The European journal of general practice
-
In 2018, Trèbes, 6,000 inhabitants with nine general practitioners (GPs) in southern France, experienced two tragedies; a terrorist attack in March, in which four people were killed, and a catastrophic flood in October, in which six people died and thousands more were affected. ⋯ We obtained valuable information on the stages of trauma experienced by GPs, allowing a better understanding of the effects on personal/professional status. Thus, the inclusion of GPs in adaptive crisis management plans would limit the effects of traumatic dissociation while increasing their professional effectiveness.
-
The diagnostic value of C-reactive protein (CRP) for appendicitis in children has not been evaluated in primary care. As biochemical responses and differential diagnoses vary with age, separate evaluation in children and adults is needed. ⋯ CRP adds value to history and physical examination when diagnosing appendicitis in children presenting acute abdominal pain in primary care. Appendicitis is least likely if the CRP value is < 10 mg/L and symptoms have been present for > 48 h.
-
Cooperation between general practitioners (GPs) and other healthcare professionals appears to help reduce the risk of polypharmacy-related adverse events in patients with multimorbidity. ⋯ Our study highlights disparities between GPs regarding cooperation with other professionals caring for their patients and suggests ways to improve cooperation.
-
General practitioners (GPs) are important providers of palliative home care (PHC). To deliver adequate palliative care, cooperation with specialised PHC teams is necessary. Specialised PHC is a type of care for severely ill patients by specialised providers. Little is known about the involvement of German GPs in specialised PHC. ⋯ In general, GPs are satisfied with the quality of care provided by specialised PHC teams but GPs do not always perceive cooperation as optimal. Involvement of GPs in specialised PHC needs to be improved.
-
Digital health is the convergence of digital technologies with health, healthcare, living, and society. Contrasting with the slow trend during the last decades, in the last few years, we have observed an expansion and widespread adoption and implementation. ⋯ We also reflect on the implications for research to evaluate digital interventions: the need to evaluate clear outcomes in light of the six dimensions of quality of care (patient-centredness, efficiency, effectiveness, safety, timeliness, and equity); to define clear populations to understand what works and for which patients; and to involve different stakeholders in the formulation and evaluation of the research questions. Finally, we share five wishes for the future of digital care in General Practice: the involvement of primary healthcare professionals and patients in the design and maintenance of digital solutions; improving infrastructure, support, and training; development of clear regulations and best practice standards; ensuring patient safety and privacy; and working towards more equitable digital solutions, that leave no one behind.