow-up consultations in UK primary care. METHOD: Primary care clinicians were provided with video-consulting equipment. Participating patients required a smartphone, tablet, or computer with camera. Clinicians invited patients requiring a follow-up consultation to choose a VC, TC, or FTFC. Consultations were audio-recorded and analysed for content and quality. Participant experience was explored in post-consultation questionnaires. Case notes were reviewed for NHS resource use. RESULTS: Of the recordings, 149/163 were suitable for analysis. VC recruits were younger, and more experienced in communicating online. FTFCs were longer than VCs (mean difference +3.7 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1 to 5.2) or TCs (+4.1 minutes, 95% CI = 2.6 to 5.5). On average, patients raised fewer problems in VCs (mean 1.5, standard deviation [SD] 0.8) compared with FTFCs (mean 2.1, SD 1.1) and demonstrated fewer instances of information giving by clinicians and patients. FTFCs scored higher than VCs and TCs on consultation-quality items. CONCLUSION: VC may be suitable for simple problems not requiring physical examination. VC, in terms of consultation length, content, and quality, appeared similar to TC. Both approaches appeared less 'information rich' than FTFC. Technical problems were common and, though patients really liked VC, infrastructure issues would need to be addressed before the technology and approach can be mainstreamed in primary care.

Acceptability, benefits, and challenges of video consulting: a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: People increasingly communicate online, using visual communication mediums such as Skype and FaceTime. Growing demands on primary care services mean that new ways of providing patient care are being considered. Video consultation (VC) over the internet is one such mode. AIM: To explore patients' and clinicians' experiences of VC. DESIGN AND SETTING: Semi-structured interviews in UK primary care. METHOD: Primary care clinicians were provided with VC equipment. They invited patients requiring a follow-up consultation to an online VC using the Attend Anywhere web-based platform. Participating patients required a smartphone, tablet, or video-enabled computer. Following VCs, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients (n = 21) and primary care clinicians (n = 13), followed by a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported positive experiences of VC, and stated that VC was particularly helpful for them as working people and people with mobility or mental health problems. VCs were considered superior to telephone consultations in providing visual cues and reassurance, building rapport, and improving communication. Technical problems, however, were common. Clinicians felt, for routine use, VCs must be more reliable and seamlessly integrated with appointment systems, which would require upgrading of current NHS IT systems. CONCLUSION: The visual component of VCs offers distinct advantages over telephone consultations. When integrated with current systems VCs can provide a time-saving alternative to face-to-face consultations when formal physical examination is not required, especially for people who work. Demand for VC services in primary care is likely to rise, but improved technical infrastructure is required to allow VC to become routine. However, for complex or sensitive problems face-to-face consultations remain preferable.

Making sense of bodily sensations: Do shared cancer narratives influence symptom appraisal?

Though new or altered bodily sensations are a common occurrence they rarely transition to biomedically defined symptoms. When they do, sensations are subject to an appraisal process that can culminate in help-seeking. The transition has particular relevance for cancer diagnoses. Studies of 'symptom appraisal' in cancer patients typically conclude that failure to regard sensations as serious or 'symptom misattribution' results in lengthier help-seeking intervals. Though multiple influences on appraisal processes are acknowledged, including the socio-cultural context, detailed description and analyses of how socio-cultural factors shape appraisal is lacking. In this paper we explore one substantial component of the sociocultural context, namely, publicly recognised shared cancer narratives, and their impact on appraisal. We undertook a secondary analysis of 24 interviews with Scottish colorectal cancer patients originally completed in 2006-2007. Our analysis showed that fear, death and severity dominated cancer narratives and were frequently restated throughout interviews. Yet, early bodily changes were often mild and vague, were commonly experienced in the context of 'feeling well' and failed to match preconceived ideas of what cancer 'feels like'. Moreover, few perceived themselves to be 'at risk' of cancer and diagnoses were characterised as 'shocking' events. Participants engaged in self-monitoring strategies and severe or painful changes prompted help-seeking. Far from misattributing symptoms, responses to bodily changes were sensible and measured; responses are particularly apt in relation to current policy rhetoric, which urges measured use of services. Our findings have resonance across healthcare settings as patients are required to negotiate a narrow and challenging space when making decisions to seek help. There is a pressing need for a more realistic approach to symptom appraisal in order to reduce help-seeking intervals. Future awareness campaigns should emphasise the importance of vague/minor bodily changes although this will necessitate discussions with health professionals on referral thresholds to achieve earlier detection.

