Shared decision-making performance of general practice residents: an observational study combining observer, resident, and patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is considered fundamental to person-centred care. However, applying SDM may be a challenge for residents in general practice, since it is a complex competence that requires the integration of knowledge and skills from several competency domains. OBJECTIVE: To support learning of SDM during medical residency, we aimed to gain insight in Dutch residents' observed and perceived SDM performance in general practice. METHODS: We evaluated residents' SDM performance from an observer, resident, and patient perspective. Consultations of first- and third-year residents were recorded. Trained observers used the validated Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION5) scale to assess observed SDM performance of residents in 98 actual recorded consultations. Perceived SDM performance was evaluated by residents and patients completing validated SDM questionnaires, supplemented with questions about (the context of) the consultation and perceived relevance of SDM immediately after the consultation. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (mean, SD, minimums, and maximums) and explorative bivariate analyses. RESULTS: The residents' observed mean SDM performance was 19.1 (range, 0-100, SD = 10.9), mean resident self-reported SDM performance was 56.9 (range, 0-100, SD = 18.5), and mean patient-reported SDM performance was 73.3 (range, 0-100, SD = 26.8). We found a significant and positive correlation between observed SDM performance and residents' perceived relevance of SDM for the consultation (t = 4.571, P ≤ 0.001) and the duration of the consultation (r = 0.390, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that there is room for increasing awareness of the potential incongruence between observed and perceived SDM performance during medical residency, in order to facilitate the implementation of SDM in clinical practice.

THE PROBLEM: Shared decision making is an important process in which healthcare professional and patient work together to reach a decision on how to solve a health problem. This decision should include patients' needs and what matters most to them. We investigated if consultations between general practitioners in training (i.e. residents) and their patients demonstrate shared decision making. The research methods: We asked the residents and patients to respond to questions on their experience of shared decision making right after the consultation. We recorded 98 consultations of residents with their patients. Two researchers rated to what extent residents demonstrated shared decision-making behaviours during these consultations. THE RESULTS: The patients reported more shared decision making than the residents (patients: 73 versus residents: 57 on a 0­100 scale). The researchers observed low levels of SDM during the consultations (19 on a 0­100 scale). Our conclusion: Residents should be aware that shared decision making does not yet frequently occur in practice. To improve the extent to which residents share decisions with their patients in general practice, residents should learn why, when, and how to involve patients in decision making during consultations.

[Quality of discharge summary for patients with limited life expectancy]. / Communicatie rondom ontslag van terminale patiënten.

The written discharge summary is the main vector of communication and serves as a critical method of patient information transfer between hospitalist and primary care provider. It is a shown challenge to timely delivery and completeness of a discharge letter, especially when it involves patients in palliative care or with a limited life expectancy. Despite the implementation of standardized letters and guidelines. Personalized interactive information transfer of hospital discharge summary between hospitalist and primary care provider should include a written as well as the strong consideration of an oral transmission. This should ensure continuity of care and limit deficiencies in content and availability of critical medical information. Joint responsibility of continuous care instead of simply a transfer.

Differences between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient-perceived empathy: a cross-sectional study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Empathy has positive effects on a range of healthcare outcomes. It is therefore an important skill for a GP. However, the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient perception of GP empathic communication during consultations is still unclear. AIM: To investigate the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient-perceived empathy. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study in primary care in the Netherlands, between December 2016 and February 2017. METHOD: GPs and their patients were asked to fill in an empathy questionnaire directly after a consultation. Patient perception of received empathy during the consultation was measured through the Dutch version of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) questionnaire. GP perception of delivered empathy during the consultation was measured with an adapted version of the CARE questionnaire. RESULTS: The authors obtained questionnaires from 147 consultations by 34 different GPs in 16 primary care practices. A total of 143 consultations were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Mean patient-perceived empathy score was significantly higher than mean GPs' empathy score (42.1, range 20.0 to 50.0 and 31.6, range 24.0 to 41.0, respectively, P<0.0001). Furthermore, a low correlation (r = 0.06) was found between GP empathy score and patient-perceived empathy score. CONCLUSION: GPs rate the delivered empathy during consultations consistently and significantly lower than their patients experience empathy during consultations. Moreover, GPs' impressions of the empathy delivered during the consultation do not predict the actual amount of empathy perceived by their patients. Patients experience a great deal of empathy during their clinical encounter. GPs' self-reports on empathy delivered gives an inaccurate reflection, and underestimates patient-perceived empathy.

