Access and triage in contemporary general practice: A novel theory of digital candidacy.

To access contemporary healthcare, patients must find and navigate a complex socio-technical network of human and digital actors linked in multi-modal pathways. Asynchronous, digitally-mediated triage decisions have largely replaced synchronous conversations between humans. In this paper, we draw on a large qualitative dataset from a multi-site study of remote and digital technologies in general practice to understand widening inequities of access. We theorise our data by bringing together traditional candidacy theory (in particular, concepts of self-assessment, help-seeking, adjudication and negotiation) and socio-technical and technology structuration theories (in particular, concepts of user configuration, articulation, distanciation, disembedding, and recursivity), thus producing a novel theory of digital candidacy. We propose that both human and technological actors (in different ways) embody social structures which affect how they 'act' in social situations. Digital technologies contain inbuilt assumptions about users' capabilities, needs, rights, and skills. Patients' ability to self-assess as sick, access digital platforms, self-advocate, and navigate multiple stages in the pathway, including adapting to and compensating for limitations in the technology, vary widely and are markedly patterned by disadvantage. Not every patient can craft an accurate digital facsimile on which the subsequent adjudication decision will be made; those who create incomplete, flawed or unpersuasive digital facsimiles may be deprioritised or misdirected. Staff who know about such patients may use articulation measures to ensure a personalised and appropriate access package, but they cannot identify or fully mitigate all such cases. The decisions and actions of human and technological agents at the time of an attempt to access care can significantly influence, disrupt, and reconstitute candidacy both immediately and recursively over time, and also recursively shape the system itself. These findings underscore the need for services to be (co-)designed with attention to the exclusionary tendencies of digital technologies and technology-supported processes and pathways.

Multiple dental implant failures: A retrospective analysis of implant retention time and risk factors.

BACKGROUND: The present retrospective study investigates implant retention time in patients who had experienced multiple implant failures and explores possible risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent placement of at least two implants and experienced failure of two or more implants between 2004 and 2022 were included in the study population. Both patient- and implant-related risk factors, including age, sex, medical history, medication intake, smoking, alcohol consumption, implant properties and anatomical and surgical factors, were evaluated. Descriptive analysis and univariate and multivariate statistical analysis were performed to assess implant retention time and failure risk, with the level of statistical significance set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 371 patients (178 men and 193 women, median age 63 years) with 3,141 implants were included in the analysis (3.14% of all patients treated since 2004). Out of these implants, 1,090 failures were observed (59.01% of all failed implants at the Academy of Oral Implantology, Vienna, Austria), with a median retention time of 108.11 months. Patients who lost teeth due to periodontitis did not show a tendency towards early implant failure (P > 0.001). Nicotine consumption (P < 0.001), age < 50 years and > 70 years (P < 0.001), maxillary location (P = 0.05), transgingival healing (P < 0.001), no provisional restoration (P = 0.035) and short implant length (P < 0.001) were associated with statistically significantly shorter implant retention times. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with multiple implant failures displayed cluster behaviour and had a median implant retention time of 9 years. Smoking, short implant length, single-stage surgery and immediate loading were all associated with a higher risk of failure, whereas age between 50 and 70 years and tooth loss due to periodontitis were associated with a longer implant retention time.

