Workplace-based assessment has become increasingly crucial in the postgraduate training of specialists in South Africa, particularly for family physicians. The development of a Portfolio of Learning (PoL) has been a central focus within the discipline of family medicine for over a decade. Initially, a paper-based portfolio was adopted to collect evidence of learning for 50 out of 85 agreed exit-level outcomes. Stellenbosch University led the conversion of this portfolio into an electronic format, known as e-PoL, utilising Scorion software. The e-PoL was successfully implemented in the Western and Eastern Cape regions and was subsequently adopted nationally under the coordination of the South African Academy of Family Physicians. In 2023, the e-PoL underwent a redesign to gather evidence of learning for 22 entrustable professional activities (EPAs). Key insights from this development process underscore the importance of the PoL in supporting assessment-for-learning rather than merely assessment-of-learning. This necessitates features for feedback and interaction, ensuring that the PoL functions beyond a mere repository of forms. Additionally, the e-PoL should facilitate triangulation, aggregation, and saturation of data points to effectively measure EPAs. Furthermore, the PoL has not only documented learning but has also played a pivotal role in guiding the development of clinical training by explicitly outlining expectations for both registrars and supervisors. While the initial design and development costs are significant, operational costs become affordable when shared across all training programmes.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented increase in telehealth use due to COVID-19 has changed general practitioners\' (GP) and patients\' engagement in healthcare. There is limited specific advice for effective communication when using telehealth. Examining telehealth use in practice in conjunction with perspectives on telehealth as they relate to communication allows opportunities to produce evidence-based guidance for optimal use of telehealth, while also offering practitioners the opportunity to reflect on elements of their communicative practice common to both styles of consultation. The objective of this research was to develop evidence-based resources to support effective, person-centred communication when GPs and patients use telehealth. This included examination of interactional practices of recorded telehealth consultations, exploration of GP and patient perspectives relating to telehealth, and identifying priorities for guidance informed by these analyses as well as participant co-design.
METHODS: This study involved recording telehealth consultations (n = 42), conducting patient surveys (n = 153), and interviewing patients (n = 9) and GPs (n = 15). These were examined using interaction analytic methods, quantitative analysis, and thematic analyses, to create a robust, integrated picture of telehealth practice and perspectives. The process of research translation involved a co-design approach, engaging with providers, patients, and policy makers to facilitate development of evidence-based principles that focus on supporting effective communication when using telehealth.
RESULTS: Three key themes relating to communication in telehealth were identified across the different analyses. These were relationship building, conversational flow, and safety netting. The draft best practice principles drawn from these themes were modified based on co-design feedback into five Best Practice Principles for Communication between GPs and Patients using Telehealth.
CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is supported through relationship building and attention to conversational flow in telehealth consultations, which in turn allows for safety netting to occur. In telehealth, GPs and patients recognise that not being co-present changes the consultation and use both intuitive and strategic interactional adjustments to support their exchange. The mixed-method examination of experiences through both a detailed analysis of telehealth consultations in practice and comparative exploration of GP and patient perspectives enabled the identification of principles that can support effective communication when using telehealth. Co-design helped ensure these principles are ready for implementation into practice.

BACKGROUND: Research activity usually improves outcomes by being translated into practice. However, there is developing evidence that research activity itself may improve the overall performance of health care organisations. However, evidence that these relationships represent a causal impact of research activity is less clear. Additionally, the bulk of the existing evidence relates to hospital settings, and it is not known if those relationships would also be found in general practice, where most patient contacts occur.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to (a) test whether there were significant relationships between research activity in general practice and organisational performance (b) test whether those relationships were plausibly causal.
METHODS: We analysed national data between 2008 and 2019 using cross sectional and longitudinal analyses, on general practices in England.
METHODS: We used cross-sectional, panel and instrumental variable analyses to explore relationships between research activity (including measures from the NIHR Clinical Research Network and the Royal College of General Practitioners) and practice performance (including clinical quality of care, patient reported experience of care, prescribing quality and hospital admissions) Results: In cross-sectional analyses, research activity was positively associated with several measures of practice performance, including clinical quality of care, patient reported experience of care, and reduced hospital admissions. The associations were generally modest in magnitude. However, longitudinal analyses did not support a reliable causal relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: Similar to findings from hospital settings, research activity in general practice is associated with practice performance. There is less evidence that research is causing those improvements, although this may reflect the limited level of research activity in most practices. We identified no negative impacts, suggesting that research activity is a potential marker of quality and something that high quality practices can deliver alongside their core responsibilities.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To provide family physicians with prescribing and diagnostic strategies that can reduce carbon emissions associated with inhalers.
METHODS: This review is based on the authors\' experience developing the climate-conscious inhaler prescribing playbooks and courses for CASCADES (Creating a Sustainable Canadian Health System in a Climate Crisis). The approach was refined through patient and provider feedback since the first playbook was published in 2021. PubMed was also searched for relevant publications on inhaler use, asthma management, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Current asthma and COPD guidelines were also reviewed.
RESULTS: There is growing acknowledgment of the substantial impact that inhalers have on climate emissions generated by the health sector. Recent surveys indicate that most Canadian patients care about climate change and would be willing to opt for less carbon-intensive treatment and care delivery options where available. Beyond inhaler choice, there are many opportunities to address the climate impacts of respiratory care and enhance quality of care. Working with patients to ensure they are using the right medications in the right ways will produce both carbon savings and better health outcomes. The climate crisis can therefore serve as a catalyst for improving treatment of patients with respiratory conditions. Family physicians may reduce carbon emissions associated with inhalers by reducing unnecessary inhaler prescribing; ensuring patients\' control of asthma and COPD is optimized; considering whether a more sustainable inhaler may be appropriate; optimizing dosing technique to reduce emissions and waste; and disposing of inhalers appropriately if possible.
CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians may reduce carbon emissions associated with inhalers through the following strategies: confirming diagnosis, controlling disease, considering inhaler type, optimizing dosing technique, and encouraging appropriate disposal.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。