Lebeau Jean-Pierre, Cadwallader Jean-Sébastien, Vaillant-Roussel Hélène, Pouchain Denis, Yaouanc Virginie, Aubin-Auger Isabelle, Mercier Alain, Rusch Emmanuel, Remmen Roy, Vermeire Etienne, Hendrickx Kristin
Department of General Practice, EES Research Team, University of Tours. Faculté de Médecine, Tours, France.
Department of General Practice, University of Tours. Faculté de Médecine, Tours, France.
BMJ Open. 2016 May 13;6(5):e010639. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010639.
To construct a typology of general practitioners' (GPs) responses regarding their justification of therapeutic inertia in cardiovascular primary prevention for high-risk patients with hypertension.
Empirically grounded construction of typology. Types were defined by attributes derived from the qualitative analysis of GPs' reported reasons for inaction.
256 GPs randomised in the intervention group of a cluster randomised controlled trial.
GPs members of 23 French Regional Colleges of Teachers in General Practice, included in the EffectS of a multifaceted intervention on CArdiovascular risk factors in high-risk hyPErtensive patients (ESCAPE) trial.
The database consisted of 2638 written responses given by the GPs to an open-ended question asking for the reasons why drug treatment was not changed as suggested by the national guidelines. All answers were coded using constant comparison analysis. A matrix analysis of codes per GP allowed the construction of a response typology, where types were defined by codes as attributes. Initial coding and definition of types were performed independently by two teams.
Initial coding resulted in a list of 69 codes in the final codebook, representing 4764 coded references in the question responses. A typology including seven types was constructed. 100 GPs were allocated to one and only one of these types, while 25 GPs did not provide enough data to allow classification. Types (numbers of GPs allocated) were: 'optimists' (28), 'negotiators' (20), 'checkers' (15), 'contextualisers' (13), 'cautious' (11), 'rounders' (8) and 'scientists' (5). For the 36 GPs that provided 50 or more coded references, analysis of the code evolution over time and across patients showed a consistent belonging to the initial type for any given GP.
This typology could provide GPs with some insight into their general ways of considering changes in the treatment/management of cardiovascular risk factors and guide design of specific physician-centred interventions to reduce inappropriate inaction.
NCT00348855.
构建一个类型学,以描述全科医生(GP)对于高危高血压患者心血管疾病一级预防中治疗惰性理由的回应方式。
基于实证构建类型学。类型由对全科医生报告的不作为原因进行定性分析得出的属性来定义。
256名全科医生被随机分配到一项整群随机对照试验的干预组。
23个法国地区全科医生学院的成员,参与了针对高危高血压患者心血管危险因素的多方面干预效果(ESCAPE)试验。
数据库由全科医生对一个开放式问题的2638份书面回复组成,该问题询问未按照国家指南建议改变药物治疗的原因。所有答案都使用持续比较分析法进行编码。对每个全科医生的代码进行矩阵分析,构建了一个回应类型学,其中类型由代码作为属性来定义。初始编码和类型定义由两个团队独立进行。
初始编码在最终编码手册中产生了69个代码列表,代表问题回复中的4764个编码参考。构建了一个包含七种类型的类型学。100名全科医生被分配到且仅被分配到其中一种类型,而25名全科医生没有提供足够的数据进行分类。类型(分配的全科医生数量)分别为:“乐观者”(28名)、“协商者”(20名)、“检查者”(15名)、“情境化者”(13名)、“谨慎者”(11名)、“完善者”(8名)和“科学家型”(5名)。对于提供了50个或更多编码参考的36名全科医生,对代码随时间和患者的演变分析表明,任何给定的全科医生始终属于初始类型。
这种类型学可以让全科医生对他们考虑心血管危险因素治疗/管理变化的一般方式有一些了解,并指导设计以医生为中心的特定干预措施,以减少不适当的不作为。
NCT00348855。