We partner with a secure submission system to handle manuscript submissions.
Please note:
You will need an account for the submission system, which is separate to your Cambridge Core account. For login and submission support, please visit the
submission and support pages.
Please review this journal's author instructions, particularly the
preparing your materials
page, before submitting your manuscript.
Click Proceed to submission system to continue to our partner's website.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this paper, we report on a study investigating the involvement of primary care providers in French local health contracts.
Background:
Worldwide actions are carried out to improve collaboration between primary care and public health to strengthen primary healthcare and consequently community health. In France, the local health contract is an instrument mobilising local stakeholders from different sectors to join in their actions to improve the health of the population.
Methods:
We developed an instrument to analyse the frequency and nature of involvement of primary care providers in 428 action plans extracted from a sample of 17 contracts (one per French region). The number of primary care actions were counted, and thematic analyses were conducted to identify the nature and level of involvement of the professionals.
Findings:
Primary care providers were involved in 20.1% (n = 86) of the action plans and were mostly described as a target of the action rather than leaders or partners. Within those action plans, 76.7% (n = 66) of these action plans aimed to improve access to care for local communities; an issue that appears as the main driver of collaboration between public health and primary care actors.
Our objective was to explore the difficulties experienced by transgender people in accessing primary health-care services and their expectations towards primary care providers to improve their health-care access.
Background:
Because transgender people are exposed to many discriminations, their health-care access is particularly poor. Guidelines recommend greater involvement of primary care providers in the processes because of the accessibility feature of primary care services.
Methods:
A qualitative study using semi-directed interviews was conducted among 27 transgender people (February 2018 – August 2018). These voluntary participants were recruited through different means: local trans or LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and/or intersex) associations, primary care providers, and social networks. The data analysis was based on reflexive thematic analysis in an inductive approach.
Findings:
Difficulties in accessing health-care occurred at all the levels of the primary health-care system: primary care providers – transgender people interaction, access to the primary care team facility (starting with the secretariat), access to secondary care specialists, and continuity of care. Transgender people report ill-adapted health-care services as a result of gender-based identification in health-care settings. Their main expectation was depsychiatrization and self-determination. They supported mixed health network comprising primary care providers and transgender people with a coordinating role for the general practitioner. These expectations should be priorities to consider in our primary health-care system to improve access to health-care for transgender people.
To explore the experiences of patients living with diabetic lower extremity amputation (DLEA) and its post-amputation wound in primary care.
Background:
DLEA, including both minor and major amputation, is a life-altering condition that brings numerous challenges to an individual’s life. Post-amputation physical wound healing is complicated and challenging because of wound dehiscence and prolonged healing times. Understanding patients’ experiences after DLEA with a post-amputation wound will enable healthcare professionals to develop interventions to assist patients in physical healing and psychosocial recovery.
Methods:
This study employs a qualitative design using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). A purposive maximum variation sample of nine patients who had had lower extremity amputations and post-amputation wound attributed to diabetes in the previous 12 months was recruited from a primary care setting in Singapore. Semi-structured audio recorded one-to-one interviews with a duration of 45–60 min each were conducted between September 2018 and January 2019. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using IPA.
Findings:
The essential meaning of the phenomenon ‘the lived experiences for patients with DLEA and post-amputated wound’ can be interpreted as ‘struggling for “normality”’ which encompasses four domains of sense making: physical loss disrupted normality, emotional impact aggravated the disrupted normality, social challenges further provoked the disrupted normality, and attempt to regain normality. The study highlights the complex physical and psychosocial transition facing patients after DLEA before post-amputation wound closure. In primary care, an amputation, whether minor or major, is a life-altering experience that requires physical healing, emotional recovery, and social adaptation to regain normality. Patients living with DLEA and a post-amputation wound may benefit from an interdisciplinary team care model to assist them with physical and psychosocial adjustment and resume normality.
Systematic identification, characterization and analysis of recommendations concerning the diagnosis and treatment of non-specific low back pain (LBP) in primary care provided in international evidence-based guidelines from high-income countries.
Background:
LBP is one of the most common reasons for consulting a primary care physician and its prevalence is higher in high-income than in middle- or low-income countries. The majority of LBP is non-specific and treatment recommendations are not often based on high-quality and patient-oriented evidence.
Methods:
We systematically searched PubMed and major guideline databases from 2013 to 2020. Two independent reviewers performed literature selection and the quality assessment of included guidelines using the AGREE II tool. We extracted all relevant recommendations including the corresponding Grade of Recommendation. We grouped all included recommendations by topic and compared them to each other.
Findings:
This overview includes 10 current guidelines and overall 549 relevant recommendations. Recommendations covered aspects of assessment and diagnosis (15%), non-pharmacological interventions (46%), pharmacological interventions (26%), invasive treatments (8%) and multimodal pain management (5%). In total, 30% of all recommendations were strong and 57% weak or very weak. The proportion of recommendations for and against an intervention was 45% and 38%, respectively. The recommendations from the different guidelines were largely in good agreement. We identify only a small number of contradictory recommendations, mostly dealing with very specific interventions.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, current evidence-based guidelines published in high-income countries provide recommendations for all major aspects of the management of people with LBP in primary care. Recommendations from different guidelines were largely consistent. More than 50% of these recommendations were weak or very weak and a high proportion of recommendation advised against an intervention.
The area of regenerative work is still close to unexplored. The aim was to explore the possibility for employees to gain energy at work.
Methods:
Questionnaire to all employees (n = 599) from different professions in public and private primary health care centers in one health care district in Sweden. The questionnaire, which had a salutogenic perspective, included information on self-rated health, psychosocial work environment and experiences, recovery, social climate, and energy. Having an energy-building experience was defined by a positive response to two combined questions regarding energy at work. Analyses were performed with bivariate correlation and multiple logistic regression.
Results:
The response rate was 84%. Health and energy correlated positively (r = 0.54). In total, 44.5% of the employees reported having an energy-building experience. Predictors for having an energy-building experience were recovery [positive odds ratio (POR) = 2.78], autonomy (POR = 2.26), positive workplace characteristics (POR = 2.09), and internal work experiences (POR = 1.88).
Conclusions:
The results support the hypothesis that it is possible to gain energy at work, an area that is still close to unexplored. There is a high correlation between energy and health. Employees’ energy-building experiences relate to well-being at work and correlates to recovery, autonomy, positive workplace characteristics, and positive internal work experiences. This knowledge can help in improving future work environment development.