Evaluating a specialist primary care service for patients experiencing homelessness: a qualitative study.
General practice
Homeless persons
Inequalities
Mental health
Patient perspectives
People experiencing homelessness
Primary health care
Journal
BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
06
02
2020
accepted:
10
02
2020
pubmed:
9
7
2020
medline:
9
7
2020
entrez:
9
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
People experiencing homelessness (PEH) often experience poor health, multimorbidity, and early mortality and experience barriers to accessing high quality health care. Little is known about how best to provide specialist primary care for these patients. To evaluate the health care provided to patients experiencing homelessness who were seen in a specialist primary care service. A qualitative evaluation of a city centre primary healthcare service for excluded and vulnerable people, such as rough sleepers, who find it difficult to visit mainstream GP services. Data on patient characteristics and service use were extracted from primary care records using electronic and free-text searches to provide context to the evaluation. Semi-structured interviews with 11 patients and four staff were used to explore attitudes and experiences. Patients had high needs compared with the general population. Patients valued continuity of care, ease of access, multidisciplinary care, and person-centred care. Staff were concerned that they lacked opportunities for reflection and learning, and that low clinical capacity affected service safety and quality. Staff also wanted more patient involvement in service planning. PEH's complex health and social problems benefited from a specialist primary care service, which is thought to reduce barriers to access, treat potentially challenging patients in a non-judgmental way, and provide personal continuity of care in order to develop trust.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
People experiencing homelessness (PEH) often experience poor health, multimorbidity, and early mortality and experience barriers to accessing high quality health care. Little is known about how best to provide specialist primary care for these patients.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the health care provided to patients experiencing homelessness who were seen in a specialist primary care service.
DESIGN & SETTING
METHODS
A qualitative evaluation of a city centre primary healthcare service for excluded and vulnerable people, such as rough sleepers, who find it difficult to visit mainstream GP services.
METHOD
METHODS
Data on patient characteristics and service use were extracted from primary care records using electronic and free-text searches to provide context to the evaluation. Semi-structured interviews with 11 patients and four staff were used to explore attitudes and experiences.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Patients had high needs compared with the general population. Patients valued continuity of care, ease of access, multidisciplinary care, and person-centred care. Staff were concerned that they lacked opportunities for reflection and learning, and that low clinical capacity affected service safety and quality. Staff also wanted more patient involvement in service planning.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
PEH's complex health and social problems benefited from a specialist primary care service, which is thought to reduce barriers to access, treat potentially challenging patients in a non-judgmental way, and provide personal continuity of care in order to develop trust.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32636203
pii: bjgpopen20X101049
doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101049
pmc: PMC7465567
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020, The Authors.
Références
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;20(6):1129-36
pubmed: 24840301
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Fam Pract. 2015 Aug;32(4):462-7
pubmed: 26002771
Epidemiol Infect. 2017 Oct;145(14):2873-2885
pubmed: 28891457
J Urban Health. 2009 Nov;86(6):965-89
pubmed: 19760155
Am J Bioeth. 2013;13(8):29-39
pubmed: 23862598
Lancet. 2018 Jan 20;391(10117):266-280
pubmed: 29137868
Trials. 2017 Jul 5;18(1):305
pubmed: 28679430
Lancet. 2018 Jan 20;391(10117):241-250
pubmed: 29137869
Aust J Gen Pract. 2018 Jan-Feb;47(1-2):44-49
pubmed: 29429315
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2008 Winter;31(3):226-33
pubmed: 18194950
J Public Health (Oxf). 2014 Mar;36(1):81-91
pubmed: 23587573
Health (London). 2012 Jan;16(1):76-104
pubmed: 21486918