Search results

International audience ; General practitioner (GP) prescribing has been identified as an arena that has broad social and political implications, which stretch beyond individual outcomes for patients. This article revisits aspects of the controversy about prescribing benzodiazepines (or 'minor tranquillizers') through an exploration of contemporary views of GPs. In the 1980s the prescribing of these drugs was considered to be both a clinical and social problem, which brought medical decision making under public scrutiny. The legacy of this controversy for recent GPs remains a relatively under-explored topic. This article describes a qualitative study of GPs practising in the north-west of England about their views of prescribing benzodiazepines. The accounts of the respondents highlight a number of points about: blame allocation, past and present; clinical challenges about risk management; and deserving and undeserving patients. These GP views are then discussed in the wider context of psychotropic drug use. It is concluded that, while there has been a recent consensus that the benzodiazepines have been problematic, when they are placed in a longer historical context, a different picture is apparent because other psychotropic drugs have raised similar problems.

General practitioner (GP) prescribing has been identified as an arena that has broad social and political implications, which stretch beyond individual outcomes for patients. This article revisits aspects of the controversy about prescribing benzodiazepines (or 'minor tranquillizers') through an exploration of contemporary views of GPs. In the 1980s the prescribing of these drugs was considered to be both a clinical and social problem, which brought medical decision making under public scrutiny. The legacy of this controversy for recent GPs remains a relatively under-explored topic. This article describes a qualitative study of GPs practising in the north-west of England about their views of prescribing benzodiazepines. The accounts of the respondents highlight a number of points about: blame allocation, past and present; clinical challenges about risk management; and deserving and undeserving patients. These GP views are then discussed in the wider context of psychotropic drug use. It is concluded that, while there has been a recent consensus that the benzodiazepines have been problematic, when they are placed in a longer historical context, a different picture is apparent because other psychotropic drugs have raised similar problems.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a serious risk factor for suicide, a major public health concern, and a significant burden on the NHS. Rates of self-harm presentation in primary care are rising and GPs interact with patients both before and after they have self-harmed. There is significant public and political interest in reducing rates of self-harm, but there has been no robust synthesis of the existing literature on the role of GPs in the management of patients who self-harm. AIM: This study aimed to explore the role of the GP in the management of patients with self-harm behaviour. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of primary care literature. METHOD: This systematic review was conducted and is reported in line with PRISMA guidance. Electronic databases systematically searched were MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and AMED. Two independent reviewers conducted study screening and selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal of all included studies. Thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: From 6976 unique citations, 12 studies met eligibility criteria and were included. These 12 studies, published from 1997–2016, of 789 GPs/family medicine physicians from Europe, the US, and Australia were of good methodological quality. Five themes were identified for facilitating GP management of self-harm: GP training, improved communication, service provision, clinical guidelines, and young people. Four barriers for GP management of self-harm were identified: assessment, service provision, local, and systemic factors. CONCLUSION: GPs recognise self-harm as a serious risk factor for suicide, but some feel unprepared for managing self-harm. The role of the GP is multidimensional and includes frontline assessment and treatment, referral to specialist care, and the provision of ongoing support.

Abstract. Background: Health-care professionals do not routinely receive training on how best to support parents bereaved by suicide. Evidence-based training – Postvention Assisting Those Bereaved by Suicide (PABBS) – was designed to address this gap. Aims: The study aimed (a) to pilot PABBS training and evaluate its perceived effectiveness (impact on self-reported knowledge, skills and confidence) in managing suicide bereavement; and (b) to explore training acceptability. Method: A pre- and postevaluation design was used. Professionals attended intensive, structured 1-day PABBS training comprising: didactic/interactive teaching; practice-orientated activities supported with real-life materials and a manual/workbook. Evaluation forms completed immediately before and after training analyzed: (a) self-reported changes in knowledge, skills, and confidence (perceived effectiveness of training); and (b) the acceptability of training. Results: In total, 62 professionals completed training. Perceived knowledge, skills, and confidence improved after training as did self-reported understanding, motivation to learn more, and intention to change practice. Training was highly rated, particularly the evidence-based, real-life materials, with some suggestions for improvement. Limitations: Self-selected sample and reliance on self-report measures are the study's limitations. Conclusion: PABBS training may help address gaps in professionals' capacity to support parents bereaved by suicide. The evidence-based content was highly acceptable and appeared to be a key ingredient in effecting self-reported changes in attitudes/intentions.

Self-care has the potential to make a significant contribution to vascular conditions, but engagement with self-care support has been limited. Lack of relevant information is highlighted by patients and policy-makers as an important barrier to effective self-care, and information provides a potentially efficient platform for changing behaviour. However, work within the social sciences has generally seen information as a necessary but insufficient driver of health behaviours. Furthermore, some groups (such as the socially disadvantaged) are expected to be less amenable to information interventions. We conducted an integrated conceptual and empirical review on information-based interventions for people with vascular disease (diabetes, heart disease and kidney disease). We reviewed conceptual and empirical work concerning the role and impact of information in self-care support to generate an explanatory framework to determine why information was effective or ineffective in encouraging self-care in patients with vascular conditions. This involved mapping relevant theories and models linking information and self-care. We also explored published systematic reviews of educational interventions in diabetes, coronary heart disease and chronic kidney disease to examine the role of information and evidence concerning its effectiveness and impact in different patient populations. The conceptual review identified variation among information interventions in terms of type, function, and their relationship to behaviour change techniques and psychological mediators of behaviour change. Key moderators of the effect of information included types of disorder, and patient capacity and resources. A wealth of educational interventions exists for diabetes and heart conditions, but the precise components of these interventions that are effective are difficult to identify. There is little evidence concerning optimal ways of tailoring interventions for socially disadvantaged groups other than ethnic minorities. A focus on printed information may not provide access to effective methods of information delivery (e.g. tailored information, use of narratives and user generated content). Developing a framework for the effective use of information needs to take account the full range of the factors identified. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.