'Overhaul Medicare and perhaps train us better': a qualitative study of primary care general practitioners' perspectives on how to implement the low back pain clinical care standards.

BMJ public health Pub Date : 2025-09-08 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjph-2025-002564
Nathalia Costa, Chung-Wei Christine Lin, Fiona Blyth, Carmen Huckel-Schneider, Rachelle Buchbinder, Danijela Gnjidic, Aili Langford, Denise O'Connor, Carl Schneider, Simon French
{"title":"'Overhaul Medicare and perhaps train us better': a qualitative study of primary care general practitioners' perspectives on how to implement the low back pain clinical care standards.","authors":"Nathalia Costa, Chung-Wei Christine Lin, Fiona Blyth, Carmen Huckel-Schneider, Rachelle Buchbinder, Danijela Gnjidic, Aili Langford, Denise O'Connor, Carl Schneider, Simon French","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2025-002564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In September 2022, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare released the Low Back Pain Clinical Care Standards ('Care Standard'). We aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives on how the Care Standard can be implemented, with a view to identifying what strategies could be used to do so.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study is underpinned by a critical realist philosophy. We interviewed 16 GPs across Australia with experience working with patients who present with low back pain (LBP). Interview questions were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, and interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three themes: theme 1-'I have my own guidelines and ways of doing things'-guidelines and standards are not relevant for experienced GPs' captures the perceived unnecessariness of seeking advice from guidelines and standards for LBP; theme 2-I agree with the standards but the system, clinicians and patients hinder my ability to enact them-reports factors impacting the will and ability of clinicians to implement the standards in practice; theme 3-Change the system and train us better-discusses potential strategies to implement the Care Standard: changing funding and infrastructure (eg, improving GPs' reimbursement for time spent, investing in publicly funded allied health services); offering training and education (eg, continuing professional development courses, improving communication training in undergraduate courses), developing stakeholder relationships (eg, primary health networks, Health Pathways), supporting clinicians through interactive assistance (eg, reminders, embedding assessment tools in existing systems), engaging/educating patients and using evaluative strategies such as auditing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results suggest that the multidimensional nature of the challenges GPs face, and the strategies they suggest, calls for a multimodal and integrated approach to implementing the Care Standards, including system changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":101362,"journal":{"name":"BMJ public health","volume":"3 2","pages":"e002564"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12421184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2025-002564","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In September 2022, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare released the Low Back Pain Clinical Care Standards ('Care Standard'). We aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives on how the Care Standard can be implemented, with a view to identifying what strategies could be used to do so.

Methods: This qualitative study is underpinned by a critical realist philosophy. We interviewed 16 GPs across Australia with experience working with patients who present with low back pain (LBP). Interview questions were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, and interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: We identified three themes: theme 1-'I have my own guidelines and ways of doing things'-guidelines and standards are not relevant for experienced GPs' captures the perceived unnecessariness of seeking advice from guidelines and standards for LBP; theme 2-I agree with the standards but the system, clinicians and patients hinder my ability to enact them-reports factors impacting the will and ability of clinicians to implement the standards in practice; theme 3-Change the system and train us better-discusses potential strategies to implement the Care Standard: changing funding and infrastructure (eg, improving GPs' reimbursement for time spent, investing in publicly funded allied health services); offering training and education (eg, continuing professional development courses, improving communication training in undergraduate courses), developing stakeholder relationships (eg, primary health networks, Health Pathways), supporting clinicians through interactive assistance (eg, reminders, embedding assessment tools in existing systems), engaging/educating patients and using evaluative strategies such as auditing.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that the multidimensional nature of the challenges GPs face, and the strategies they suggest, calls for a multimodal and integrated approach to implementing the Care Standards, including system changes.

“全面改革医疗保险,或许更好地培训我们”:一项关于初级保健全科医生对如何实施腰痛临床护理标准的观点的定性研究。
导读:2022年9月,澳大利亚卫生保健安全和质量委员会发布了腰痛临床护理标准(“护理标准”)。我们的目的是探讨全科医生(全科医生)对如何实施护理标准的看法,以确定可以使用哪些策略来实现这一目标。方法:本定性研究以批判现实主义哲学为基础。我们采访了16名全科医生,他们在澳大利亚有治疗下腰痛(LBP)患者的经验。访谈问题基于理论领域框架,访谈数据采用反身性主题分析。结果:我们确定了三个主题:主题1-“我有自己的指导方针和做事方式”-指导方针和标准与经验丰富的全科医生无关”抓住了从LBP的指导方针和标准中寻求建议的感知不必要;主题2:我同意标准,但系统、临床医生和患者阻碍了我制定标准的能力——报告影响临床医生在实践中实施标准的意愿和能力的因素;主题3——改变系统,更好地培训我们——讨论实施护理标准的潜在战略:改变资金和基础设施(例如,改善全科医生的报销时间,投资于公共资助的联合医疗服务);提供培训和教育(例如,继续专业发展课程,改进本科课程中的沟通培训),发展利益攸关方关系(例如,初级卫生网络,健康途径),通过互动援助(例如,提醒,在现有系统中嵌入评估工具)支持临床医生,吸引/教育患者并使用审计等评估策略。结论:我们的研究结果表明,全科医生面临的挑战是多方面的,他们建议的策略需要多模式和综合的方法来实施护理标准,包括系统变革。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信