[More sensitive approach to question of sexual orientation]. / Genuanceerde aanpak bij vragen naar seksuele oriëntatie.

Doctors encounter lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) patients. Most LGBs are physically and mentally healthy, but LGBs also have unique healthcare needs, that is mental health issues, sexually-transmitted diseases including HIV infection, substance use, and avoidance of healthcare. Sexual minority stress due to stigmatisation, rejection, internalised homophobia, bullying and violence is a causal issue. Optimising care for LGBs involves knowing patients' sexual orientation by asking them. As sexual orientation comprises the domains of sexual identity, sexual attraction and sexual behaviour, all should be addressed appropriately as these domains together or separately determine the impact on health. Sexual identity correlates closely, but not completely, with sexual behaviour. Individuals may engage in same-sex sexual behaviour, but not identify themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual. Patients are willing to answer questions about their sexual orientation. Doctors should take the initiative to discuss sexual orientation and avoid making heteronormative assumptions. The uptake of LGB-related issues in guidelines and educational programmes may improve doctors' awareness.

Chlamydia prevalence in the general population: is there a sex difference? a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The focus of Chlamydia trachomatis screening and testing lies more on women than on men. The study aim was to establish by systematic review the prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in men and women in the general population. METHODS: Electronic databases and reference lists were searched from 2000 to 2013 using the key words "Chlamydia trachomatis", "population-based study" and "disease prevalence". Reference lists were checked. Studies were included in the analysis if Chlamydia trachomatis prevalence was reported for both men and women in a population-based study. Prevalence rates for men and women were described as well as highest prevalence rate by age and sex. The difference in prevalence between the sexes in each study was calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and quality assessment for the review. In nine of the twenty-five studies there was a statistically significant sex difference in the chlamydia prevalence. In all nine studies the prevalence of chlamydia was higher in women than in men. The prevalence for women varied from 1.1% to 10.6% and for men from 0.1% to 12.1%. The average chlamydia prevalence is highly variable between countries. The highest prevalence of chlamydia occurred predominantly in younger age groups (< 25 years). The absence of symptoms in population-based urogenital chlamydia infection is common in men and women (mean 88.5% versus 68.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The urogenital chlamydia trachomatis prevalence in the general population is more similar than dissimilar for men and women. A modest sex difference is apparent. The prevalence rates can be used to inform chlamydia screening strategies in general practice.

Incorporating and evaluating an integrated gender-specific medicine curriculum: a survey study in Dutch GP training.

BACKGROUND: We recently set standards for gender-specific medicine training as an integrated part of the GP training curriculum. This paper describes the programme and evaluation of this training. METHODS: The programme is designed for GP registrars throughout the 3-year GP training. The modules emphasize interaction, application, and clinically integrated learning and teaching methods in peer groups. In 2005 - 2008, after completion of each tutorial, GP registrars were asked to fill in a questionnaire on a 5-point Likert scale to assess the programme's methods and content. GP registrars were also asked to identify two learning points related to the programme. RESULTS: The teaching programme consists of five 3-hour modules that include gender themes related to and frequently seen by GPs such as in doctor-patient communication and cardiovascular disease. GP registrars evaluated the training course positively. The written learning points suggest that GP registrars have increased their awareness of why attention to gender-specific information is relevant. CONCLUSION: In summary, gender-specific medicine training has been successfully integrated into an existing GP training curriculum. The modules and teaching methods are transferable to other training institutes for postgraduate training. The evaluation of the teaching programme shows a positive impact on GP registrars' gender awareness.