Most COVID-19 patients were treated in primary health care (PHC) in Europe.To demonstrate the scope of PHC workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic emphasising similarities and differences of patient’...
There is little research on laypersons’ perceptions regarding common cold and influenza, their symptomatic distinction and considerations of risk. This study investigates understanding of pathogenesis across three European countries and provides a knowledge base from which adequate prevention recommendations and treatment advice can be derived. This is a qualitative research study. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 85 participants from three European countries (Austria n = 31, Belgium n = 30, Croatia n = 24) about their experiences, perceptions and risk considerations regarding the common cold and influenza. We performed a qualitative thematic content analysis. Three main themes were identified: common cold as harmless with individualistic symptoms; influenza as mainly distinguishable by fever, confinement to bed and severity of symptoms, but description about onset and duration are diverse; and views on pathogenesis contain references to disease causing agents and circumstances. Overall we found that risk perception is based largely on personal experience and risk is assumed moderate for both diseases. Study participants possessed a fairly good understanding of symptoms, differences and pathogenesis of common cold and influenza; but explanations integrated misconceptions, such as misinterpretation of fever, disease continuums, diverse onset ideas etc. Perceptions were largely based on lived experiences and interventions for prevention and treatment should be led by health care workers and focus on these issues. Basic consultations, awareness raising activities and other knowledge disseminations strategies should include aspects of communicableness and the self-limiting nature of both diseases. An informed understanding of both infectious diseases is crucial and may also increase influenza vaccination coverage in the three respective countries effectively.
3 March 2017 in European Journal of General Practice
Background: A comprehensive understanding of the various aspects of patients’ myocardial infarction (MI) experiences may help to guide these patients and their relatives through the many uncertainties they face and help them to stabilize their lives after the disruption they experienced. Objectives: To explore MI patients’ experiences of life with MI, the challenges they face during the process of accepting their condition, and the setting and resetting of their personal goals. Methods: Thirty semi-structured, individual interviews were conducted. The grounded theory method was used, and Atlas.ti qualitative data analysis software was used to facilitate the analysis. Results: Three main themes and explanatory models emerged from the data analysis: a good adaptation – the ‘new normality;’ maladjustment – a continuous search for a ‘new normality;’ and perceived needs in the search for a new normality. Patients perceived several areas of need that they felt must be met before they could reach the state of a new normality. These needs included overcoming the anxiety of a possible MI recurrence; acquiring knowledge about MI in general and about ‘my MI’ in particular; the need for a timeline; for patience and steadiness; for both objective and subjective health status improvement; for taking control over the disease; and living within a supportive context. Conclusion: When faced with a dramatic life event, most patients succeed in achieving a new normality in which they live changed but still satisfying lives. The needs experienced by patients when searching for a new normality may guide practitioners in leading patient-centred consultations.
21 August 2019 in European Journal of General Practice
Background: Common cold and influenza result in an increased number of primary care consultations, significant work/school absences and cause a socio-economic burden. Laypeople’s perceptions and knowledge regarding common cold and influenza prevention is poorly understood and under-researched. Objectives: Our study explores laypeople’s knowledge of prevention of common cold and influenza across three European countries. Furthermore, it investigates if there is any distinction between prevention activities focussing on reasons impacting the attitude towards influenza vaccination as well as investigating cross-country variation. Methods: In total, 85 semi-structured individual interviews were performed across three European countries (Austria n = 31, Belgium n = 30, Croatia n = 24). Qualitative thematic content analysis was performed. Results: Most participants across all three countries made no distinction between the prevention of the common cold and influenza and referenced the same preventative measures for both conditions. They mainly expressed negative attitudes towards influenza vaccination possibly effective but only intended for high-risk groups (bedridden/older people, chronic patients or health workers). There were very few cross-country differences in results. Conclusion: The perception of health risk of contracting influenza and a primary healthcare physicians’ recommendation played an important role in shaping participants’ decisions towards vaccination. Primary healthcare physicians are invited to assess and if necessary adjust inappropriate prevention behaviour through their everyday patient consultations as well as add to the knowledge about influenza severity and influenza vaccination benefits to their patients.
7 February 2024 in European Journal of Public Health
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of patients received ambulatory treatment, highlighting the importance of primary health care (PHC). However, there is limited knowledge regarding PHC workload in Europe during this period. The utilization of COVID-19 PHC indicators could facilitate the efficient monitoring and coordination of the pandemic response. The objective of this study is to describe PHC indicators for disease surveillance and monitoring of COVID-19’s impact in Europe. Descriptive, cross-sectional study employing data obtained through a semi-structured ad hoc questionnaire, which was collectively agreed upon by all participants. The study encompasses PHC settings in 31 European countries from March 2020 to August 2021. Key-informants from each country answered the questionnaire. Main outcome: the identification of any indicator used to describe PHC COVID-19 activity. Out of the 31 countries surveyed, data on PHC information were obtained from 14. The principal indicators were: total number of cases within PHC (Belarus, Cyprus, Italy, Romania and Spain), number of follow-up cases (Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Spain and Turkey), GP’s COVID-19 tests referrals (Poland), proportion of COVID-19 cases among respiratory illnesses consultations (Norway and France), sick leaves issued by GPs (Romania and Spain) and examination and complementary tests (Cyprus). All COVID-19 cases were attended in PHC in Belarus and Italy. The COVID-19 pandemic exposes a crucial deficiency in preparedness for infectious diseases in European health systems highlighting the inconsistent recording of indicators within PHC organizations. PHC standardized indicators and public data accessibility are urgently needed, conforming the foundation for an effective European-level health services response framework against future pandemics.
26 February 2025 in European Journal of General Practice
Person-centred care (PCC) is a fundamental principle in general practice, emphasising practices tailored to individual patient preferences, needs, and values. Despite the importance of PCC, general practitioners (GPs) face obstacles in effectively implementing it, with associated factors remaining unclear. The PACE GP/FP study aims to explore GPs' attitudes towards PCC and the factors facilitating or hindering its implementation in daily practice across European countries. This paper outlines the PACE GP/FP study protocol. The cross-sectional design with data collection via an online survey distribution to GPs in 24 European countries. Study instruments include two validated questionnaires (Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and Patient Physician Orientation Scale (PPOS)) and additional items covering general information about the doctor and their practice, as well as facilitators and barriers to PCC. These additional items were specifically developed for the study, translated using the forward-backward method, evaluated through cognitive debriefing, and integrated into the REDCap platform to create language and country-specific survey links. The STROBE checklist guides the reporting of the manuscript. The PACE GP/FP study will provide a comprehensive exploration of GPs' attitudes towards PCC and the factors shaping its practice in Europe. The findings from the PACE GP/FP study will provide evidence for designing future implementation strategies and guide targeted interventions to promote PCC in primary care across Europe.