Patients' Perspectives on Plans Generated During Primary Care Visits and Self-Reported Adherence at 3 Months: Data From a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective primary care necessitates follow-up actions by the patient beyond the visit. Prior research suggests room for improvement in patient adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to understand patients' views on their primary care visits, the plans generated therein, and their self-reported adherence after 3 months. METHODS: As part of a large multisite cluster randomized pragmatic trial in 3 health care organizations, patients completed 2 surveys-the first within 7 days after the index primary care visit and another 3 months later. For this analysis of secondary outcomes, we combined the results across all study participants to understand patient adherence to care plans. We recorded patient characteristics and survey responses. Cross-tabulation and chi-square statistics were used to examine bivariate associations, adjusting for multiple comparisons when appropriate. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess how patients' intention to follow, agreement, and understanding of their plans impacted their plan adherence, allowing for differences in individual characteristics. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to characterize the patient's self-reported plans and reasons for adhering (or not) to the plan 3 months later. RESULTS: Of 2555 patients, most selected the top box option (9=definitely agree) that they felt they had a clear plan (n=2011, 78%), agreed with the plan (n=2049, 80%), and intended to follow the plan (n=2108, 83%) discussed with their provider at the primary care visit. The most common elements of the plans reported included reference to exercise (n=359, 14.1%), testing (laboratory, imaging, etc; n=328, 12.8%), diet (n=296, 11.6%), and initiation or adjustment of medications; (n=284, 11.1%). Patients who strongly agreed that they had a clear plan, agreed with the plan, and intended to follow the plan were all more likely to report plan completion 3 months later (P<.001) than those providing less positive ratings. Patients who reported plans related to following up with the primary care provider (P=.008) to initiate or adjust medications (P≤.001) and to have a specialist visit were more likely to report that they had completely followed the plan (P=.003). Adjusting for demographic variables, patients who indicated intent to follow their plan were more likely to follow-through 3 months later (P<.001). Patients' reasons for completely following the plan were mainly that the plan was clear (n=1114, 69.5%), consistent with what mattered (n=1060, 66.1%), and they were determined to carry through with the plan (n=887, 53.3%). The most common reasons for not following the plan were lack of time (n=217, 22.8%), having decided to try a different approach (n=105, 11%), and the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the plan (n=105, 11%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' initial assessment of their plan as clear, their agreement with the plan, and their initial willingness to follow the plan were all strongly related to their self-reported completion of the plan 3 months later. Patients whose plans involved lifestyle changes were less likely to report that they had "completely" followed their plan. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03385512; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03385512. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/30431.

Training needs for staff providing remote services in general practice: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary general practice includes many kinds of remote encounter. The rise in telephone, video and online modalities for triage and clinical care requires clinicians and support staff to be trained, both individually and as teams, but evidence-based competencies have not previously been produced for general practice. AIM: To identify training needs, core competencies, and learning methods for staff providing remote encounters. DESIGN AND SETTING: Mixed-methods study in UK general practice. METHOD: Data were collated from longitudinal ethnographic case studies of 12 general practices; a multi-stakeholder workshop; interviews with policymakers, training providers, and trainees; published research; and grey literature (such as training materials and surveys). Data were coded thematically and analysed using theories of individual and team learning. RESULTS: Learning to provide remote services occurred in the context of high workload, understaffing, and complex workflows. Low confidence and perceived unmet training needs were common. Training priorities for novice clinicians included basic technological skills, triage, ethics (for privacy and consent), and communication and clinical skills. Established clinicians' training priorities include advanced communication skills (for example, maintaining rapport and attentiveness), working within the limits of technologies, making complex judgements, coordinating multi-professional care in a distributed environment, and training others. Much existing training is didactic and technology focused. While basic knowledge was often gained using such methods, the ability and confidence to make complex judgements were usually acquired through experience, informal discussions, and on-the-job methods such as shadowing. Whole-team training was valued but rarely available. A draft set of competencies is offered based on the findings. CONCLUSION: The knowledge needed to deliver high-quality remote encounters to diverse patient groups is complex, collective, and organisationally embedded. The vital role of non-didactic training, for example, joint clinical sessions, case-based discussions, and in-person, whole-team, on-the-job training, needs to be recognised.

Patient safety in remote primary care encounters: multimethod qualitative study combining Safety I and Safety II analysis.

