Subjects -> MEDICAL SCIENCES (Total: 8810 journals)
    - ANAESTHESIOLOGY (121 journals)
    - CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES (350 journals)
    - DENTISTRY (292 journals)
    - ENDOCRINOLOGY (152 journals)
    - FORENSIC SCIENCES (44 journals)
    - HEMATOLOGY (159 journals)
    - HYPNOSIS (4 journals)
    - INTERNAL MEDICINE (180 journals)
    - MEDICAL GENETICS (58 journals)
    - MEDICAL SCIENCES (2448 journals)
    - NURSES AND NURSING (372 journals)
    - OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY (211 journals)
    - ONCOLOGY (395 journals)
    - OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY (84 journals)
    - PATHOLOGY (100 journals)
    - PEDIATRICS (277 journals)
    - PSYCHIATRY AND NEUROLOGY (846 journals)
    - RESPIRATORY DISEASES (108 journals)
    - RHEUMATOLOGY (79 journals)
    - SPORTS MEDICINE (83 journals)
    - SURGERY (412 journals)

INTERNAL MEDICINE (180 journals)                     

Showing 1 - 180 of 180 Journals sorted alphabetically
Abdomen     Open Access  
ACP Hospitalist     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
ACP Internist     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
ACP Journal Club     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Acta Clinica Belgica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Acute and Critical Care     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Acute Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Advances in Hepatology     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Advances in Integrative Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine     Open Access  
American Family Physician     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 38)
American Journal of Hypertension     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 31)
Anales de Medicina Interna     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Anatomy & Physiology : Current Research     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Angiology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Annals of Colorectal Research     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Annals of Internal Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 392)
AORN Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Apollo Medicine     Open Access  
Archives of Drug Information     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Archivos de Medicina Interna     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine & Biology     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
BMI Journal : Bariátrica & Metabólica Iberoamericana     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care     Open Access   (Followers: 35)
BMJ Quality & Safety     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 69)
Bone & Joint Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 138)
Brain Communications     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Brain Science Advances     Open Access  
Canadian Journal of General Internal Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Cardiovascular Medicine in General Practice     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Case Reports in Internal Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cell Death & Disease     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Cephalalgia     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Cephalalgia Reports     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada     Free   (Followers: 1)
Clinical Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Clinical Liver Disease     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Clinical Nutrition     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 98)
Clinical Thyroidology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
CNE Pflegemanagement     Hybrid Journal  
Communication Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Current Diabetes Reports     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
Current Hepatology Reports     Hybrid Journal  
Current Research: Integrative Medicine     Open Access  
CVIR Endovascular     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Der Internist     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Diabetes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 603)
Diabetes Care     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 578)
Diabetes Internacional     Open Access  
Diabetes Spectrum     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
Diagnosis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Egyptian Journal of Bronchology     Open Access  
Egyptian Journal of Internal Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Egyptian Journal of Neurosurgery     Open Access  
Egyptian Liver Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Egyptian Spine Journal     Open Access  
EMC - Aparato Locomotor     Hybrid Journal  
Endovascular Neuroradiology / Ендоваскулярна нейрорентгенохірургія     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
eNeuro     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Ergonomics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
European Journal of Inflammation     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
European Journal of Internal Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
European Journal of Translational Myology     Open Access  
European Radiology Experimental     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Head and Neck Tumors     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Health Sociology Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
HemaSphere     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Hepatology Communications     Open Access  
Hepatoma Research     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Human Physiology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
ImmunoHorizons     Open Access  
Immunological Medicine     Open Access  
Infectious Diseases: Research and Treatment     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Inflammation and Regeneration     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases     Open Access  
Innere Medizin up2date     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Internal and Emergency Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Internal Medicine Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
International Journal of Abdominal Wall and Hernia Surgery     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Anatomy and Research     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
International Journal of Angiology     Hybrid Journal  
International Journal of Artificial Organs     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