Receptionists' role in new approaches to consultations in primary care: a focused ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: The receptionist is pivotal to the smooth running of general practice in the UK, communicating with patients and booking appointments. AIM: The authors aimed to explore the role of the receptionist in the implementation of new approaches to consultations in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: The authors conducted a team-based focused ethnography. Three researchers observed eight general practices across England and Scotland between June 2015 and May 2016. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with 39 patients and 45 staff in the practices, all of which had adopted one or more methods (telephone, email, e-consultation, or internet video) for providing an alternative to face-to-face consultation. RESULTS: Receptionists have a key role in facilitating patient awareness regarding new approaches to consultations in primary care, while at the same time ensuring that patients receive a consultation appropriate to their needs. In this study, receptionists' involvement in implementation and planning for the introduction of alternative approaches to face-to-face consultations was minimal, despite the expectation that they would be involved in delivery. CONCLUSION: A shared understanding within practices of the potential difficulties and extra work that might ensue for reception staff was lacking. This might contribute to the low uptake by patients of potentially important innovations in service delivery. Involvement of the wider practice team in planning and piloting changes, supporting team members through service reconfiguration, and providing an opportunity to discuss and contribute to modifications of any new system would ensure that reception staff are suitably prepared to support the introduction of a new approach to consultations.

Multimorbidity and Socioeconomic Deprivation in Primary Care Consultations.

PURPOSE: The influence of multimorbidity on the clinical encounter is poorly understood, especially in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation where burdensome multimorbidity is concentrated. The aim of the current study was to examine the effect of multimorbidity on general practice consultations, in areas of high and low deprivation. METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses of 659 video-recorded routine consultations involving 25 general practitioners (GPs) in deprived areas and 22 in affluent areas of Scotland. Patients rated the GP's empathy using the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure immediately after the consultation. Videos were analyzed using the Measure of Patient-Centered Communication. Multilevel, multi-regression analysis identified differences between the groups. RESULTS: In affluent areas, patients with multimorbidity received longer consultations than patients without multimorbidity (mean 12.8 minutes vs 9.3, respectively; P = .015), but this was not so in deprived areas (mean 9.9 minutes vs 10.0 respectively; P = .774). In affluent areas, patients with multimorbidity perceived their GP as more empathic (P = .009) than patients without multimorbidity; this difference was not found in deprived areas (P = .344). Video analysis showed that GPs in affluent areas were more attentive to the disease and illness experience in patients with multimorbidity (P < .031) compared with patients without multimorbidity. This was not the case in deprived areas (P = .727). CONCLUSIONS: In deprived areas, the greater need of patients with multimorbidity is not reflected in the longer consultation length, higher GP patient centeredness, and higher perceived GP empathy found in affluent areas. Action is required to redress this mismatch of need and service provision for patients with multimorbidity if health inequalities are to be narrowed rather than widened by primary care.

Alternatives to the face-to-face consultation in general practice: focused ethnographic case study.

