You Cannot Function in "Overwhelm": Helping Primary Care Navigate the Slow End of the Pandemic.

GOAL: This study was developed to explicate underlying organizational factors contributing to the deterioration of primary care clinicians' mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using data from the Larry A. Green Center for the Advancement of Primary Health Care for the Public Good's national survey of primary care clinicians from March 2020 to March 2022, a multidisciplinary team analyzed more than 11,150 open-ended comments. Phase 1 of the analysis happened in real-time as surveys were returned, using deductive and inductive coding. Phase 2 used grounded theory to identify emergent themes. Qualitative findings were triangulated with the survey's quantitative data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The clinicians shifted from feelings of anxiety and uncertainty at the start of the pandemic to isolation, lack of fulfillment, moral injury, and plans to leave the profession. The frequency with which they spoke of depression, burnout, and moral injury was striking. The contributors to this distress included crushing workloads, worsening staff shortages, and insufficient reimbursement. Consequences, both felt and anticipated, included fatigue and demoralization from the inability to manage escalating workloads. Survey findings identified responses that could alleviate the mental health crisis, namely: (1) measuring and customizing workloads based on work capacity; (2) quantifying resources needed to return to sufficient staffing levels; (3) promoting state and federal support for sustainable practice infrastructures with less administrative burden; and (4) creating patient visits of different lengths to rebuild relationships and trust and facilitate more accurate diagnoses. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Attention to clinicians' mental health should be rapidly directed to on-demand, confidential mental health support so they can receive the care they need and not worry about any stigma or loss of license for accepting that help. Interventions that address work-life balance, workload, and resources can improve care, support retention of the critically important primary care workforce, and attract more trainees to primary care careers.

Storylines of family medicine XII: family medicine and the healthcare system.

Storylines of Family Medicine is a 12-part series of thematically linked mini-essays with accompanying illustrations that explore the many dimensions of family medicine, as interpreted by individual family physicians and medical educators in the USA and elsewhere around the world. In 'XII: Family medicine and the future of the healthcare system', authors address the following themes: 'Leadership in family medicine', 'Becoming an academic family physician', 'Advocare-our call to act', 'The paradox of primary care and three simple rules', 'The quadruple aim-melding the patient and the health system', 'Fit-for-purpose medical workforce', 'Universal healthcare-coverage for all', 'The futures of family medicine' and 'The 100th essay.' May readers of these essays feel empowered to be part of family medicine's exciting future.

A novel methodological approach to participant engagement and policy relevance for community-based primary medical care research during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand.

Community-based primary care, such as general practice (GP) or urgent care, serves as the primary point of access to healthcare for most Australians and New Zealanders. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has created significant and ongoing disruptions to primary care. Traditional research methods have contributed to gaps in understanding the experiences of primary care workers during the pandemic. This paper describes a novel research design and method that intended to capture the evolving impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care workers in Australia and New Zealand. Recurrent, rapid cycle surveys were fielded from May 2020 through December 2021 in Australia, and May 2020 through February 2021 in New Zealand. Rapid survey development, fielding, triangulated analysis and dissemination of results allowed close to real-time communication of relevant issues among general practice workers, researchers and policy-makers. A conceptual model is presented to support longitudinal analysis of primary care worker experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand, and key learnings from applying this novel method are discussed. This paper will assist future research teams in development and execution of policy-relevant research in times of change and may inform further areas of interest for COVID-19 research in primary care.

Is primary care ready for a potential new public health emergency in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, now subsided?

INTRODUCTION: The lingering burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care clinicians and practices poses a public health emergency for the United States. This study uses clinician-reported data to examine changes in primary care demand and capacity. METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, 36 electronic surveys were fielded among primary care clinicians responding to survey invitations as posted on listservs and identified through social media and crowd sourcing. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed on both closed- and open-ended survey questions. RESULTS: An average of 937 respondents per survey represented family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine, geriatrics, and other specialties. Responses reported increases in patient health burden, including worsening chronic care management and increasing volume and complexity. A higher frequency of dental- and eyesight-related issues was noted by respondents, as was a substantial increase in mental or emotional health needs. Respondents also noted increased demand, "record high" wait times, and struggles to keep up with patient needs and the higher volume of patient questions. Frequent qualitative statements highlighted the mismatch of patient needs with practice capacity. Staffing shortages and the inability to fill open clinical positions impaired clinicians' ability to meet patient needs and a substantial proportion of respondents indicated an intention to leave the profession or knew someone who had. CONCLUSION: These data signal an urgent need to take action to support the ability of primary care to meet ongoing patient and population health care needs.

