BACKGROUND: Despite 2 decades of cancer survivorship research, policy, and advocacy, primary care in the United States has not fully integrated survivorship care into its generalist role. This manuscript describes innovative roles primary care physicians have adopted in survivorship care and how these roles emerged.
METHODS: We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with a snowball sample of 10 US primary care physician innovators in survivorship care. Interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. Our team met weekly as interviews were completed to review transcripts and write summaries. We analyzed data using an immersion-crystallization process.
RESULTS: Innovators did not receive formal survivorship training but gained knowledge experientially and through self-guided education. All worked in academic primary care and/or cancer centers; context strongly influenced role operationalization. We delineated 4 major role-types along a spectrum, with primary care generalist orientations at one end and cancer generalist orientations at the other. Primary care generalists applied survivorship guidelines during regular visits (\"GENERALISTS+\") or focused on cancer treatment effects amid other comorbidities during blocked clinic time (\"oncoGENERALISTS\"). Cancer generalists focused on cancer-related sequalae during and after treatment; some provided continuity care to survivors (\"ONCOGENERALISTS\"), while others incorporated unmet primary care needs into survivorship consults (\"ONCOgeneralists\").
CONCLUSIONS: Primary care survivorship innovations are occurring in academic primary care and cancer centers settings in the US. To move beyond the work of individual innovators, systematic investments are needed to support adoption of such innovations. For wider diffusion of survivorship care into community primary care, additional strategies that include primary care survivorship education and workforce development are needed to facilitate risk-stratified and shared-care models.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to describe the facilitators and barriers of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic for primary care clinicians in safety-net settings.
METHODS: We selected 5 surveys fielded between September 2020 and March 2023 from the national \"Quick COVID-19 Primary Care Survey\" by the Larry A. Green Center, with the Primary Care Collaborative. We used an explanatory sequential mixed method approach. We compared safety-net practices (free & charitable organization, federally qualified health center (FQHC), clinics with a 50% or greater Medicaid) to all other settings. We discuss: 1) telemedicine services provided; 2) clinician motivations; 3) and telemedicine access.
RESULTS: All clinicians were similarly motivated to implement telemedicine. Safety-net clinicians were more likely to report use of phone visits. These clinicians felt less \"confident in my use of telemedicine\" (covariate-adjusted OR = 0.611, 95% CI 0.43 - 0.87) and were more likely to report struggles with televisits in March 2023 (covariate-adjusted OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.16 - 2.57), particularly with physical examinations. Safety-net clinicians were more likely to endorse reductions in no-shows (covariate-adjusted OR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.17 - 2.68). Telemedicine increased access and new patient-facing demands including portal communications.
CONCLUSIONS: This study enhances our understanding of the use of telemedicine within the safety-net setting. Clinician perceptions are important for identifying barriers to telemedicine following the end of the Federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. Clinicians highlighted significant limitations to its use including clinical appropriateness, quality of physical examinations, and added patient-facing workload.

BACKGROUND: The NASEM Primary Care Report and Primary Care scorecard highlighted the importance of primary care physician (PCP) capacity and having a usual source of care (USC). However, research has found that PCP capacity and USC do not always correlate. This exploratory study compares geographic patterns and the characteristics of counties with similar rates of PCP capacity but varying rates of USC.
METHODS: Our county-level, cross-sectional approach includes estimates from the Robert Graham Center and data from the Robert Wood Johnson County Health Rankings (CHR). We utilized conditional mapping methods to first identify US counties with the highest rates of social deprivation (SDI). Next, counties were stratified based on primary care physician (PCP) capacity and usual source of care (USC) terciles, allowing us to identify 4 types of counties: (1) High-Low (high PCP capacity, low USC); (2) High-High (high PCP capacity, high USC); (3) Low-High (low PCP capacity, high USC); and (4) Low-Low (low PCP capacity, low USC). We use t test to explore differences in the characteristics of counties with similar rates of primary care capacity.
RESULTS: The results show clear geographic patterns: High-High counties are located primarily in the northern and northeastern US; High-Low counties are located primarily in the southwestern and southern US. Low-High counties are concentrated in the Appalachian and Great Lakes regions; Low-Low counties are concentrated in the southeastern US and Texas. Descriptive results reveal that rates of racial and ethnic minorities, the uninsured, and social deprivation are highest in counties with low rates of USC for both high PCP and low PCP areas.
CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing PCP shortages and improving rates of USC are key strategies for increasing access to high-quality, primary care. Targeting strategies by geographic region will allow for tailored models to improve access to and continuity of primary care. For example, we found that many of the counties with the lowest rates of USC are found in non-Medicaid expansion states (Texas, Georgia, and Florida) with high rates of uninsured populations, suggesting that expanding Medicaid and improving access to health insurance are key strategies for increasing USC in these states.