BACKGROUND: Triage and clinical consultations increasingly occur remotely. We aimed to learn why safety incidents occur in remote encounters and how to prevent them. SETTING AND SAMPLE: UK primary care. 95 safety incidents (complaints, settled indemnity claims and reports) involving remote interactions. Separately, 12 general practices followed 2021-2023. METHODS: Multimethod qualitative study. We explored causes of real safety incidents retrospectively ('Safety I' analysis). In a prospective longitudinal study, we used interviews and ethnographic observation to produce individual, organisational and system-level explanations for why safety and near-miss incidents (rarely) occurred and why they did not occur more often ('Safety II' analysis). Data were analysed thematically. An interpretive synthesis of why safety incidents occur, and why they do not occur more often, was refined following member checking with safety experts and lived experience experts. RESULTS: Safety incidents were characterised by inappropriate modality, poor rapport building, inadequate information gathering, limited clinical assessment, inappropriate pathway (eg, wrong algorithm) and inadequate attention to social circumstances. These resulted in missed, inaccurate or delayed diagnoses, underestimation of severity or urgency, delayed referral, incorrect or delayed treatment, poor safety netting and inadequate follow-up. Patients with complex pre-existing conditions, cardiac or abdominal emergencies, vague or generalised symptoms, safeguarding issues, failure to respond to previous treatment or difficulty communicating seemed especially vulnerable. General practices were facing resource constraints, understaffing and high demand. Triage and care pathways were complex, hard to navigate and involved multiple staff. In this context, patient safety often depended on individual staff taking initiative, speaking up or personalising solutions. CONCLUSION: While safety incidents are extremely rare in remote primary care, deaths and serious harms have resulted. We offer suggestions for patient, staff and system-level mitigations.

Association of physician burnout with perceived EHR work stress and potentially actionable factors.

OBJECTIVE: Physicians of all specialties experienced unprecedented stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating preexisting burnout. We examine burnout's association with perceived and actionable electronic health record (EHR) workload factors and personal, professional, and organizational characteristics with the goal of identifying levers that can be targeted to address burnout. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey of physicians of all specialties in an academic health center, using a standard measure of burnout, self-reported EHR work stress, and EHR-based work assessed by the number of messages regarding prescription reauthorization and use of a staff pool to triage messages. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses examined the relationship among burnout, perceived EHR work stress, and actionable EHR work factors. RESULTS: Of 1038 eligible physicians, 627 responded (60% response rate), 49.8% reported burnout symptoms. Logistic regression analysis suggests that higher odds of burnout are associated with physicians feeling higher level of EHR stress (odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.25), having more prescription reauthorization messages (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.47), not feeling valued (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.69-7.22) or aligned in values with clinic leaders (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.87-4.27), in medical practice for ≤15 years (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.63-4.12), and sleeping for <6 h/night (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.12-2.67). DISCUSSION: Perceived EHR stress and prescription reauthorization messages are significantly associated with burnout, as are non-EHR factors such as not feeling valued or aligned in values with clinic leaders. Younger physicians need more support. CONCLUSION: A multipronged approach targeting actionable levers and supporting young physicians is needed to implement sustainable improvements in physician well-being.

Best practices for managing depression and suicide risk in World Trade Center responders and survivors.

A growing body of research supports the association between exposure to the World Trade Center attacks and increased risk of subsequent depression, particularly among individuals who directly witnessed the attacks or participated in the rescue and recovery efforts. Depressive disorders, often comorbid with PTSD and substance use disorders, present an ongoing and substantial health burden for 9/11 responders and survivors. These conditions are associated with an increased risk of suicide mortality, highlighting the importance of screening for depression and suicidal ideation in this population. This paper, part of a series for primary care and other clinicians, offers a brief overview of research on depression in WTC-exposed populations, summarizes critical elements for identifying and managing depression, and offers best practices for suicide prevention.

World Trade Center psychological exposures and trauma related disorders: PTSD and adjustment disorders.