BACKGROUND: NHS policy encourages general practices to introduce alternatives to the face-to-face consultation, such as telephone, email, e-consultation systems, or internet video. Most have been slow to adopt these, citing concerns about workload. This project builds on previous research by focusing on the experiences of patients and practitioners who have used one or more of these alternatives. AIM: To understand how, under what conditions, for which patients, and in what ways, alternatives to face-to-face consultations present benefits and challenges to patients and practitioners in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Focused ethnographic case studies took place in eight UK general practices between June 2015 and March 2016. METHOD: Non-participant observation, informal conversations with staff, and semi-structured interviews with staff and patients were conducted. Practice documents and protocols were reviewed. Data were analysed through charting and the 'one sheet of paper' mind-map method to identify the line of argument in each thematic report. RESULTS: Case study practices had different rationales for offering alternatives to the face-to-face consultation. Beliefs varied about which patients and health issues were suitable. Co-workers were often unaware of each other's practice; for example, practice policies for use of e-consultations systems with patients were not known about or followed. Patients reported benefits including convenience and access. Staff and some patients regarded the face-to-face consultation as the ideal. CONCLUSION: Experience of implementing alternatives to the face-to-face consultation suggests that changes in patient access and staff workload may be both modest and gradual. Practices planning to implement them should consider carefully their reasons for doing so and involve the whole practice team.

Assessing the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure in sexual health nurses' consultations.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly healthcare policies emphasise the importance of person-centred, empathic care. Consequently, healthcare professionals are expected to demonstrate the 'human' aspects of care in training and in practice. The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure is a patient-rated measure of the interpersonal skills of healthcare practitioners. It has been widely validated for use by healthcare professionals in both primary and secondary care. This paper reports on the validity and reliability of the CARE Measure with sexual health nurses. METHODS: Patient questionnaires were collected for 943 consultations with 20 sexual health nurses. Participating patients self-completed the questionnaire immediately after the encounter with the nurse. The questionnaire included the ten item CARE Measure, the Patient Enablement Index, and overall satisfaction instruments. Construct validity was assessed through Spearman's correlation and principal component analysis. Internal consistence was assessed through Cronbach's alpha and the inter-rater reliability through Generalisability Theory. Data were collected in 2013 in Scotland. RESULTS: Female patients completed 68% of the questionnaires. The mean patient age was 28.8 years (standard deviation 9.8 years). Two of the 20 participating nurses withdrew from the study. Most patients (71.7%) regarded the CARE Measure items as very important to their consultation and the number of 'not applicable' and missing responses' were low (2.6% and 0.1% respectively). The participating nurses had high CARE Measure scores; out of a maximum possible score of 50, the overall mean CARE measure score was 47.8 (standard deviation 4.4). The scores were moderately correlated with patient enablement (rho = 0.232, p = 0.001) and overall satisfaction (rho = 0.377, p = 0.001. Cronbach's alpha showed the measure's high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.95), but the inter-rater reliability could not be calculated due to the high achieved CARE Measure scores that varied little between nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Within this clinical context the CARE Measure has high perceived relevance and face validity. The findings support construct validity and some evidence of reliability. The high CARE Measure scores may have been due to sample bias. A future study which ensures a representative sample of patients on a larger group of nurses is required to determine whether the measure can discriminate between nurses.

Pathways to diagnosis of a second primary cancer: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: As cancer survivors continue to live longer, the incidence of second primary cancers (SPCs) will also rise. Relatively little is understood about the diagnostic pathway for SPCs, how people appraise, interpret symptoms and seek help for a second different cancer and the experiences (including challenges) of healthcare providers relating to SPCs. This study aims to systematically appraise and synthesise the literature on the pathways to diagnosis of an SPC and the associated patient and healthcare provider experiences. METHODS: The approach taken includes systematic searches of published and unpublished literature without any date or language restrictions. MEDLINE, Embase, CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE In-Process and non-indexed citations, PsycINFO, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and other non-indexed citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, CINAHL, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, PROSPERO and grey literature will be searched to identify observational, systematic reviews, mixed methods and qualitative studies of interest. Titles, abstracts and full texts will be screened against the inclusion-exclusion criteria by at least two reviewers independently. Relevant outcomes of interest and study and population characteristics will be extracted. Synthesis will be used guided by the Pathways to Treatment model and the Olesen model of time intervals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. This systematic review will provide a deeper understanding of the complex and heterogeneous diagnostic pathways of SPCs, while identifying common themes across the diagnostic interval, routes to diagnosis and patient and healthcare provider experiences. These findings will help provide a nuanced picture of the diagnostic pathway for SPCs that may inform policy and consistent practice. In particular, approaches to early diagnosis for an SPC; including the timing and reasons behind the decision by the patient to seek care,the challenges faced by healthcare providers, and in the development of future interventions to reduce the delay in patient time-to-presentation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016051692.

