A77 IMPLEMENTATION OF GUT LINK-IBS; RESULTS OF A SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW OF PRIMARY CARE PROVIDERS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The Division of Digestive Care and Endoscopy in Halifax, Nova Scotia has had longstanding challenges with GI referral volume outstripping divisional capacity resulting in limited access to specialist care. Many referrals for functional bowel disorders (FBD) are returned to referring providers. Although this helps rationalize limited system resources, it often impairs access to appropriate and necessary GI care. The co-development and implementation of clinical care pathways across gastroenterology and primary care may help to improve access to high-quality GI care. Aims The project aimed to engage primary healthcare providers (PHCPs) to identify environmental and behavioral barriers and facilitators for managing undifferentiated lower GI disorders in primary care. Data generated from stakeholder engagement will be used to develop, implement, and evaluate strategies for referral and management of FBD. A real-world, functional clinical care pathway that supports the implementation of evidence-based practices in the diagnosis and management of functional GI conditions within primary care will enhance care and timely access to specialist. Methods This is a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of PHCPs working in Nova Scotia. Interview questions were developed and guided by the evidence-based implementation science frameworks. Physicians were recruited through existing primary care networks. Participants were offered a Zoom™virtual semi-structured interview. A brief intake questionnaire was administered to collect baseline demographics. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for data analysis. Data were categorized into coding schemes and themes were created using an inductive coding approach. Results As of October 2021, 9 interviews have been conducted. Average participant age was 44 years, with the majority identifying practice in a group or collaborative care setting (n=7, 78%). Five worked in urban practice settings and the remainder in rural areas. Preliminary major themes included: 1. A lack of satisfaction with access to gastrointestinal care, with most physicians noting it to be worse than access to other specialist services. 2. Management of FBDs were felt to be within the scope of primary care practice 3. Access to diagnostic tests like fecal calprotectin with appropriate education on its use as a diagnostic tool would be useful. 4. PHCP’s suggested care pathways be easy to use, require minimal time, and ideally be implemented within their pre-existing EMR or in paper form. Conclusions PHCPs acknowledge a significant burden of undifferentiated lower GI complaints in their practice and poor access to gastroenterology services. All participants were open to helping develop and use a clinical care pathway for the investigation and management of undifferentiated lower GI symptoms. Data collection and analysis are ongoing. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».