The relationship between exposure to the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster and elevated rates of trauma related psychiatric illnesses in 9/11 responders and survivors has been well documented. This paper is part of a series to promote the practice of evidence-based medicine when managing persons with WTC-related conditions and focuses on "Trauma and Stressor Related Disorders," a diagnostic category that includes posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and adjustment disorder. It offers background on 9/11-related trauma exposure, a summary of research findings from this cohort, and is followed by brief diagnostic and treatment information from selected clinical practice guidelines.

The World Trade Center Health Program: an introduction to best practices.

More than 20 years have elapsed since the September 11, 2001 (9/11) terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC), Pentagon and at Shanksville, PA. Many persons continue to suffer a variety of physical and mental health conditions following their exposures to a mixture of incompletely characterized toxicants and psychological stressors at the terrorist attack sites. Primary care and specialized clinicians should ask patients who may have been present at any of the 9/11 sites about their 9/11 exposures, especially patients with cancer, respiratory symptoms, chronic rhinosinusitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, psychiatric symptoms, and substance use disorders. Clinicians, especially those in the NY metropolitan area, should know how to evaluate, diagnose, and treat patients with conditions that could be associated with exposure to the 9/11 attacks and its aftermath. As such, this issue of Archives contains a series of updates to clinical best practices relevant to medical conditions whose treatment is covered by the WTC Health Program. This first paper in the 14-part series describes the purpose of this series, defines the WTC Health Program and its beneficiaries, and explains how relevant Clinical Practice Guidelines were identified. This paper also reminds readers that because physical and mental health conditions are often intertwined, a coordinated approach to care usually works best and referral to health centers affiliated with the WTC Health Program may be necessary, since all such Centers offer multidisciplinary care.

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Mediates the Association between Traumatic World Trade Center Dust Cloud Exposure and Ongoing Systemic Inflammation in Community Members.

Exposure to World Trade Center (WTC) dust/fumes and traumas on 11 September 2001 has been reported as a risk factor for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other mental/physical health symptoms in WTC-affected populations. Increased systemic inflammation and oxidative stress from the exposure and subsequent illnesses have been proposed as contributors to the underlying biological processes. Many blood-based biomarkers of systemic inflammation, including C-reactive protein (CRP), are useful for non-invasive diagnostic and monitoring of disease process, and also potential targets for therapeutic interventions. Twenty years after 9/11, however, the relationships between WTC exposure, chronic PTSD, and systemic inflammation are only beginning to be systematically investigated in the WTC-affected civilian population despite the fact that symptoms of PTSD and systemic inflammation are still common and persistent. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap, using enrollees of the WTC Environmental Health Center (EHC), a federally designated treatment and surveillance program for community members (WTC Survivors) exposed to the 9/11 terrorist attack. We conducted a mediation analysis to investigate the association between acute WTC dust cloud traumatic exposure (WDCTE) on 9/11, chronic PTSD symptoms, and levels of systemic inflammation. The data indicate that the chronic PTSD symptoms and some specific symptom clusters of PTSD significantly mediate the WDCTE on systemic inflammation, as reflected by the CRP levels. As both chronic PTSD and systemic inflammation are long-term risk factors for neurodegeneration and cognitive decline, further research on the implications of this finding is warranted.

Clinical risk in remote consultations in general practice: findings from in-COVID-19 pandemic qualitative research.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic-related rise in remote consulting raises questions about the nature and type of risks in remote general practice. AIM: To develop an empirically based and theory-informed taxonomy of risks associated with remote consultations. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative sub-study of data selected from the wider datasets of three large, multi-site, mixed-method studies of remote care in general practice before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups, with a total of 176 clinicians and 43 patients. Data were analysed thematically, taking account of an existing framework of domains of clinical risk. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic brought changes to estates (for example, how waiting rooms were used), access pathways, technologies, and interpersonal interactions. Six domains of risk were evident in relation to the following: (1) practice set-up and organisation (including digital inequalities of access, technology failure, and reduced service efficiency); (2) communication and the clinical relationship (including a shift to more transactional consultations); (3) quality of clinical care (including missed diagnoses, safeguarding challenges, over-investigation, and over-treatment); (4) increased burden on the patient (for example, to self-examine and navigate between services); (5) reduced opportunities for screening and managing the social determinants of health; and (6) workforce (including increased clinician stress and fewer opportunities for learning). CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding potential benefits, if remote consultations are to work safely, risks must be actively mitigated by measures that include digital inclusion strategies, enhanced safety-netting, and training and support for staff.