Readiness for Delivering Digital Health at Scale: Lessons From a Longitudinal Qualitative Evaluation of a National Digital Health Innovation Program in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Digital health has the potential to support care delivery for chronic illness. Despite positive evidence from localized implementations, new technologies have proven slow to become accepted, integrated, and routinized at scale. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to examine barriers and facilitators to implementation of digital health at scale through the evaluation of a £37m national digital health program: ?Delivering Assisted Living Lifestyles at Scale" (dallas) from 2012-2015. METHODS: The study was a longitudinal qualitative, multi-stakeholder, implementation study. The methods included interviews (n=125) with key implementers, focus groups with consumers and patients (n=7), project meetings (n=12), field work or observation in the communities (n=16), health professional survey responses (n=48), and cross program documentary evidence on implementation (n=215). We used a sociological theory called normalization process theory (NPT) and a longitudinal (3 years) qualitative framework analysis approach. This work did not study a single intervention or population. Instead, we evaluated the processes (of designing and delivering digital health), and our outcomes were the identified barriers and facilitators to delivering and mainstreaming services and products within the mixed sector digital health ecosystem. RESULTS: We identified three main levels of issues influencing readiness for digital health: macro (market, infrastructure, policy), meso (organizational), and micro (professional or public). Factors hindering implementation included: lack of information technology (IT) infrastructure, uncertainty around information governance, lack of incentives to prioritize interoperability, lack of precedence on accountability within the commercial sector, and a market perceived as difficult to navigate. Factors enabling implementation were: clinical endorsement, champions who promoted digital health, and public and professional willingness. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is receptiveness to digital health, barriers to mainstreaming remain. Our findings suggest greater investment in national and local infrastructure, implementation of guidelines for the safe and transparent use and assessment of digital health, incentivization of interoperability, and investment in upskilling of professionals and the public would help support the normalization of digital health. These findings will enable researchers, health care practitioners, and policy makers to understand the current landscape and the actions required in order to prepare the market and accelerate uptake, and use of digital health and wellness services in context and at scale.

General Practitioners' Empathy and Health Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study of Consultations in Areas of High and Low Deprivation.

PURPOSE: We set out to compare patients' expectations, consultation characteristics, and outcomes in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation, and to examine whether the same factors predict better outcomes in both settings. METHODS: Six hundred fifty-nine patients attending 47 general practitioners in high- and low-deprivation areas of Scotland participated. We assessed patients' expectations of involvement in decision making immediately before the consultation and patients' perceptions of their general practitioners' empathy immediately after. Consultations were video recorded and analyzed for verbal and non-verbal physician behaviors. Symptom severity and related well-being were measured at baseline and 1 month post-consultation. Consultation factors predicting better outcomes at 1 month were identified using backward selection methods. RESULTS: Patients in deprived areas had less desire for shared decision-making (P <.001). They had more problems to discuss (P = .01) within the same consultation time. Patients in deprived areas perceived their general practitioners (GPs) as less empathic (P = .02), and the physicians displayed verbal and nonverbal behaviors that were less patient centered. Outcomes were worse at 1 month in deprived than in affluent groups (70% response rate; P <.001). Perceived physician empathy predicted better outcomes in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' expectations, GPs' behaviors within the consultation, and health outcomes differ substantially between high- and low-deprivation areas. In both settings, patients' perceptions of the physicians' empathy predict health outcomes. These findings are discussed in the context of inequalities and the "inverse care law."

