scholarly journals Evaluation of the Fracture Liaison Service within the Canadian Healthcare Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Matthew Wong-Pack ◽  
Nawazish Naqvi ◽  
George Ioannidis ◽  
Ramy Khalil ◽  
Alexandra Papaioannou ◽  
...  

Previous studies evaluating fracture liaison service (FLS) programs have found them to be cost-effective, efficient, and reduce the risk of fracture. However, few studies have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of these programs. We compared the patient populations of those referred for osteoporosis management by FLS to those referred by primary care physicians (PCP), within the Canadian healthcare system in the province of Ontario. Specifically, we investigated if a referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures and if osteoporosis therapies have been previously initiated. A retrospective chart review of patients assessed by a single Ontario rheumatology practice affiliated with FLS between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, was performed identifying two groups: those referred by FLS within Hamilton and those referred by their PCP for osteoporosis management. Fracture risk of each patient was determined using FRAX. A total of 573 patients (n = 225 (FLS group) and n = 227 (PCP group)) were evaluated. Between the FLS and PCP groups, there were no significant differences in the absolute 10-year risk of a major osteoporotic fracture (15.6% (SD = 10.2) vs 15.3% (SD = 10.3)) and 10-year risk of hip fracture (4.7% (SD = 8.3) vs 4.7% (SD = 6.8)), respectively. 10.7% of patients referred by FLS and 40.5% of patients referred by their PCP were on osteoporosis medication prior to fracture. Our study suggests that referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures, and clinically effective at identifying the care gap with the previous use of targeted osteoporosis therapies from referral from PCP being low and much lower in those referred by FLS. Interventional programs such as FLS can help close the treatment gap by providing appropriate care to patients that were not previously identified to be at risk for fracture by their primary care physician and initiate proper medical management.

Author(s):  
Juan-Luis Muñoz-Sánchez ◽  
María Sánchez-Gómez ◽  
María Martín-Cilleros ◽  
Esther Parra-Vidales ◽  
Diego de Leo ◽  
...  

This study analyzes the views of four groups of healthcare professionals who may play a role in the management of suicidal behavior. The goal was to identify key factors for suicide prevention in different areas of the healthcare system. Qualitative research was conducted using focus groups made up of different healthcare professionals who participated in the identification, management, and prevention of suicidal behavior. Professionals included were primary care physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, and emergency physicians. ‘Suicide’ was amongst the most relevant terms that came up in discussions most of the times it appeared associated with words such as ‘risk’, danger’, or ‘harm’. In the analysis by categories, the four groups of professionals agreed that interventions in at-risk behaviors are first in importance. Prevention was the second main concern with greater significance among psychiatrists. Primary care professionals call for more time to address patients at risk for suicide and easier access to and communication with the mental health network. Emergency care professionals have a lack of awareness of their role in the detection of risk for suicide in patients who seek attention at emergency care facilities for reasons of general somatic issues. Mental health care professionals are in high demand in cases of self-harm, but they would like to receive specific training in dealing with suicidal behavior.


Author(s):  
Juan-Luis Muñoz-Sanchez ◽  
María Cruz Sánchez-Gómez ◽  
María Victoria Martín-Cilleros ◽  
Esther Parra-Vidales ◽  
Diego de Leo ◽  
...  

OBJETIVE: This study analyses the views of four groups of healthcare professionals who may play a role in the management of suicidal behaviour. The goal was to identify key factors for suicide prevention in different areas of the healthcare system. METHODOLOGY: Qualitative research was conducted using focus groups made up of different healthcare professionals who participated in the identification, management and prevention of suicidal behaviour. Professionals included were primary care physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists and emergency physicians. RESULTS: ‘Suicide’ was amongst the most relevant terms that came up in discussions most of the times it appeared associated with words such as ‘risk’, ‘danger’ or ‘harm’. In the analysis by categories, the four groups of professionals agreed that interventions in at-risk behaviours are first in importance. Prevention was the second main concern with greater significance among psychiatrists. DISCUSSION: Primary care professionals claim for more time to address patients at risk for suicide and an easier access to and communication with the mental health network. Emergency care professionals have a lack of awareness of their role in the detection of risk for suicide in patients who seek attention at emergency care facilities for reasons of general somatic issues. Mental health care professionals are in high demand in case of self-harm but they would like to receive specific training in dealing with g suicidal behaviour.