Telemedicine in Primary Care: Lessons Learned About Implementing Health Care Innovations During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine emerged as an important tool in primary care. Technology and policy-related challenges, however, revealed barriers to adoption and implementation. This report describes the findings from weekly and monthly surveys of primary care clinicians regarding telemedicine during the first 2 years of the pandemic. METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, we conducted electronic surveys using convenience samples obtained through social networking and crowdsourcing. Unique tokens were used to confidentially track respondents over time. A multidisciplinary team conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses to identify key concepts and trends. RESULTS: A total of 36 surveys resulted in an average of 937 respondents per survey, representing clinicians from all 50 states and multiple specialties. Initial responses indicated general difficulties in implementing telemedicine due to poor infrastructure and reimbursement mechanisms. Over time, attitudes toward telemedicine improved and respondents considered video and telephone-based care important tools for their practice, though not a replacement for in-person care. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of telemedicine during COVID-19 identified barriers and opportunities for technology adoption and highlighted steps that could support primary care clinics' ability to learn, adapt, and implement technology.

The Role of Primary Care in Improving Population Health.

Policy Points Systems based on primary care have better population health, health equity, and health care quality, and lower health care expenditure. Primary care can be a boundary-spanning force to integrate and personalize the many factors from which population health emerges. Equitably advancing population health requires understanding and supporting the complexly interacting mechanisms by which primary care influences health, equity, and health costs.

Primary Care: A Critical Stopgap of Mental Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a worsening mental health crisis, while also dramatically reducing access to in-person primary care services. Primary care, an essential provider of mental health services, rapidly adopted telemedicine to address behavioral health needs. Here we examine the provision of mental health services by primary care during the pandemic, including the essential use of telemedicine. METHODS: Data were collected via a series of national, cross-sectional surveys of primary care clinicians in November 2020 by the Larry A. Green Center. The survey was distributed through a network of partner organizations and subscribers. Descriptive and chi squared analysis were utilized. RESULTS: Among 1,472 respondents, 88% reported increased mental health needs and 37% reported higher rates of substance use among patients. Most (65%) clinicians became more involved in providing mental health support, and 64% reported using telemedicine to provide behavioral health services. Phone-based care was more common for care delivery among patients who were uninsured (60% vs 42%, P < .01), Medicare beneficiaries (45% vs 36%, P < .05), non-English speaking (67% vs 40%, P < .001), and racial and ethnic minorities (58% vs 34%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care is a leading provider of mental health services and has played a critical role during the pandemic. Primary care clinicians have strong relationships with their patients as well as outreach within communities that may otherwise struggle to access mental health services. The use of telemedicine in primary care, and specifically phone-based services, has been an essential tool to providing equitable access to mental health services.

Exploration of the psychometric properties of the Person-Centred Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) in a Chinese primary care population in Hong Kong: a cross-sectional validation study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the validity and psychometric properties of the Chinese Person-Centred Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) in a Chinese-speaking population. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: A primary care clinic in Hong Kong. PARTICIPANTS: 300 Chinese adult patients (150 males and 150 females) were recruited from a primary care clinic to complete a questionnaire containing the PCPCM, Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE), Patient Enablement Index (PEI) and Adult (short version) Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT). The Chinese PCPCM was readministered to 118 participants after 14 days for test-retest reliability. OUTCOME MEASURES: The construct validity, reliability and sensitivity of the Chinese PCPCM. RESULTS: The Chinese PCPCM was identified to have a one-factor construct, with good item fit and unidimensionality on Rasch analysis. Internal reliability was high (Cronbach's alpha >0.8) with moderate test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.622, p<0.001). Significant correlations (0.58, 0.42, 0.48) between the PCPCM and CARE, PEI and Adult (short version) PCAT scores supported good convergent construct validity. PCPCM scores were higher among patients who had known their doctors for a longer period or who were more likely to be able to see the same doctor at every visit, and among those who self-reported to have 'better health' rather than 'worse health'. CONCLUSION: The Chinese PCPCM appears to be a valid, reliable and sensitive instrument for evaluating the quality of person-centred care among primary care patients in Hong Kong. Further studies are needed to confirm the utility of this instrument in other Chinese-speaking populations around the world.