Measuring empathic, person-centred communication in primary care nurses: validity and reliability of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure.

BACKGROUND: Empathic patient-centred care is central to high quality health encounters. The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure is a patient-rated experience measure of the interpersonal quality of healthcare encounters. The measure has been extensively validated and is widely used by doctors in primary care but has not been validated in nursing. This study assessed the validity and reliability of the CARE Measure in routine nurse consultations in primary care. METHODS: Seventeen nurses from nine general medical practices located in three Scottish Health Boards participated in the study. Consecutive patients (aged 16 years or older) were asked to self-complete a questionnaire containing the CARE Measure immediately after their clinical encounter with the nurse. Statistical analysis included Spearman's correlation and principal component analysis (construct validity), Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency), and Generalisability theory (inter-rater reliability). RESULTS: A total of 774 patients (327 male and 447 female) completed the questionnaire. Almost three out of four patients (73 %) felt that the CARE Measure items were very important to their current consultation. The number of 'not applicable' responses and missing values were low overall (5.7 and 1.6 % respectively). The mean CARE Measure score in the consultations was 45.9 and 48 % achieved the maximum possible score of 50. CARE Measure scores correlated in predicted ways with overall satisfaction and patient enablement in support of convergent and divergent validity. Factor analysis found that the CARE Measure items loaded highly onto a single factor. The measure showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.97) and acceptable inter-rater reliability (G = 0.6 with 60 patients ratings per nurse). The scores were not affected by patients' age, gender, self-perceived overall health, living arrangements, employment status or language spoken at home. CONCLUSIONS: The CARE Measure has high face and construct validity, and internal reliability in nurse consultations in primary care. Its ability to discriminate between nurses is sufficient for educational and quality improvement purposes.

Verbal and non-verbal behaviour and patient perception of communication in primary care: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed the importance of a broad range of verbal and non-verbal consultation behaviours. AIM: To explore the relationship of observer ratings of behaviours of videotaped consultations with patients' perceptions. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational study in general practices close to Southampton, Southern England. METHOD: Verbal and non-verbal behaviour was rated by independent observers blind to outcome. Patients competed the Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS; primary outcome) and questionnaires addressing other communication domains. RESULTS: In total, 275/360 consultations from 25 GPs had useable videotapes. Higher MISS scores were associated with slight forward lean (an 0.02 increase for each degree of lean, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.002 to 0.03), the number of gestures (0.08, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.15), 'back-channelling' (for example, saying 'mmm') (0.11, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.2), and social talk (0.29, 95% CI = 0.4 to 0.54). Starting the consultation with professional coolness ('aloof') was helpful and optimism unhelpful. Finishing with non-verbal 'cut-offs' (for example, looking away), being professionally cool ('aloof'), or patronising, ('infantilising') resulted in poorer ratings. Physical contact was also important, but not traditional verbal communication. CONCLUSION: These exploratory results require confirmation, but suggest that patients may be responding to several non-verbal behaviours and non-specific verbal behaviours, such as social talk and back-channelling, more than traditional verbal behaviours. A changing consultation dynamic may also help, from professional 'coolness' at the beginning of the consultation to becoming warmer and avoiding non-verbal cut-offs at the end.