International Journal of Hyperthermia     Open Access  
International Journal of Internal Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
International Journal of Noncommunicable Diseases     Open Access  
International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Italian Journal of Anatomy and Embryology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
JAMA Internal Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 364)
JCSM Clinical Reports     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
JHEP Reports     Open Access  
JIMD Reports     Open Access  
JMV - Journal de Médecine Vasculaire     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 41)
JOP. Journal of the Pancreas     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Basic & Clinical Physiology & Pharmacology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Bone Oncology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Cancer & Allied Specialties     Open Access  
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hepatology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Clinical Movement Disorders     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives     Open Access  
Journal of Cutaneous Immunology and Allergy     Open Access  
Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Endoluminal Endourology     Open Access  
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Journal of General Internal Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Journal of Hypertension     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Journal of Infectious Diseases     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 48)
Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine     Open Access  
Journal of Internal Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Journal of Liver : Disease & Transplantation     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Medical Internet Research     Open Access   (Followers: 24)
Journal of Movement Disorders     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 46)
Journal of Pancreatic Cancer     Open Access  
Journal of Renal and Hepatic Disorders     Open Access  
Journal of Solid Tumors     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Sports Medicine and Allied Health Sciences : Official Journal of the Ohio Athletic Trainers Association     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Journal of the European Mosquito Control Association     Open Access  
Journal of Translational Internal Medicine     Open Access  
Jurnal Vektor Penyakit     Open Access  
La Revue de Medecine Interne     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Lege artis - Das Magazin zur ärztlichen Weiterbildung     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Liver Cancer International     Open Access  
Liver Research     Open Access  
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Molecular Therapy - Oncolytics     Open Access  
Multiple Sclerosis and Demyelinating Disorders     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
MYOPAIN. A journal of myofascial pain and fibromyalgia     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Neuro-Oncology Advances     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Neurobiology of Pain     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Neurointervention     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Neuromuscular Diseases     Open Access  
Nigerian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology     Full-text available via subscription  
OA Alcohol     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Oncological Coloproctology     Open Access  
Open Journal of Internal Medicine     Open Access  
Pleura and Peritoneum     Open Access  
Pneumo News     Full-text available via subscription  
Polish Archives of Internal Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Preventing Chronic Disease     Free   (Followers: 2)
Progress in Transplantation     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Prostate International     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Pulmonary Therapy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Quality of Life Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20)
Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis     Open Access  
Revista Chilena de Fonoaudiología     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Revista de la Sociedad Peruana de Medicina Interna     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Revista del Instituto de Medicina Tropical     Open Access  
Revista Hispanoamericana de Hernia     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Revista Médica Internacional sobre el Síndrome de Down     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Revista Virtual de la Sociedad Paraguaya de Medicina Interna     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Romanian Journal of Diabetes Nutrition and Metabolic Diseases     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine     Open Access  
Russian Journal of Child Neurology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Schlaf     Hybrid Journal  
Schmerzmedizin     Hybrid Journal  
Scientific Journal of the Foot & Ankle     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
SciMedicine Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
SEMERGEN - Medicina de Familia     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
The Journal of Critical Care Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Therapeutic Advances in Musculoskeletal Disease     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Thieme Case Report     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Tijdschrift voor Urologie     Hybrid Journal  
Tissue Barriers     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Transgender Health     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
US Cardiology Review     Open Access  
Vascular and Endovascular Review     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Ожирение и метаболизм     Open Access  


Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Journal Prestige (SJR): 1.174
Citation Impact (citeScore): 2
Number of Followers: 11  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 1557-2625 - ISSN (Online) 1558-7118
Published by American Board of Family Medicine Homepage  [1 journal]
  • Family Medicine and the "New" Opioid Epidemic

    • Authors: Johnson M. S.
      Pages: 1 - 3
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190432
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Why Are Early Career Family Physicians Driving Increases in Buprenorphine