Measuring Primary Care Across 35 OECD Countries.

PURPOSE: To examine the psychometric properties and scores of the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) in 28 languages and 35 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. METHODS: Using a paid online sampling service, we requested age- and sex-representative samples of 360 adults in each country. We administered the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure-a previously validated 11-item, patient-reported measure that was developed using what patients and clinicians said is most important about primary care. We also assessed construct validity through associations with demographics, the Patient-Enablement Instrument, number of years the person had been with their primary care physician and practice, whether the patient thought the doctor knowing the results would improve their care, and whether it was hard to complete the survey. We assessed the psychometric properties of the PCPCM in each country and report the summative and item-specific PCPCM scores for each country. RESULTS: The PCPCM exhibited solid psychometric properties across all languages and countries, with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.88 to 0.95, and corrected item-total correlations ranging from 0.47 to 0.81, with the vast majority of countries ranging from the low 0.50s to the high 0.70s. Multiple analyses showed strong evidence of concurrent validity. With a potential range from a low of 1 to a high of 4, the overall mean score was 2.74, with a standard deviation of 0.19. Mean PCPCM scores ranged from the lowest in Sweden (2.28) to the highest in Turkey (3.08), with Germany ranking second (3.01), and the United States third (2.99). CONCLUSION: The internal consistency and concurrent validity of the PCPCM across multiple countries provides strong evidence of the coherence of the breadth of primary care functions that patients and clinicians say are important. The diversity of total and item-specific scores across countries provokes interesting hypotheses about the influence of each different country's policies, practices, demographics, and culture on primary care, and provides a strong impetus for further ecological and individual data analyses using the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure. Annals "Online First" article.

Changing Reasons for Visiting Primary Care Over a 35-Year Period.

OBJECTIVE: To understand changes in reasons for visit to primary care in the face of an aging population, growing evidence for proactive preventive and chronic disease services, and the rise of the chronic care model. METHODS: We examined the reason for visits to primary care physicians using the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) from 1980-2015. RESULTS: Among all physicians, the percent of visits for prevention increased from 17% in 2001 to 20% in 2015. Among visits to primary care, most continued to be for acute problems - with the percent of visits for acute illness declining over the past 15 years, after remaining steady for two decades. Preventive care visits increased from 19% in 2001 to 26% in 2015. The percent of primary care visits for chronic conditions declined between 1980 and 2000, and then remained steady, accounting for 30% in 2001 and 31% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Growing emphasis on chronic disease management is not reflected in the percent of primary care visits for chronic illness. This study highlights the potential utility of longitudinal data within a historical interpretive frame, while raising questions about the utility of using a main reason for visit to classify complex primary care visits.

