Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Peter Vedsted

Primary care physicians' access to in-house ultrasound examinations across Europe: A questionnaire study

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • Camilla Aakjær Andersen, Aalborg University
  • ,
  • Martin Bach B. Jensen, Aalborg University
  • ,
  • Berit Skjødeberg Toftegaard
  • ,
  • Peter Vedsted
  • Michael Harris, Bath University, University of Bern
  • ,
  • Örenäs Research Group, Bath University

Objective The overall objective of this study was to examine the differences in ultrasound availability in primary care across Europe. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Primary care. Participants Primary care physicians (PCPs). Primary and secondary outcomes measures The primary aim was to describe the variation in in-house primary care ultrasonography availability across Europe using descriptive statistics. The secondary aim was to explore associations between in-house ultrasonography availability and the characteristics of PCPs and their clinics using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. Results We collected data from 20 European countries. A total of 2086 PCPs participated, varying from 59 to 446 PCPs per country. The median response rate per country was 24.8%. The median (minimum-maximum) percentage of PCPs across Europe with access to in-house abdominal ultrasonography was 15.3% (0.0%-98.1%) and 12.1% (0.0%-30.8%) had access to in-house pelvic ultrasonography with large variations between countries. We found associations between in-house abdominal ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.9) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.8). Corresponding associations were found between in-house pelvic ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.7) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.1). Additionally, we found a negative association between urban clinics and in-house pelvic ultrasound availability (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.9). Conclusions Across Europe, there is a large variation in PCPs' access to in-house ultrasonography and organisational aspects of primary care seem to determine this variation. If evidence continues to support ultrasonography as a front-line point-of-care test, implementation strategies for increasing its availability in primary care are needed. Future research should focus on facilitators and barriers that may affect the implementation process.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummere030958
TidsskriftBMJ Open
Vol/bind9
Nummer9
Antal sider8
ISSN2044-6055
DOI
StatusUdgivet - aug. 2019

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 169531715