    • Authors: St. Louis, J; Weida, N.
      Pages: 4 - 6
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190404
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Early-Career and Graduating Physicians More Likely to Prescribe

    • Authors: Peterson, L. E; Morgan, Z. J, Eden, A. R.
      Pages: 7 - 8
      Abstract: Using data from 2016 to 2018, we demonstrate a sharp increase in graduating family medicine residents and early-career family physicians who intend to or actually prescribe buprenorphine with no change in mid-to-late-career physicians. Family physicians are responding to the opioid crisis but, growing the family medicine workforce to treat opioid-use disorder will require a larger response from mid-to-late-career physicians.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190230
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Characteristics of Office-Based Buprenorphine Prescribers for Medicare

    • Authors: Abraham, R; Wilkinson, E, Jabbarpour, Y, Petterson, S, Bazemore, A.
      Pages: 9 - 16
      Abstract: Introduction:Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major and growing public health concern, and Medicare patients have nearly double the proportion of OUD prevalence compared with those with commercial insurance. This study examines provider-level characteristics to delineate the wide variation behind buprenorphine provision, which is the mainstay of medication-assisted treatment for OUD.Methods:Using Medicare Part D Public Use Files claims data from 2013 to 2016 in all states, we assessed prescribing patterns of buprenorphine formulations for the specialties of family medicine, internal medicine, psychiatry, and general practice. We incorporated data from 2013 to 2016 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile to model various provider- and area-level characteristics as predictors of buprenorphine prescriber status.Results:Family medicine and internal medicine comprise nearly two-thirds of the outpatient buprenorphine prescriber population for Medicare beneficiaries. Yet, both specialties also have the lowest proportion of active buprenorphine prescribers compared with psychiatrists and general practitioners. Additional characteristics associated with buprenorphine provision include male sex, osteopathic training, Northeast region, US undergraduate medical education, more years in practice, and a higher proportion of dual-eligible patients.Conclusions:Primary care specialties, such as family medicine and internal medicine, currently comprise a significant majority of the US buprenorphine prescriber population for Medicare beneficiaries. Future policies should target specific demographics to enable greater patient access from physicians who are characteristically less likely to prescribe buprenorphine to increase overall capacity.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190233
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • A New Quality Improvement Toolkit to Improve Opioid Prescribing in Primary

    • Authors: van Eeghen, C; Kennedy, A. G, Pasanen, M. E, MacLean, C. D.
      Pages: 17 - 26
      Abstract: Introduction:The role of opioids in managing chronic pain has evolved in light of the opioid misuse epidemic and new evidence regarding risks and benefits of long-term opioid therapy. With mounting national guidelines and local regulations, providers need interventions to standardize and improve safe, responsible prescribing. This article summarizes the evolution of an opioid management toolkit using a quality improvement (QI) approach to improve prescribing.Methods:The authors developed a list of opioid-prescribing best practices and offered in-office, team-based QI projects to ambulatory clinics, updated and tested over 3 trials in the form of a toolkit. Outcome measures included pre- and postproject surveys on provider and staff satisfaction, toolkit completion, and process measures. The toolkit supports workflow planning, redesign, and implementation.Results:Ten clinics participated in trial 1, completing the QI project on average in 3 months, with a mean of 9.1 hours of team time. Provider satisfaction with prescribing increased from 42% to 96% and staff satisfaction from 54% to 81%. The most common strategies in trials 1 and 2 focused on regulatory compliance (35% to 36%), whereas in Trial 3 there was a strong move toward peer support (81%).Discussion:Clinics responded to implementation of opioid-related best practices using QI with improved provider and staff satisfaction. Once the goals of regulatory compliance and workflow improvements were met, clinics focused on strategies supporting providers in the lead role of managing chronic pain, building on strategies that provide peer support. Using QI methods, primary care clinics can improve opioid-prescribing best practices for patients.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2019.01.190238
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Prescribing Patterns and Use of Risk-Reduction Tools After Implementing an
           Opioid-Prescribing Protocol