Underinvestment in primary care and erosion of the primary care physician workforce are resulting in patients across the US experiencing growing difficulty in obtaining access to primary care. Compounding this access problem, we find that the average patient panel size among US family physicians may have decreased by 25% over the past decade (2013 to 2022). Reversing the decline in access to primary care in the face of decreasing panel sizes requires both better supporting family physicians to manage larger panels, such as by expanding primary care teams, and substantially increasing the supply of family physicians.

OBJECTIVE: Due to the increasing complexity of the healthcare system, effective communication and data exchange between hospitalists (in-hospital physicians) and primary care physicians (PCPs) is both central and challenging. In Switzerland, little is known about hospitalists\' perception of their communication with PCPs. The primary objective was to assess hospitalists\' satisfaction with their communication with PCPs. Secondary objectives addressed all information about the referral process and communication with PCPs during and after the hospital encounter. Lastly, the results of a previous survey among PCPs were juxtaposed to compare their responses to similar questions.
METHODS: This study surveyed hospitalists in six hospitals in the Central Switzerland region. The survey was sent via email to hospitalists from November 2021 to February 2022. The questionnaire contained 17 questions with single- and multiple-choice answers and the option of free-text entry. Exploratory multivariable logistic regression was used to analyse independent associations.
RESULTS: In total, 276 of 1134 hospitalists responded (response rate 24.3%): (1) the majority of hospitalists are satisfied with the general communication (n = 162, 58.7%) as well as with referral letters (n = 145, 52.5%), (2) preferred information channels for referral letters are email (n = 212, 76.8%) and electronic portals (n = 181, 65.5%), (3) the three most important items of information in referrals are: medication list, diagnoses and reason for referral. In multivariable regression, compared to other clinicians, internists independently favoured informing PCPs of emergency admissions of their patients in a timely manner (OR 2.04; 95%CI 1.21-3.49). Comparing responses from PCPs (n = 109), the most prominent discrepancy was that 67% (n = 184) of hospitalists claimed to \"always\" inform after an encounter, whereas only 7% (n = 8) of PCPs agreed.
CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitalists are satisfied with the communication with PCPs and prefer electronic communication channels. Room for improvement was found around timely transmission of patient information before and after hospital encounters.