2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamidreza Doroodchi ◽  
Maziar Abdolrasulnia ◽  
Jill A Foster ◽  
Elyse Foster ◽  
Mintu P Turakhia ◽  
...  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 465-471
Author(s):  
Gregory S. Liptak ◽  
Gail M. Revell

There is general agreement that case management should be provided to children with chronic illnesses, yet it is not clear who should provide this service. A survey of physicians and parents of children with chronic illnesses was conducted to evaluate the practice and views of pediatricians and compare their assessments with those of parents. Surveys were mailed to 360 physicians and 519 families with response rates of 39% and 63%, respectively. The majority of physicians (74%) thought that the primary care physician should provide case management. When compared with parents, physicians underestimated the parental need for information about the child's diagnosis (8% vs 52%, P < .001), treatments (3% vs 54%, P < .01), and prognosis (30% vs 78%, P < .01). They also overestimated parental needs for information regarding financial aid (70% vs 58%, P < .01), vocations (78% vs 54%, P < .01), and insurance (62% vs 51%, P < .05). Four services ranked by need by parents in the top 10 were not ranked in the top 10 by physicians. Rural physicians noted that services were more difficult to obtain than did those in nonrural areas. The physicians surveyed made several recommendations for steps that could be implemented to facilitate their role as case manageers. If primary care physicians are to be effective case managers, alterations in the current system of care will be required including continuing education related to chronic illness, information about community resources, reimbursement for the time required to perform case management, and better communication between physician and parents.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-290
Author(s):  
Paul C. Young ◽  
Yu Shyr ◽  
M. Anthony Schork

Objective. To determine the roles of primary care physicians and specialists in the medical care of children with serious heart disease. Setting. Pediatric Cardiology Division; Tertiary Care Children's Hospital. Subjects. Convenience sample of parents, primary care physicians, and pediatric cardiologists of 92 children with serious heart disease. Design. Questionnaire study; questionnaires based on 16 medical care needs, encompassing basic primary care services, care specific to the child's heart disease and general issues related to chronic illness. Results. All children had a primary care physician (PCP), and both they and the parents (P) reported high utilization of PCP for basic primary care services. However, there was little involvement of PCP in providing care for virtually any aspect of the child's heart disease. Parents expressed a low level of confidence in the ability of PCP in general or their child's own PCP to meet many of their child's medical care needs. Both PCP and pediatric cardiologists (PC) were significantly more likely than parents to see a role for PCP in providing for care specific to the heart disease as well as more general issues related to chronic illness. PC and PCP generally agreed about the role PCP should play, although PC saw a bigger role for PCP in providing advice about the child's activity than PCP themselves did. PC were less likely to see the PCP as able to follow the child for long term complications than PCP did. PC were more likely than PCP to believe that PCP were too busy or were inadequately reimbursed to care for children with serious heart disease. Only about one-third of parents reported discussing psychosocial, family, economic, or genetic issues with any provider, and PCP were rarely involved in these aspects of chronic illness. Conclusions. Primary care physicians do not take an active role in managing either the condition-specific or the more general aspects of this serious chronic childhood illness. With appropriate information and support from their specialist colleagues primary care physicians could provide much of the care for this group of children. Generalists and specialists are both responsible for educating and influencing parents about the role primary care physicians can play in caring for children with serious chronic illness.


2021 ◽  
pp. 155982762110412
Author(s):  
Anne Sprogell ◽  
Allison R. Casola ◽  
Amy Cunningham

As the healthcare system evolves, it is becoming more complicated for physicians and patients. Patients might have had one doctor in the past, but now are likely to regularly see several specialists along with their primary care physician. Patients can access their health records online, which increases transparency and accountability, but adds more information they have to interpret. This is the concept of health literacy—the ability to obtain, process, and act upon information regarding one’s health. This article will characterize health literacy in primary care and provide three areas that primary care physicians and researchers can direct their focus in order to increase health literacy among patients: community engagement, trainee education, and examination of personal bias.


Author(s):  
Mary Jo Dorsey ◽  
Ellen Detlefsen

Objective – To describe preliminary findings from a study of information-seeking behaviors of primary care physicians who care for elderly and depressed patients, and the correlation between what is sought versus what is provided to the patient and (or) caregiver. Setting – Physicians in two large ambulatory primary care practices throughout urban Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who take care of geriatric patients. Methods – Structured interviews, with common questions, will be conducted with 12 primary care physicians to determine patterns of information-seeking behaviors. Environmental scans of physicians' offices for evidence of their existing information behaviors will complement the information obtained from the interviews. Results – This pilot study provides an analysis of the resources primary care physicians use to seek information to provide to patients and caregivers. Analyses show types of information sought, time spent seeking information, and methods used to find information given to patients. Conclusions – With mounting evidence of the Internet being used for patient self care, it is essential to understand if primary care physicians understand the scope and breadth of information readily available to their patients. The primary care physician needs to be aware of the types of information made available to their patients and the caregivers who are inclined to obtain information for the patient.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document