苏格兰全科医生对绿色社会处方的看法:一项全国性横断面调查的分析。

IF 2 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
BJGP Open Pub Date : 2025-09-24 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0259
Helen Frost, Tricia R Tooman, Bruce Mason, Eddie Donaghy, Katie Hawkins, Sue Lewis, Maria Wolters, Stewart W Mercer
{"title":"苏格兰全科医生对绿色社会处方的看法:一项全国性横断面调查的分析。","authors":"Helen Frost, Tricia R Tooman, Bruce Mason, Eddie Donaghy, Katie Hawkins, Sue Lewis, Maria Wolters, Stewart W Mercer","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Green social prescribing (GSP) aims to link patients to nature-based health interventions (NBHIs) through GPs. However, knowledge of GPs' views on GSP is limited.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore GPs' views on GSP and the factors influencing these views.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>National cross-sectional survey of GPs' working lives in Scotland, conducted in 2023, which included four questions about GSP.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Descriptive analysis of GPs' views of GSP and univariate and multivariate (binary logistic) analysis of factors influencing these views.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey found 79.6% (<i>n</i> = 1098) of GPs had heard of GSP, 81.3% (<i>n</i> = 1106) would be happy to refer patients to NBHIs, 67.8% (<i>n</i> = 931) thought GSP was suitable for older patients with multimorbidity, and 43.7% (<i>n</i> = 599) felt that patients living in deprived areas would access GSP. Greater knowledge of GSP was associated with White ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 3.22, <i>P</i> = 0.002) and the number of clinical sessions worked per week (aOR 0.90; 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.99, <i>P</i> = 0.034). Higher job satisfaction was associated with more positive views about the suitability of GSP for older patients with multimorbidity (aOR 1.14; 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.30; <i>P</i> = 0.043) as were views on whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.20; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.33, <i>P</i> = 0.013). GPs working in deprived areas also had more positive views regarding whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.24; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.45, <i>P</i> = 0.159).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GPs in Scotland are aware of and willing to refer to GSP but have concerns about accessibility for patients from deprived areas. Views were influenced by personal and practice characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"GPs' views on green social prescribing in Scotland: analysis of a national cross-sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"Helen Frost, Tricia R Tooman, Bruce Mason, Eddie Donaghy, Katie Hawkins, Sue Lewis, Maria Wolters, Stewart W Mercer\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0259\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Green social prescribing (GSP) aims to link patients to nature-based health interventions (NBHIs) through GPs. However, knowledge of GPs' views on GSP is limited.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore GPs' views on GSP and the factors influencing these views.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>National cross-sectional survey of GPs' working lives in Scotland, conducted in 2023, which included four questions about GSP.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Descriptive analysis of GPs' views of GSP and univariate and multivariate (binary logistic) analysis of factors influencing these views.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey found 79.6% (<i>n</i> = 1098) of GPs had heard of GSP, 81.3% (<i>n</i> = 1106) would be happy to refer patients to NBHIs, 67.8% (<i>n</i> = 931) thought GSP was suitable for older patients with multimorbidity, and 43.7% (<i>n</i> = 599) felt that patients living in deprived areas would access GSP. Greater knowledge of GSP was associated with White ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 3.22, <i>P</i> = 0.002) and the number of clinical sessions worked per week (aOR 0.90; 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.99, <i>P</i> = 0.034). Higher job satisfaction was associated with more positive views about the suitability of GSP for older patients with multimorbidity (aOR 1.14; 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.30; <i>P</i> = 0.043) as were views on whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.20; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.33, <i>P</i> = 0.013). GPs working in deprived areas also had more positive views regarding whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.24; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.45, <i>P</i> = 0.159).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GPs in Scotland are aware of and willing to refer to GSP but have concerns about accessibility for patients from deprived areas. Views were influenced by personal and practice characteristics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJGP Open\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"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.2024.0259\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0259","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

摘要

背景:绿色社会处方(GSP)旨在通过全科医生(gp)将患者与基于自然的健康干预(NBHIs)联系起来。然而,对普通医生对普惠制的看法了解有限。目的:探讨全科医生对普惠制的看法及其影响因素。设计与设置:对苏格兰全科医生工作生活的全国性横断面调查,于2023年进行,其中包括四个关于普惠制的问题。方法:描述性分析全科医生对GSP的看法,并对影响这些看法的因素进行单因素和多因素(二元logistic)分析。结果:80% (n=1098)的全科医生听说过GSP, 81% (n=1160)的全科医生愿意将患者转介到NBHIs, 68% (n=931)的全科医生认为GSP适用于老年多病患者,44% (n=599)的全科医生认为生活在贫困地区的患者可以使用GSP。对GSP了解程度高与白人相关(aOR 2.04;CI 1.30-3.22, P=0.002)和每周临床工作次数(aOR 0.90;Ci 0.82-0.99, p =0.034)。较高的工作满意度与对老年多病患者GSP适用性的更积极看法相关(aOR 1.14 CI 1.00-1.30;P=0.043),生活在贫困地区的患者是否会获得GSP (aOR 1.20;Ci 1.06-1.45, p =0.013)。在贫困地区工作的全科医生对贫困地区患者是否获得GSP (aOR 1.24;Ci 1.06-1.45, p =0.008)。结论:苏格兰的全科医生意识到并愿意参考GSP,但对贫困地区患者的可及性存在担忧。观点受到个人和实践特点的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
GPs' views on green social prescribing in Scotland: analysis of a national cross-sectional survey.

Background: Green social prescribing (GSP) aims to link patients to nature-based health interventions (NBHIs) through GPs. However, knowledge of GPs' views on GSP is limited.

Aim: To explore GPs' views on GSP and the factors influencing these views.

Design & setting: National cross-sectional survey of GPs' working lives in Scotland, conducted in 2023, which included four questions about GSP.

Method: Descriptive analysis of GPs' views of GSP and univariate and multivariate (binary logistic) analysis of factors influencing these views.

Results: The survey found 79.6% (n = 1098) of GPs had heard of GSP, 81.3% (n = 1106) would be happy to refer patients to NBHIs, 67.8% (n = 931) thought GSP was suitable for older patients with multimorbidity, and 43.7% (n = 599) felt that patients living in deprived areas would access GSP. Greater knowledge of GSP was associated with White ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 3.22, P = 0.002) and the number of clinical sessions worked per week (aOR 0.90; 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.99, P = 0.034). Higher job satisfaction was associated with more positive views about the suitability of GSP for older patients with multimorbidity (aOR 1.14; 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.30; P = 0.043) as were views on whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.20; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.33, P = 0.013). GPs working in deprived areas also had more positive views regarding whether patients living in deprived areas would access GSP (aOR 1.24; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.45, P = 0.159).

Conclusion: GPs in Scotland are aware of and willing to refer to GSP but have concerns about accessibility for patients from deprived areas. Views were influenced by personal and practice characteristics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信