COPD in Smoking and Non-Smoking Community Members Exposed to the World Trade Center Dust and Fumes.

Background: The characteristics of community members exposed to World Trade Center (WTC) dust and fumes with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) can provide insight into mechanisms of airflow obstruction in response to an environmental insult, with potential implications for interventions. Methods: We performed a baseline assessment of respiratory symptoms, spirometry, small airway lung function measures using respiratory impulse oscillometry (IOS), and blood biomarkers. COPD was defined by the 2019 GOLD criteria for COPD. Patients in the WTC Environmental Health Center with <5 or ≥5 pack year smoking history were classified as nonsmoker-COPD (ns-COPD) or smoker-COPD (sm-COPD), respectively. Main Results: Between August 2005 and March 2018, 467 of the 3430 evaluated patients (13.6%) fit criteria for COPD. Among patients with COPD, 248 (53.1%) were ns-COPD. Patients with ns-COPD had measures of large airway function (FEV1) and small airway measures (R5−20, AX) that were less abnormal than those with sm-COPD. More ns-COPD compared to sm-COPD had a bronchodilator (BD) response measured by spirometry (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.008) or by IOS (36 vs. 21%, p = 0.002). Blood eosinophils did not differ between ns-COPD and sm-COPD, but blood neutrophils were higher in sm-COPD compared to ns-COPD (p < 0.001). Those with sm-COPD were more likely to be WTC local residents than ns-COPD (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Spirometry findings and small airway measures, as well as inflammatory markers, differed between patients with ns-COPD and sm-COPD. These findings suggest potential for differing mechanisms of airway injury in patients with WTC environmental exposures and have potential therapeutic implications.

Why do GPs rarely do video consultations? qualitative study in UK general practice.

BACKGROUND: Fewer than 1% of UK general practice consultations occur by video. AIM: To explain why video consultations are not more widely used in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of a sub-sample of data from three mixed-method case studies of remote consultation services in various UK settings from 2019-2021. METHOD: The dataset included interviews and focus groups with 121 participants from primary care (33 patients, 55 GPs, 11 other clinicians, nine managers, four support staff, four national policymakers, five technology industry). Data were transcribed, coded thematically, and then analysed using the Planning and Evaluating Remote Consultation Services (PERCS) framework. RESULTS: With few exceptions, video consultations were either never adopted or soon abandoned in general practice despite a strong policy push, short-term removal of regulatory and financial barriers, and advances in functionality, dependability, and usability of video technologies (though some products remained 'fiddly' and unreliable). The relative advantage of video was perceived as minimal for most of the caseload of general practice, since many presenting problems could be sorted adequately and safely by telephone and in-person assessment was considered necessary for the remainder. Some patients found video appointments convenient, appropriate, and reassuring but others found a therapeutic presence was only achieved in person. Video sometimes added value for out-of-hours and nursing home consultations and statutory functions (for example, death certification). CONCLUSION: Efforts to introduce video consultations in general practice should focus on situations where this modality has a clear relative advantage (for example, strong patient or clinician preference, remote localities, out-of-hours services, nursing homes).

Cognitive Function among World Trade Center-Exposed Community Members with Mental Health Symptoms.