    • Authors: Breeden, M. A; Jacobs, C. K, Witthaus, M, Salas, J, Everard, K. M, Penton, E, Scherrer, J. F.
      Pages: 27 - 33
      Abstract: Background:The literature on results from primary care–based opioid-prescribing protocols is small and results have been mixed. To advance this field, we evaluated whether opioid prescribing changed after a comprehensive protocol was implemented and whether change was associated with the number and type of risk reduction tools adopted.Methods:Electronic medical record data were obtained for 2607 patients. Demographics, Patient Health Questionnaire–9 scores, body mass index, and utilization levels of protocol elements were measured for 24 months prior and 18 months post implementation of an opioid-prescribing protocol within a federally qualified health center. 2 and t-tests were computed to estimate change in opioid prescribing, morphine-equivalent dose, comedication prescribing, and number and type of protocol elements utilized.Results:The opioid protocol was associated with an increase in urine drug screens from 18.3% to 26.8% from pre to postimplementation (P < .0001). There was no significant increase in opioid treatment agreements. Tramadol (21.4% to 16.8%, P = .0006) and antidepressant (56.0% to 51.6%, P = .012) prescribing significantly decreased. Total opioid prescriptions and maximum morphine-equivalent doses were similar from pre to postimplementation. Protocol elements were more often used when patients had a higher opioid dose and were receiving benzodiazepines.Conclusions:Implementing a multi-faceted opioid-prescribing protocol was not associated with change in number or dose of opioid prescriptions but was associated with greater use of urine drug screens, and risk reduction tools were used more often in high-risk patients. Implementation research is needed to identify barriers to maximizing adherence to opioid protocols.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190247
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Satisfaction with Health Care Among Prescription Opioid Recipients

    • Authors: Jerant, A; Agnoli, A, Franks, P.
      Pages: 34 - 41
      Abstract: Background:Prior studies examining the association of opioid prescriptions with satisfaction with care involved limited, selected samples with mixed findings. We examined this issue, of relevance to reducing discretionary opioid prescribing, in a US representative sample.Methods:We performed an observational study of adults (N = 69,985) enrolled in the 2005 to 2015 US Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. We examined the association of high (top quartile) satisfaction with receipt of 0, 1 to 5, or ≥6 opioid prescriptions per year. The base model adjusted for demographics and year; the full model added adjustment for health status (12-item Short Form Survey). A sensitivity analysis further adjusted for outpatient visits.Results:In the base model, respondents who received 1 to 5 or ≥6 opioid prescriptions were each less likely to have high satisfaction than those who received no opioid prescriptions (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] [95% CIs] 0.83 [0.79–0.88] and 0.70 [0.63–0.79], respectively). After adding health status adjustment, compared with respondents receiving no opioid prescriptions, those receiving 1 to 5 were similarly likely and those reporting ≥6 were more likely to have high satisfaction (AORs [95% CIs] 1.00 [0.94–1.06] and 1.44 [1.27–1.63], respectively). The findings were not substantively affected by further adjustment for outpatient visits.Discussion:In a US national sample, individuals who received ≥6 opioid prescriptions in a year were more likely to have top quartile satisfaction than those receiving fewer or no opioid prescriptions after accounting for health status. Whether the high satisfaction among such individuals was driven by the prescriptions themselves or by other personal characteristics requires study, as do the effects of deprescribing.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190090
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Factors That Influence Changes to Existing Chronic Pain Management Plans