Patient centredness and the outcome of primary care consultations with patients with depression in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with depression are managed in general practice. In deprived areas, depression is more common and poorer outcomes have been reported. AIM: To compare general practice consultations and early outcomes for patients with depression living in areas of high or low socioeconomic deprivation. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary data analysis of a prospective observational study involving 25 GPs and 356 consultations in deprived areas, and 20 GPs and 303 consultations in more affluent areas, with follow-up at 1 month. METHOD: Validated measures were used to (a) objectively assess the patient centredness of consultations, and (b) record patient perceptions of GP empathy. RESULTS: PHQ-9 scores >10 (suggestive of caseness for moderate to severe depression) were significantly more common in deprived than in affluent areas (30.1% versus 18.5%, P<0.001). Patients with depression in deprived areas had more multimorbidity (65.4% versus 48.2%, P<0.05). Perceived GP empathy and observer-rated patient-centred communication were significantly lower in consultations in deprived areas. Outcomes at 1 month were significantly worse (persistent caseness 71.4% deprived, 43.2% affluent, P = 0.01). After multilevel multiregression modelling, observer-rated patient centredness in the consultation was predictive of improvement in PHQ-9 score in both affluent and deprived areas. CONCLUSION: In deprived areas, patients with depression are more common and early outcomes are poorer compared with affluent areas. Patient-centred consulting appears to improve early outcome but may be difficult to achieve in deprived areas because of the inverse care law and the burden of multimorbidity.

Outcome related to impact on daily living: preliminary validation of the ORIDL instrument.

BACKGROUND: The challenge of finding practical, patient-rated outcome measures is a key issue in the evaluation of health care systems and interventions. The ORIDL (Outcome in Relation to Impact on Daily Living) instrument (formerly referred to as the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital Outcomes Scale or GHHOS) has been developed to measure patient's views of the outcome of their care by asking about change, and relating this to impact on daily life. The aim of the present paper is to describe the background and potential uses of the ORIDL, and to report on its preliminary validation in a series of three studies in secondary and primary care. METHODS: In the first study, 105 patients attending the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital (GHH) were followed-up at 12 months and changes in health status were measured by the EuroQol (EQOL) and the ORIDL. In the second study, 187 new patients at the GHH were followed-up at 3, 12, and 33 months, using the ORIDL, the Short Form 12 (SF-12), and the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP). In study three, 323 patients in primary care were followed for 1 month post-consultation using the ORIDL and MYMOP. In all 3 studies the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) was also used as an outcome measure. RESULTS: Study 1 showed substantial improvements in main complaint and well-being over 12 months using the ORIDL, with two-thirds of patients reporting improvements in daily living. These improvements were not significantly correlated with changes in serial measures of the EQOL between baseline and 12 months, but were correlated with the EQOL transitions measure. Study 2 showed step-wise improvements in ORIDL scores between 3 and 33 months, which were only weakly associated with similar changes in SF-12 scores. However, MYMOP change scores correlated well with ORIDL scores at all time points. Study 3 showed similar high correlations between ORIDL scores and MYMOP scores. In all 3 studies, ORIDL scores were also significantly correlated with PEI-outcome scores. CONCLUSION: There is significant agreement between patient outcomes assessed by the ORIDL and the EQOL transition scale, the MYMOP, and the PEI-outcome instrument, suggesting that the ORIDL may be a valid and sensitive tool for measuring change in relation to impact on life.

Quality in general practice consultations; a qualitative study of the views of patients living in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Inequality in health and health care services is an important policy issue internationally as well as in the UK, and is closely linked to socio-economic deprivation, which in Scotland is concentrated in and around Glasgow. Patients views on primary care in deprived areas are not well documented. In the present study we explore the views of patients living in a high deprivation area on the quality of consultations in general practice. METHODS: Qualitative focus group study set in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in a large peripheral housing estate in Glasgow, Scotland. 11 focus groups were conducted; 8 with local community groups and 3 with other local residents. In total 72 patients took part. Grounded theory was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Patients' perceptions of the quality of the consultation with GPs consisted of two broad, inter-relating themes; (1) the GPs' competence, and (2) the GPs empathy or ' caring'. Competence was often assumed but many factors coloured this assumption, in particular whether patients had experienced (directly or indirectly with a close family member) 'successful' outcomes with that doctor previously or not. 'Caring' related to patients feeling (a) listened to by the doctor and being able to talk; (b) valued as an individual by the doctor (c) that the doctor understood 'the bigger picture', and (d) the doctors' explanations were clear and understandable. Relational continuity of care (being able to see the same GP and having a good relationship), and having sufficient time in the consultation were closely linked with perceptions of consultation quality. CONCLUSION: Patients from deprived areas want holistic GPs who understand the realities of life in such areas and whom they can trust as both competent and genuinely caring. Without this, they may judge doctors as socially distant and emotionally detached. Relational continuity, empathy and sufficient time in consultations are key factors in achieving this.