Cultural adaptation and content validity of a Chinese translation of the 'Person-Centered Primary Care Measure': findings from cognitive debriefing.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an equivalent Chinese translation of the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) and to establish its cultural adaptability and content validity through cognitive debriefing. DESIGN: The original English PCPCM was first translated into Chinese by double forward-translation by professional translators. The reconciliated Chinese version was then doubly back-translated into English by two other professional translators blinded to the forward-translation. On affirmation on its linguistic equivalence with the developers of the original English PCPCM, the reconciliated Chinese PCPCM was sent for cognitive debriefing with 20 Chinese-speaking primary care subjects by a trained interviewer using structured probing questions to collect their opinions on the clarity, comprehensibility and relevance of each item and response option in the Measure. SETTING: Subjects were invited from a primary care clinic in Hong Kong to undergo the cognitive debriefing interviews. The interviews were divided into four groups chronologically to allow revision of the items to be made in between. PARTICIPANTS: Ten males and 10 females above the age of 18 completed the cognitive interviews. They were all Cantonese-speaking Chinese recruited by convenience sampling. Subjects with cognitive impairment, could not read Chinese, too old or too sick to complete the interviews were excluded from the study. RESULTS: An average of 3.3 min (range 3-4 min) was required for the subjects to self-complete the Measure. All items were generally perceived to be easily understood and relevant. Modifications were made to items with the content validity index (CVI) on clarity or understanding <0.8 in each round of the interviews or if a majority of the subjects suggested rewording. Revisions were made to two items in the Chinese PCPCM throughout the whole cognitive debriefing process before the final version was confirmed. The average CVI on clarity of the Chinese PCPCM items ranged from 0.75 to 1. The average CVI on understanding ranged from 0.7 to 1. The average CVI on relevance ranged from 0.55 to 1. CONCLUSIONS: The content validity of the PCPCM was ascertained in terms of its clarity, understandability and relevance to allow further testing of its psychometric properties in a larger Chinese population.

Low-Intensity Intervention Supports Diabetes Registry Implementation: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in the Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN).

BACKGROUND: Previous research demonstrated that registries are effective for improving clinical guideline adherence for the care of patients with type 2 diabetes. However, registry implementation has typically relied on intensive support (such as practice facilitators) for practice change and care improvement. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a remotely delivered, low-intensity organizational change intervention supports implementation and use of diabetes registries in primary care. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized controlled effectiveness trial of providing limited external support leveraging internal practice resources and problem-solving capacities for driving diabetes registry implementation in 32 practices in Virginia. INTERVENTION: All practices identified local implementation champions who participated in an in-person education session on the value and use of diabetes registries, while intervention practices were also paired with peer mentors and had access to a physician informaticist, who worked remotely to assist practices with implementation. MAIN MEASURES: Practice champions reported progress on registry implementation milestone achievement, and reported practice-level organizational capacity by using a modified version of the Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC). KEY RESULTS: Intervention practices were significantly more likely to have implemented a registry (44% vs 6%, P = .04) and to have achieved more implementation milestones (5.5 vs 2.6, P < .0001) than control practices. Baseline ACIC scores indicated room for organizational improvement with regard to chronic illness care (overall median, 6.4; range, 3.8 to 10.8) and clinical information systems use (median, 6.0; range, 0 to 11) with no significant differences between intervention and control practices. CONCLUSIONS: Remotely provided guidance paired with limited in-person assistance can support rapid implementation of diabetes registries in typical primary care practices.

Caregiver and Clinician Perspectives on Missed Well-Child Visits.

PURPOSE: Despite the benefits of well-child care visits, up to one-half of these visits are missed. Little is known about why children miss them, so we undertook a qualitative study to elucidate these factors. METHODS: We interviewed 17 caregivers whose children had missed well-child visits and 6 clinicians, focusing on 3 areas: the value of well-child visits, barriers to attendance, and facilitators of attendance. Transcripts were analyzed with a grounded theory approach and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Caregivers and clinicians identified similar important aspects of well-child visits: immunizations, detection of disease, and monitoring of growth and development. Both groups identified similar barriers to attendance: transportation, difficulty taking time off from work, child care, and other social stressors. CONCLUSIONS: Further work to explore how addressing social determinants of health might improve attendance of well-child visits is needed.

