Patients' perspectives on ecologically sustainable healthcare in general practice.

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
BJGP Open Pub Date : 2025-05-23 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0041
Eva H Visser, Evelyn A Brakema, Irene A Slootweg, Hedwig Mm Vos, Marieke A Adriaanse
{"title":"Patients' perspectives on ecologically sustainable healthcare in general practice.","authors":"Eva H Visser, Evelyn A Brakema, Irene A Slootweg, Hedwig Mm Vos, Marieke A Adriaanse","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare contributes substantially to climate change. GPs want to implement sustainable healthcare, but are hesitant; worried that this may jeopardise their doctor-patient relationship. However, whether this concern is valid should urgently be assessed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore patients' perspectives on sustainable healthcare in general practice.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>In 2022 and 2023 we performed an online study; participants were Dutch adults; using experimental vignettes and a questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The vignettes described GP appointments for three health complaints with randomly allocated treatment advice, varying in sustainability and explanation, but with comparable health outcomes. The questionnaire assessed participants' perspectives on sustainable healthcare in general practice. We analysed the vignettes using mixed-design ANOVA and the questionnaire using descriptive statistics and correlations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>801 participants completed the vignettes, and 397 the questionnaire. We found no difference on satisfaction with a doctor's visit (<i>P</i>'<i>s</i>>.238) when comparing a sustainable and a less-sustainable treatment option. The effect of explicitly mentioning sustainability differed per health complaint (dyspnoea: no difference; knee pain: MD=.319, <i>P</i>=.002; erythema: MD=-.227, <i>P</i>=.003). In the questionnaire, participants reported positive expectations, and trust in the GP and treatment when delivering sustainable healthcare, but were more neutral about the GPs' role.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found no indication that sustainable treatment advice leads to lower satisfaction with GP care. The effect of explicitly mentioning sustainability was minimal and differed per health complaint. When directly asked, participants were mainly positive about sustainable healthcare. These results could encourage GPs to introduce sustainable treatment advice, without worrying about negatively influencing patient satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Healthcare contributes substantially to climate change. GPs want to implement sustainable healthcare, but are hesitant; worried that this may jeopardise their doctor-patient relationship. However, whether this concern is valid should urgently be assessed.

Aim: To explore patients' perspectives on sustainable healthcare in general practice.

Design & setting: In 2022 and 2023 we performed an online study; participants were Dutch adults; using experimental vignettes and a questionnaire.

Method: The vignettes described GP appointments for three health complaints with randomly allocated treatment advice, varying in sustainability and explanation, but with comparable health outcomes. The questionnaire assessed participants' perspectives on sustainable healthcare in general practice. We analysed the vignettes using mixed-design ANOVA and the questionnaire using descriptive statistics and correlations.

Results: 801 participants completed the vignettes, and 397 the questionnaire. We found no difference on satisfaction with a doctor's visit (P's>.238) when comparing a sustainable and a less-sustainable treatment option. The effect of explicitly mentioning sustainability differed per health complaint (dyspnoea: no difference; knee pain: MD=.319, P=.002; erythema: MD=-.227, P=.003). In the questionnaire, participants reported positive expectations, and trust in the GP and treatment when delivering sustainable healthcare, but were more neutral about the GPs' role.

Conclusion: We found no indication that sustainable treatment advice leads to lower satisfaction with GP care. The effect of explicitly mentioning sustainability was minimal and differed per health complaint. When directly asked, participants were mainly positive about sustainable healthcare. These results could encourage GPs to introduce sustainable treatment advice, without worrying about negatively influencing patient satisfaction.

患者对全科实践中生态可持续医疗保健的看法。
背景:医疗保健对气候变化的影响很大。全科医生希望实施可持续的医疗保健,但犹豫不决;担心这会危及他们的医患关系。然而,这种担忧是否有效,应该紧急进行评估。目的:探讨全科实践中患者对可持续医疗保健的看法。设计与设置:在2022年和2023年,我们进行了一项在线研究;参与者为荷兰成年人;使用实验小片段和问卷调查。方法:这些小插曲描述了三个健康投诉的全科医生预约,随机分配治疗建议,在可持续性和解释上有所不同,但具有可比的健康结果。问卷评估了参与者对全科实践中可持续医疗保健的看法。我们使用混合设计方差分析和使用描述性统计和相关性的问卷分析了小插曲。结果:801名参与者完成了小短文,397名参与者完成了问卷。我们发现,在比较可持续治疗方案和非可持续治疗方案时,对医生就诊的满意度(P's>.238)没有差异。明确提及可持续性的效果因健康投诉而异(呼吸困难:无差异;膝关节疼痛:MD=。319, P = .002;红斑:MD = -。227年,P = .003)。在问卷调查中,参与者报告了积极的期望,并在提供可持续医疗保健时信任全科医生和治疗,但对全科医生的作用持中立态度。结论:我们没有发现持续治疗建议导致全科医生护理满意度降低的迹象。明确提及可持续性的影响很小,而且每个健康投诉都有所不同。当被直接问及时,参与者主要对可持续医疗持积极态度。这些结果可以鼓励全科医生引入可持续的治疗建议,而不必担心对患者满意度产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信