The World Trade Center Environmental Health Center (WTC EHC), is a federally designated clinical center of excellence for surveillance and treatment of WTC disaster exposed community members (WTC Survivors). Cognitive impairment (CI) has been extensively described in WTC responders and a concern for progressive impairment in all WTC disaster exposed groups has been raised. Cognitive status, however, has not been systematically characterized in the WTC Survivor population. We describe cognitive status in a subgroup of the Survivor population referred for mental health evaluation (N = 480) in the WTC EHC as measured by scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument, and examine their association with WTC exposures and individual-level covariates including PTSD and depression screening inventory scores. In regression analyses, probable cognitive impairment (MoCA score < 26) was found in 59% of the study subjects and was significantly associated with age, race/ethnicity, education, income, depression and PTSD scores. Being caught in the dust cloud on 11 September 2011 was significantly associated with cognitive impairment even after controlling for the above. These data suggest an association with cognitive dysfunction in WTC Survivors with exposure to the toxic dust/fumes and psychological stress from the 9/11 terrorist attack and warrant further systematic study.

Remote care in UK general practice: baseline data on 11 case studies.

Background: Accessing and receiving care remotely (by telephone, video or online) became the default option during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but in-person care has unique benefits in some circumstances. We are studying UK general practices as they try to balance remote and in-person care, with recurrent waves of COVID-19 and various post-pandemic backlogs. Methods: Mixed-methods (mostly qualitative) case study across 11 general practices. Researchers-in-residence have built relationships with practices and become familiar with their contexts and activities; they are following their progress for two years via staff and patient interviews, documents and ethnography, and supporting improvement efforts through co-design. In this paper, we report baseline data. Results: Reflecting our maximum-variety sampling strategy, the 11 practices vary in size, setting, ethos, staffing, population demographics and digital maturity, but share common contextual features-notably system-level stressors such as high workload and staff shortages, and UK's technical and regulatory infrastructure. We have identified both commonalities and differences between practices in terms of how they: 1] manage the 'digital front door' (access and triage) and balance demand and capacity; 2] strive for high standards of quality and safety; 3] ensure digital inclusion and mitigate wider inequalities; 4] support and train their staff (clinical and non-clinical), students and trainees; 5] select, install, pilot and use technologies and the digital infrastructure which support them; and 6] involve patients in their improvement efforts. Conclusions: General practices' responses to pandemic-induced disruptive innovation appear unique and situated. We anticipate that by focusing on depth and detail, this longitudinal study will throw light on why a solution that works well in one practice does not work at all in another. As the study unfolds, we will explore how practices achieve timely diagnosis of urgent or serious illness and manage continuity of care, long-term conditions and complex needs.

We describe early results from the Remote by Default 2 study, which is following 11 UK general practices for two years as they introduce various kinds of remote appointment booking and clinical consultations. We have been using interviews and ethnography (watching real-world activities), and analysing documents (such as practice reports and websites) to prepare case studies of the 11 practices, which vary widely in size, ethos, geographical location, practice population and digital maturity. Our initial interviews identified the following cross-cutting themes, which showed both commonalities and differences across the 11 practices: - The 'digital front door' (patients gaining access using digital portals), which was used to a greater or lesser extent in all practices; some found these systems frustrating and inefficient.- Quality and safety. Staff were concerned about the risk of missing an important diagnosis when consulting remotely, and felt that digitisation could threaten continuity of care.- Digital inclusion. All practices were keen to ensure that patients who lacked digital devices or skills were not disadvantaged; this goal was achieved in different ways (and to different degrees) in different settings.- Staff support and training. Some practices are finding current workload unsustainable due to (among other things) rising patient demand, unfilled staff posts, a post-pandemic backlog of unmet need, and task-shifting from secondary care. Digitisation appears to have increased workload in most practices.- Technologies and infrastructure. The IT infrastructure in each practice had grown in a particular way over time, and was in this sense 'path-dependent' (hence, not easily changed). In conclusion, different practices are responding to the 'disruptive innovation' of digital technologies in very different ways, reflecting their different practice populations, settings and priorities. We plan to follow the above themes over time and explore additional themes including the experience and role of patients.