BACKGROUND: Obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) is a major risk factor for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and affects most patients with HFpEF. Patients living with obesity may experience delays in HFpEF diagnosis and management. We aimed to understand the clinical journey of patients with obesity and HFpEF and the role of primary care providers (PCPs) in diagnosing and managing patients with both conditions.
METHODS: An anonymous, US population-based online survey was conducted in September 2020 among 114 patients with self-reported HFpEF and obesity and 200 healthcare providers, 61 of whom were PCPs who treat patients with HFpEF and obesity.
RESULTS: Half of patients (51%) with HFpEF reported waiting an average of 11 months to discuss their symptoms with a PCP; 11% then received their diagnosis from a PCP. PCPs initiated treatment and oversaw the management of HFpEF only 35% of the time, and 44% of PCPs discussed obesity treatment medication options with their patients. Only 20% of PCPs indicated they had received formal obesity management training, and 79% of PCPs indicated they would be interested in obesity management training and support.
CONCLUSIONS: PCPs could play a valuable role in addressing obesity and referring patients with obesity and signs and symptoms of HFpEF to cardiologists. Increased awareness of HFpEF and its link to obesity may help PCPs more quickly identify and diagnose their patients with these conditions.
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a common form of heart failure. Many patients who have HFpEF also have obesity or excess weight. We wanted to understand the medical experience of patients with HFpEF and obesity and the role that primary care providers (PCPs) play in managing patients with these diseases. We surveyed 114 patients with HFpEF and obesity and 200 healthcare providers who treat patients with HFpEF and obesity, 61 of whom were PCPs. One-quarter of patients had a major heart-related event that led to their HFpEF diagnosis. Half of the patients said they had an initial discussion about HFpEF symptoms with a PCP, but only one in ten were diagnosed by a PCP. Few PCPs said they received obesity management training, but most were interested in receiving more obesity management training and support. PCPs play an important role in organizing care for patients with HFpEF and obesity. However, there is room to improve HFpEF awareness and access to obesity management tools and strategies among PCPs.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was twofold: to investigate what kind of information patients with heart failure (HF) tell their doctors about their medication adherence at home, and how often such information is provided in consultations where medication reconciliation is recommended. To meet these objectives, we developed an analysis to recognise, define, and count (1) patient utterances including medication adherence disclosures in clinical interactions (MADICI), (2) MADICI including red-flags for non-adherence, and (3) MADICI initiated by patients without prompts from their doctor.
METHODS: Exploratory interaction-based observational cohort study. Inductive microanalysis of authentic patient-doctor consultations, audio-recorded at three time-points for each patient: (1) first ward visit in hospital, (2) discharge visit from hospital, and (3) follow-up visit with general practitioner (GP).
METHODS: Norway (2022-2023).
METHODS: 25 patients with HF (+65 years) and their attending doctors (23 hospital doctors, 25 GPs).
RESULTS: We recognised MADICI by two criteria: (1) they are about medication prescribed for use at home, AND (2) they involve patients\' action, experience, or stance regarding medications. Using these criteria, we identified 427 MADICIs in 25 patient trajectories: 143 (34%) at first ward visit (min-max=0-35, median=3), 57 (13%) at discharge visit (min-max=0-8, median=2), 227 (53%) at GP-visit (min-max=2-24, median=7). Of 427 MADICIs, 235 (55%) included red-flags for non-adherence. Bumetanide and atorvastatin were most frequently mentioned as problematic. Patients initiated 146 (34%) of 427 MADICIs. Of 235 \'red-flag MADICIs\', 101 (43%) were initiated by patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-managing older patients with HF disclosed information about their use of medications at home, often including red-flags for non-adherence. Patients who disclosed information that signals adherence problems tended to do so unprompted. Such disclosures generate opportunities for doctors to assess and support patients\' medication adherence at home.

UNASSIGNED: Our nation faces an urgent need for more primary care (PC) physicians, yet interest in PC careers is dwindling. Students from underrepresented in medicine (UIM) backgrounds are more likely to choose PC and practice in underserved areas yet their representation has declined. Accelerated PC programs have the potential to address workforce needs, lower educational debt, and diversify the physician workforce to advance health equity.
UNASSIGNED: With support from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) and the American Medical Association\'s Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative, University of California School of Medicine (UC Davis) implemented the Accelerated Competency-based Education in Primary Care (ACE-PC) program - a six-year pathway from medical school to residency for students committed to health equity and careers in family medicine or PC-internal medicine. ACE-PC accepts 6-10 students per year using the same holistic admissions process as the 4-year MD program with an additional panel interview that includes affiliated residency program faculty from UC Davis and KPNC. The undergraduate curriculum features: PC continuity clinic with a single preceptor throughout medical school; a 9-month longitudinal integrated clerkship; supportive PC faculty and culture; markedly reduced student debt with full-tuition scholarships; weekly PC didactics; and clinical rotations in affiliated residency programs with the opportunity to match into specific ACE-PC residency tracks.
UNASSIGNED: Since 2014, 70 students have matriculated to ACE-PC, 71% from UIM groups, 64% are first-generation college students. Of the graduates, 48% have entered residency in family medicine and 52% in PC-internal medicine. In 2020, the first graduates entered the PC workforce; all are practicing in California, including 66% at federally qualified health centers, key providers of underserved care.

