To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review of the purpose, design, and use of family trees by family physicians (FPs).
Background:
Family trees offer a valuable contribution to understanding the relevance of the patient’s family history in comprehensive primary healthcare provision. There is little research on the role of family trees in the everyday practice of FPs. Studies often focus on specific diseases and their context: however, a comprehensive exploration of the usefulness of family trees is crucial for FPs.
Methods:
A systematic literature review was conducted through a keyword search in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria selected, 24 studies were identified and a qualitative analysis was performed.
Findings:
A total of 369 publications were identified across 32 fields. Twenty-four studies were included in the final analysis according to the QUOROM statement. The results underscore the role of family trees and highlight the value of this tool’s multidimensionality. The use of this tool directs FPs to consider a genetic cause and a possible referral to a geneticist. The value of a family tree lies in the personalized patient-oriented treatment in connection with hereditary risks for chronic diseases. For FPs, the greatest challenge in treating patients is determining their risk of developing a chronic disease or cancer. Using a family tree can improve the quality of their healthcare.
This study aimed to identify nurses’ views on influenza vaccination and factors that might explain why they do not receive influenza vaccinations, and to examine any ethical issues encountered in the vaccination process.
Background:
All 27 European Union member states and 2 other European countries recommended influenza vaccinations for healthcare workers in 2014–15. Data show that the influenza vaccination rate among nurses in Slovenia is even lower than in other European countries. Slovenian study showed that 41.7% of the respondents had received both the pandemic and the seasonal vaccine. Doctors had the highest level of vaccine coverage, with 44.1%, followed by registered nurses at 23.4%, whereas the lowest level was found among nursing assistants and nursing technicians (17%) at a Ljubljana health clinic.
Methods:
A qualitative study was carried out. Nineteen nurses who did not receive influenza vaccination took part in the study. Thematic interviews were conducted in December 2018. Interview transcripts were read, coded, reviewed and labelled by three independent researchers. The collected material was processed using qualitative content analysis.
Findings:
Thirteen categories and four themes were identified and coded, which enabled an understanding of the nurses’ views regarding influenza vaccination. Most of their experiences were positive in one way: they recognised the importance of vaccination and people’s awareness of it. However, they did not obtain the influenza vaccine themselves. The main barriers to vaccination were doubt regarding the vaccine’s effectiveness, the potential for side effects, the belief that young healthcare professionals are well protected and not at high risk, an overrated trust in their own immune systems, and the belief that pharmaceutical industry marketing was targeting them. The nurses suggested several ways that vaccination could be promoted and improved vaccination coverage achieved. These findings call attention to the importance of recognising both the need for targeted information for the nurses and the need for different approaches to healthcare provision.
We sought to examine strength of primary care service delivery as measured by selected process indicators by general practitioners from 31 European countries plus Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. We explored the relation between strength of service delivery and healthcare expenditures.
Background
The strength of a country’s primary care is determined by the degree of development of a combination of core primary care dimensions in the context of its healthcare system. This study analyses the strength of service delivery in primary care as measured through process indicators in 31 European countries plus Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.
Methods
A comparative cross-sectional study design was applied using the QUALICOPC GP database. Data on the strength of primary healthcare were collected using a standardized GP questionnaire, which included 60 questions divided into 10 dimensions related to process, structure, and outcomes. A total of 6734 general practitioners participated. Data on healthcare expenditure were obtained from World Bank statistics. We conducted a correlation analysis to analyse the relationship between strength and healthcare expenditures.
Findings
Our findings show that the strength of service delivery parameters is less than optimal in some countries, and there are substantial variations among countries. Continuity and comprehensiveness of care are significantly positively related to national healthcare expenditures; however, coordination of care is not.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.