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.

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.

BACKGROUND: Access to dermatologists is limited in parts of the US, making primary care clinicians (PCCs) integral for early detection of skin cancers. A handheld device using elastic scattering spectroscopy (ESS) was developed to aid PCCs in their clinical assessment of skin lesions.
METHODS: In this prospective study, 3 PCCs evaluated skin lesions reported by patients as concerning and scanned each lesion with the handheld ESS device. The comparison was pathology results or a 3-dermatologist panel examining high resolution dermatoscopic and clinical images. PCCs reported their diagnosis, management decision, and confidence level for each lesion. Evaluation of results included sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and Area Under the Curve (AUC).
RESULTS: A total of 155 patients and 178 lesions were included in the final analysis. The most commonly patient-reported concerning feature was \"new or changing lesion\" (91.6%). Device diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 90.0% and 60.7%, respectively, based on biopsy result or dermatologist panel reference standard; comparatively, PCC sensitivity was 40.0% and 84.8% specificity without the use of the device. Device NPV was 98.9%, and device PPV was 13.6%. The device recommended patient referral to dermatology with 88.2% concordance with the dermatologist panel. AUC for the device and PCCs were 0.815 and 0.643, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the ESS device by PCCs can improve diagnostic and management sensitivity for select malignant skin lesions by correctly classifying most benign lesions of patient concern. This may increase skin cancer detection while improving access to specialist care.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy is a chronic infection with high morbidity in Brazil. Primary care physicians\' lack of knowledge about the disease may play a significant role in underdiagnosis. This study aimed to assess primary care physicians\' ability to identify typical leprosy skin lesions and their knowledge of the subject.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study relied on a questionnaire in which participating doctors chose one main diagnostic hypothesis and two differential diagnoses for each skin lesion presented. Five leprosy lesions were included. Questions regarding management, follow-up, and diagnostic workup for the disease were also included. The questionnaire was sent to primary care physicians working in Curitiba, in the Southern Brazilian state of Paraná, and dermatologists, who constituted the control group.
RESULTS: Thirty-two primary care physicians and 26 dermatologists agreed to participate in the study. Primary care physicians accurately identified a mean of 1.8 ± 1.2 of the five leprosy skin lesions, while dermatologists accurately identified 2.5 ± 0.9 (P = 0.009). The main misdiagnosed leprosy forms were the lepromatous and histoid variants. Among primary care physicians, 56.2% claimed to have little knowledge of the subject and a large share of participants was unaware of recent updates in treating paucibacillary forms, even within the dermatologist subgroup.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians in Curitiba have little information regarding the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of leprosy. Even dermatologists had difficulties with treatment and patient management, emphasizing the constant need for education on this subject.

UNASSIGNED: Postpartum mental health care is a public health priority requiring interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration. Primary care physicians (PCPs) have the potential to play an essential role in facilitating access to health care and providing comprehensive and coordinated care for postpartum mental health problems. In Japan, however, there are no previous studies on the extent to which PCPs are involved in postpartum mental health care. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the practices and experiences of Japanese PCPs in providing such care.
UNASSIGNED: This study presents a subset of the findings from a cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire on postpartum care among Japanese PCPs. We employed descriptive analysis to examine their practices and experiences in providing general and postpartum mental health care.
UNASSIGNED: We received 339 valid responses from 5811 PCPs. The median proportion of the outpatients with mental health problems that PCPs regularly saw was 15%. Approximately two out of three PCPs (68.7%) reported routinely performing screening for depression and anxiety. Seventy-six percent of PCPs had the opportunity to provide care for postpartum women. Approximately one in two PCPs (47.8%) had managed cases of postpartum mental health problems and collaborated with various professionals and resources to provide care.
UNASSIGNED: The majority of Japanese PCP participants in the study provide mental health care and have managed cases of postpartum mental health problems, collaborating with various health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Primary aldosteronism (PA) is the most common treatable and potentially curable cause of secondary hypertension. Prompt diagnosis and management by primary care physicians (PCPs) is important given the increased risk of cardiovascular complications however screening rates are low in primary care. Our aim was to identify factors that influence screening behaviour for PA among PCPs.
METHODS: A rigorous scoping review of seven databases between 16/08/22 and 09/08/23 was used to investigate PA screening practices. Articles written in English from peer-reviewed literature within the last 20 years were eligible for inclusion if an aspect of their study was conducted in primary care.
RESULTS: A total of 1380 titles and abstracts, and 61 full texts were screened, with 20 studies selected for data extraction. We identified three broad categories of factors influencing screening by PCPs-the patient, the clinician, and the healthcare system. Some studies targeted these factors to improve screening rates although there is little data on implementation and outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Low awareness, inadequate guidelines, and poor access to testing were identified as key barriers to PA screening. Targeted education sessions for PCPs, clear guidelines, and closer proximity to diagnostic centres may be required to improve PA detection in primary care.