UNASSIGNED: To address the increasing demands for gastroenterology specialty care and increasing wait times, centralized access and triage (CAT) systems, telephone support, and clinical care pathways were implemented to streamline referrals and support management of low-risk gastrointestinal (GI) conditions in the primary care medical home. This study aimed to understand primary care providers (PCPs) and GI specialists\' perceptions of these supports, factors that affect support implementation and identify barriers and facilitators for implementing supports from both PCP and GI specialists\' perspectives.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a mixed method study including surveys and interviews with PCPs and GI specialists. Online surveys and semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted from July 2022 to September 2022. All interviews were transcribed and coded to perform a thematic analysis. Survey data were analyzed in SPSS version 25. Descriptive statistics were employed to summarize and describe the data collected. Inferential statistics were used to identify associations and relationships within the dataset. T-test and chi-square tests were applied at 95% confidence level, with a p value <0.05 (two-sided) considered statistically significant.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 36 PCPs responded to the survey. Most respondents were working full-time (73.5%, n = 25) and were female (73.5%, n = 25). Overall, 42% used the pathways regularly, 48% (n = 16) used them occasionally, and very few (9.1%, n = 3) said they were aware but had not used pathways. Overall, PCPs were satisfied with CAT processes and the use of primary care pathways, recognizing the importance of fair and equitable access to specialty care. Specific processes in CAT for vulnerable populations and patients using walk-in clinics were recognized as a limitation, given the lack of ease in completing the required testing and follow-up needed when utilizing the care pathway. Of the 112 GI specialists who received the survey, 28 (25%) completed it, with males (50.0%, n = 14) and females (39.2%, n = 11), remainder no response. Most participate in CAT (73.9%, n = 17) and were remunerated by an alternative relationship plan (ARP) (53.6%, n = 15). Overall, GIs were satisfied with central triaging and primary care pathways, reducing unnecessary time and resource expenditure for referrals. There were statistically significant differences in perceptions among fee for service and alternative relationship plan GI specialists regarding the effectiveness of CAT in improving access and use of health system resources.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, PCPs and GI specialists believe utilizing CAT and primary care pathways improves referral quality, reduces resource expenditure, and provides fair and equitable access to GI specialty services. Improvement in CAT processes with improved pathway awareness may reduce unnecessary referrals.

BACKGROUND:  Administrative tasks are an increasing burden for primary care doctors globally and linked to burnout. Many tasks occur during consultations. They cause interruptions with possible effects on patients\' and doctors\' experiences and care. The burden and typology of interruptions of doctors in primary care consultations have not been studied in South Africa. Given the link between administrative loads and burnout, describing the extent of these interruptions would help. This study\'s aim was to assess the extent of interruptions on primary care doctors in the Western Cape.
METHODS:  This was a descriptive cross-sectional survey. Doctors from rural and urban primary care clinics in the Western Cape answered an online self-administered survey on the types of interruptions experienced during consultations. Interruptions were categorised and their prevalence calculated. Clinical and non-clinical interruption categories were compared.
RESULTS:  There were 201 consultations from 30 doctors. Most interruptions were from retrieving and recording the current patient\'s information (93.0%), paperwork for other patients (50.7%), and telephone calls about the current patient (41.8%). Other prevalent interruptions were for emergencies (39.8%) and acquiring consumables (37.3%). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of four (2-4) interruption types per consultation was higher than global settings.
CONCLUSIONS:  Doctors experienced many interruptions during consultations. Their wide range included interruptions unrelated to the current patient.Contribution: This study adds insights from the global south on clinicians\' administrative burden. It elaborates on the types of activities that interrupt consultations in an upper-middle income primary care setting. Exploration of interventions to decrease this burden is suggested.