Reporting of paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy symptoms to clinicians among women with breast cancer: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Cases of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) under-reporting have been sporadically described in the literature, but no studies have focused on actively examining this behavior. Our primary aim was to identify women who purposefully under-reported CIPN, along with reasons for doing so. A secondary aim was to explore factors enabling or hindering communication of CIPN to clinicians. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer who had received paclitaxel in a prospective observational study. The interview guide was developed based on factors hypothesized to influence side effect disclosure to clinicians. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically content analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-four women were interviewed. Three main themes emerged from the analysis: (1) enablers of CIPN reporting (e.g., positive relationship with the oncology team, sufficient appointment time, existence of alternative communication channels to office visits, expectation of CIPN as a side effect); (2) deterrents to CIPN reporting (e.g., perception of need to complete the full course of therapy, fear of treatment discontinuation, lack of knowledge of long-term consequences of CIPN); and (3) balancing survival versus functional impairment due to CIPN. Women prioritized efficacy over CIPN until physical functioning was meaningfully affected. No patients reported purposeful CIPN under-reporting, but three women admitted having considered doing so. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence of CIPN withholding, women considered both the effectiveness and the toxicity of paclitaxel treatment, as well as beliefs about treatment and long-term consequences of CIPN and relationship with the oncology team, when deciding whether to report CIPN symptoms.

Opportunities for Occupational Therapy on a Primary Care Team.

IMPORTANCE: Leaders in the occupational therapy profession have called for occupational therapy's inclusion in primary care, but little is known about the occupational needs of patients in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To explore the need for and potential role of occupational therapy in a team-based primary care clinic. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study using a convenience sample of clinicians and patients. Meetings and semistructured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded by multiple coders using a general immersion-crystallization approach to identify relevant themes. SETTING: Outpatient complex care clinic of an urban academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: The study included a voluntary sample of clinicians and patients from the complex care clinic. Patients were recruited from a staff-provided list; eligible patients had attended the clinic for at least 1 yr. All patients had multiple chronic conditions and were uninsured or received Medicaid. RESULTS: Researchers attended 10 clinician team meetings and conducted 13 patient interviews and 10 clinician interviews. Four domains of patient need were identified by both patients and clinicians: complex medical management, patients' limited resources, mental health needs, and challenges to occupation. Clinicians also identified cognitive-behavioral challenges affecting care, including lack of engagement and poor problem solving. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The makeup of the clinic team reflected their intent to address medical, socioeconomic, and mental health domains. However, cognitive-behavioral challenges and patients' occupational limitations were not consistently addressed. Thus, patients had unmet needs that occupational therapy practitioners were qualified to address. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS: This study adds to the available literature examining patient needs and clinician challenges in a primary care clinic. Patients have occupational needs that are not being addressed in primary care, indicating a need for occupational therapy in this setting.

A New Comprehensive Measure of High-Value Aspects of Primary Care.

PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a concise measure of primary care that is grounded in the experience of patients, clinicians, and health care payers. METHODS: We asked crowd-sourced samples of 412 patients, 525 primary care clinicians, and 85 health care payers to describe what provides value in primary care, then asked 70 primary care and health services experts in a 2½ day international conference to provide additional insights. A multidisciplinary team conducted a qualitative analysis of the combined data to develop a parsimonious set of patient-reported items. We evaluated items using factor analysis, Rasch modeling, and association analyses among 2 online samples and 4 clinical samples from diverse patient populations. RESULTS: The resulting person-centered primary care measure parsimoniously represents the broad scope of primary care, with 11 domains each represented by a single item: accessibility, advocacy, community context, comprehensiveness, continuity, coordination, family context, goal-oriented care, health promotion, integration, and relationship. Principal axes factor analysis identified a single factor. Factor loadings and corrected item-total correlations were >0.6 in online samples (n = 2,229) and >0.5 in clinical samples (n = 323). Factor scores were fairly normally distributed in online patient samples, and skewed toward higher ratings in point-of-care patient samples. Rasch models showed a broad spread of person and item scores, acceptable item-fit statistics, and little item redundancy. Preliminary concurrent validity analyses supported hypothesized associations. CONCLUSIONS: The person-centered primary care measure reliably, comprehensively, and parsimoniously assesses the aspects of care thought to represent high-value primary care by patients, clinicians, and payers. The measure is ready for further validation and outcome analyses, and for use in focusing attention on what matters about primary care, while reducing measurement burden.

Core Principles to Improve Primary Care Quality Management.