Dermatological conditions and skin cancers are common health concerns that require early detection and intervention. Primary care physicians play a crucial role in recognizing these conditions and serving as the first line of defense against skin cancers. This guide provides a systematic approach to conducting thorough skin examinations and enhancing understanding of common presentations of precancerous and cancerous lesions. We emphasize the importance of performing annual full-body skin exams to facilitate early detection and management of skin conditions, including a step-by-step, systematic protocol for conducting these exams, comprising preparing the patient, documenting findings, educating the patient, and considering biopsy or referral for suspicious lesions. Furthermore, we explore the atypical features of skin lesions that raise clinical suspicion and warrant further investigation. We describe the characteristics of common skin cancers, such as basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. We stress the importance of patient education on self-skin checks and sun protection measures. By incorporating the knowledge and skills presented in this guide, primary care physicians can confidently perform thorough full-body skin checks, identify common dermatological findings and early signs of skin cancers, and provide comprehensive care to patients. This will help ensure optimal outcomes in dermatological health.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) should be active and reliable promoters of physical activity (PA), but there is no strong evidence that their knowledge and personal habits contribute to this. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of PA recommendations provided by PCPs to patients in terms of their self-assessed PA knowledge and personal habits. This study used a cross-sectional design and data were collected through a self-reported online questionnaire. The study sample consisted of 202 PCPs from a large Lithuanian city, Kaunas, of which 122 were females (60.4%) and 80 were males (39.6%). The data were analyzed using SPSS version 29 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) for Windows. The findings show that the frequency of recommendations related to providing PA to patients is statistically significantly dependent on PCP health-friendly or partially favorable PA habits, their self-assessed level of knowledge about physical activity, and their self-assessed competence related to providing PA recommendations to patients, but this is not statistically dependent on objectively assessed level of knowledge related to PA.

BACKGROUND: Given that mental health problems in adolescence may have lifelong impacts, the role of primary care physicians (PCPs) in identifying and managing these issues is important. Artificial Intelligence (AI) may offer solutions to the current challenges involved in mental health care. We therefore explored PCPs\' challenges in addressing adolescents\' mental health, along with their attitudes towards using AI to assist them in their tasks.
METHODS: We used purposeful sampling to recruit PCPs for a virtual Focus Group (FG). The virtual FG lasted 75 minutes and was moderated by two facilitators. A life transcription was produced by an online meeting software. Transcribed data was cleaned, followed by a priori and inductive coding and thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We reached out to 35 potential participants via email. Seven agreed to participate, and ultimately four took part in the FG. PCPs perceived that AI systems have the potential to be cost-effective, credible, and useful in collecting large amounts of patients\' data, and relatively credible. They envisioned AI assisting with tasks such as diagnoses and establishing treatment plans. However, they feared that reliance on AI might result in a loss of clinical competency. PCPs wanted AI systems to be user-friendly, and they were willing to assist in achieving this goal if it was within their scope of practice and they were compensated for their contribution. They stressed a need for regulatory bodies to deal with medicolegal and ethical aspects of AI and clear guidelines to reduce or eliminate the potential of patient harm.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the groundwork for assessing PCPs\' perceptions of AI systems\' features and characteristics, potential applications, possible negative aspects, and requirements for using them. A future study of adolescents\' perspectives on integrating AI into mental healthcare might contribute a fuller understanding of the potential of AI for this population.

Primary care physicians are likely both excited and apprehensive at the prospects for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). Complexity science may provide insight into which AI/ML applications will most likely affect primary care in the future. AI/ML has successfully diagnosed some diseases from digital images, helped with administrative tasks such as writing notes in the electronic record by converting voice to text, and organized information from multiple sources within a health care system. AI/ML has less successfully recommended treatments for patients with complicated single diseases such as cancer; or improved diagnosing, patient shared decision making, and treating patients with multiple comorbidities and social determinant challenges. AI/ML has magnified disparities in health equity, and almost nothing is known of the effect of AI/ML on primary care physician-patient relationships. An intervention in Victoria, Australia showed promise where an AI/ML tool was used only as an adjunct to complex medical decision making. Putting these findings in a complex adaptive system framework, AI/ML tools will likely work when its tasks are limited in scope, have clean data that are mostly linear and deterministic, and fit well into existing workflows. AI/ML has rarely improved comprehensive care, especially in primary care settings, where data have a significant number of errors and inconsistencies. Primary care should be intimately involved in AI/ML development, and its tools carefully tested before implementation; and unlike electronic health records, not just assumed that AI/ML tools will improve primary care work life, quality, safety, and person-centered clinical decision making.