Predicting and comparing patient satisfaction in four different modes of health care across a nation.

This study aims to inform strategic policy makers and managers about the value of general population surveys by determining and comparing dimensions of satisfaction in four different health services in Scotland: general practice, domiciliary care, outpatients and inpatients (including day cases). The research design involved secondary data analysis of a national telephone survey conducted to inform the development of a national health plan. The database was created using a stratified quota sample of 3052 people of 16 years and above resident in Scotland in 2000. The main outcome measures investigated were overall measures of patient satisfaction with each type of service. Principal components analysis was used to determine the dimensions. Interest was in the extent to which patients, many of whom were the same (having used more than one service), evaluated different services in similar ways, as well as those factors specific to each service. Using logistic regression, the results demonstrate that interpersonal care and information, and desired improvements in service were universal and key explanatory dimensions in all services, followed by a combination of access, physical facilities, time and quality of food, depending on relevance to the service. These factors, particularly interpersonal care and information, distinguished well the highly satisfied from the others, with age providing further discrimination between non-hospital patients, while gender added to discrimination between inpatients. In conclusion, despite the limitations of telephone interviews, it is feasible to ask about several services at the same time and for the answers to reflect common underlying dimensions of evaluation found in more exhaustive research within each service. These factors offer a set of summary measures by which services can be easily evaluated at a strategic level and point to where efforts to increase patient satisfaction can be maximised.

A pilot prospective study on the consultation and relational empathy, patient enablement, and health changes over 12 months in patients going to the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To relate prospectively initial consultation characteristics-length, empathy, and patient enablement- with perceived health changes in patients going to the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital (GHH). METHODS: Consecutive outpatients completed the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure and the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) immediately after their first consultations, again at 3 months, and the PEI also at 12 months. The Short Form-12 was completed immediately before and the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome (MYMOP) Profile during the first consultation, and both were repeated at 3 and 12 months. Perceived changes in main complaint and well-being were assessed using the Glasgow Homoeopathic Outcome Scale (GHHOS). RESULTS: Empathy score at first consultation was highly predictive of ongoing empathy score at 3 months (Spearman's rho, 0.572, p < 0.0001). Empathy scores at first consultation also correlated significantly with enablement score at first consultation (rho, 0.325, p < 0.0001) and overall enablement at 12 months (rho, 0.281; p < 0.05). Controlling for the number of subsequent consultations, initial empathy scores were also predictive of change in main complaint, and general well-being, at 3 months (rho, 0.225, 0.213 respectively; p < 0.05). Enablement score at first consultation also predicted overall enablement at 3 months (rho, 0.255; p < 0.05) and 12 months (rho, 0.282; p < 0.05). Initial enablement predicted GHOSS well-being score at 3 months after controlling for number of consultations (rho, 0.279; p < 0.05). Both empathy and enablement at 3 months predicted overall enablement at 12 months (rho, 0.327; p < 0.01 and rho, 0.577; p < 0.0001, respectively). Empathy at 3 months was not significantly related to GHHOS scores at 12 months, whereas enablement scores at 3 months were highly predictive of both GHHOS main complaint and well-being scores at 12 months (rho, 0.459 and 0.507, respectively; p < 0.0001). Empathy and enablement scores did not correlate significantly with changes in SF-12 and MYMOP scores at any of the time points. The length of the first consultation was related to initial and subsequent CARE scores, overall enablement, and GHHOS scores at 3 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Empathy is crucial for enablement, which, in turn, is strongly related to perceived change in main complaint and well-being. The length of time the clinician spends with a patient at initial consultation appears to be an important factor in these complex relationships among process and outcome.