Quality management in American health care is in crisis. Performance measurement in its current form is costly, redundant, and labyrinthine. Increasingly, its contribution to achieving the Quadruple Aim is under close examination, especially in the domain of primary care services, where the burden of measurement is heaviest. This article assesses the state of quality management in primary care in the United States, particularly the 2015 Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, in comparative perspective, drawing lessons from the Quality and Outcomes Framework in the United Kingdom. The health care delivery function specific to primary care is pivotal to crossing the quality chasm, yet prior efforts to improve the quality of this function have failed more often than succeeded. These failures are the result of quality programs unguided by core principles of primary care. Quality management in primary care requires a more disciplined approach, adherent to 4 foundational principles: optimizing holistic patient and population health; harnessing the Quadruple Aim as a dynamic whole; applying measurements as tools for quality, not outcomes of quality; and prioritizing therapeutic relationships. These principles serve as the foundation for a bridge to high-functioning primary care that will lead American health care closer to the Quadruple Aim.

Primary Care Physician Perspectives about Antipsychotics and Other Medications for Symptoms of Dementia.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines, policies, and warnings have been applied to reduce the use of medications for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Because of rare dangerous side effects, antipsychotics have been singled out in these efforts. However, antipsychotics are still prescribed "off label" to hundreds of thousands of seniors residing in nursing homes and communities. Our objective was to evaluate how and why primary-care physicians (PCPs) employ nonpharmacologic strategies and drugs for BPSD. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews analyzed via template, immersion and crystallization, and thematic development of 26 PCPs (16 family practice, 10 general internal medicine) in full time primary-care practice for at least 3 years in Northwestern Virginia. RESULTS: PCPs described 4 major themes regarding BPSD management: (1) nonpharmacologic methods have substantial barriers; (2) medication use is not constrained by those barriers and is perceived as easy, efficacious, reasonably safe, and appropriate; (3) pharmacologic policies decrease the use of targeted medications, including antipsychotics, but also have unintended consequences such as increased use of alternative risky medications; and (4) PCPs need practical evidence-based guidelines for all aspects of BPSD management. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs continue to prescribe medications because they meet patient-oriented goals and because PCPs perceive drugs, including antipsychotics and their alternatives, to be more effective and less dangerous than evidence suggests. To optimally treat BPSD, PCPs need supportive verified prescribing guidelines and access to nonpharmacologic modalities that are as affordable, available, and efficacious as drugs; these require and deserve significant additional research and payer support. Community PCPs should be included in BPSD policy and guideline development.

Caregiver Perspectives About Using Antipsychotics and Other Medications for Symptoms of Dementia.

Background and Objectives: To avoid "chemical restraints," policies and guidelines have been implemented to curb the use of medications for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Antipsychotics have been particularly targeted because of their rare severe side effects. Consequently, caregiver directed non-pharmacologic therapies have increased while medication use for BPSD has diminished. Despite such initiatives, however, antipsychotics continue to be prescribed "off-label" for roughly 20% of nursing home patients. How caregivers impact management approaches and prescribing decisions for BPSD, including antipsychotic use, is poorly understood. Aim: assesses experiences and perceptions of family and nursing caregivers regarding factors influencing medication decisions for BPSD. Research Design and Methods: Semi-structured interviews, analyzed via template, immersion and crystallization, and thematic development. Thirty-two participants from Northwestern Virginia representing five groups of caregivers for dementia patients were interviewed: families of community-dwelling, assisted living, and nursing home patients, and nurses from the same assisted living/nursing home facilities. Results: Caregivers described three major themes regarding medications: (a) Systemic barriers exist for non-pharmacologic BPSD therapies. (b) Medications have few barriers, and seem generally effective and safe. (c) When non-pharmacologic measures fail, medications, including antipsychotics, may be necessary and appropriate for palliation of patient distress. Discussion and Implications: To further reduce medications for BPSD, obstacles to services and alternative therapies must be mitigated. Caregiver perceptions that medications are generally safe and effective contribute to their continued use. Guidelines and policies for BPSD management should incorporate the caregiver position that medications, including antipsychotics, are sometimes justified and required to alleviate patient suffering.