    • Authors: Diiulio, J; Militello, L. G, Andraka-Christou, B. T, Cook, R. L, Hurley, R. W, Downs, S. M, Anders, S, Mamlin, B. W, Danielson, E. C, Harle, C. A.
      Pages: 42 - 50
      Abstract: Background:The objective of this qualitative study is to better understand primary care clinician decision making for managing chronic pain. Specifically, we focus on the factors that influence changes to existing chronic pain management plans. Limitations in guidelines and training leave clinicians to use their own judgment and experience in managing the complexities associated with treating patients with chronic pain. This study provides insight into those judgments based on clinicians' first-person accounts. Insights gleaned from this study could inspire innovations aimed at supporting primary care clinicians (PCCs) in managing chronic pain.Methods:We conducted 89 interviews with PCCs to obtain their first-person perspective of the factors that influenced changes in treatment plans for their patients. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians, cognitive scientists, and public health researchers.Results:Seven themes emerged through our analysis of factors that influenced a change in chronic pain management: 1) change in patient condition; 2) outcomes related to treatment; 3) nonadherent patient behavior; 4) insurance constraints; 5) change in guidelines, laws, or policies; 6) approaches to new patients; and 7) specialist recommendations.Conclusions:Our analysis sheds light on the factors that lead PCCs to change treatment plans for patients with chronic pain. An understanding of these factors can inform the types of innovations needed to support PCCs in providing chronic pain care. We highlight key insights from our analysis and offer ideas for potential practice innovations.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190284
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • When Physicians Say No: Predictors of Request Denial and Subsequent
           Patient Satisfaction

    • Authors: Magnan, E. M; Franks, P, Jerant, A, Kravitz, R. L, Fenton, J. J.
      Pages: 51 - 58
      Abstract: Background:Physician denial of patient requests is associated with lower patient satisfaction. Our objective was to explore factors that influence physician request denial and patient satisfaction after request denial.Methods:Cross-sectional observational study of 1141 adult patients seen during 1319 outpatient visits with 56 primary care physicians. We measured patients' postvisit self-report of requests and request fulfillment, visit satisfaction, sociodemographics, health status, symptom burden, life satisfaction, medical skepticism, and whether patients saw their usual physician and a faculty or resident physician. We used mixed-effects regression analyses to identify predictors of request denial and visit satisfaction among patients who had a request denied.Results:Patients made at least 1 request at 867 visits (65.7%) with at least 1 denied request reported at 182 visits (21.0%). Patients who saw their usual physician were less likely to report a request denial (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.88), and patients with the highest symptom burden (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.38 to 3.55) or greater medical skepticism (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.78) were more likely to report request denials. After request denials, patients seeing their usual physicians reported significantly greater visit satisfaction compared with not seeing their usual physician (adjusted percentile rank in visit satisfaction: 12.4%; 95% CI, 3.5% to 21.2%).Conclusions:Approximately one fifth of visits in primary care have a denied request. Having an office visit with one's usual physician is associated with reduced likelihood of request denial and may mitigate the adverse impacts of request denial on patient visit satisfaction.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190202
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Patterns of Health Professionals Toward
           Medical and Non-medical Stimulant Use by Young Adults

    • Authors: Loskutova, N. Y; Waterman, J, Callen, E, Staton, E. W, Bullard, E, Shields, J.
      Pages: 59 - 70
      Abstract: Background:The role of family physicians (FPs) and college health professionals (CHPs) in stimulant treatment and nonmedical use of stimulants is not clear.Objective:To investigate the current practices, concerns, needs, beliefs, barriers, and facilitators to appropriate pharmacological treatment of teens and young adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and prevention of nonmedical use and diversion.Methods:A cross-sectional survey developed by the project team and experts in the field, delivered to national sample of FPs and CHPs.Results:A total of 794 completed surveys were analyzed. The average age of respondents was 51.6 ± 10.3 years; 50.6% of the respondents were female. The majority of CHPs (80.6%) reported they spend 75% to 100% of their time with patients age 17 to 24 years and 74.0% of FPs reported they spend less than 25% of their time with this age group. The majority (91.7%) of the respondents indicated that untreated ADHD affects quality of life, and 76.4% indicated untreated ADHD is often associated with risky behaviors. More CHPs than FPs always refer out for ADHD diagnosis (70.7% vs 52.1%; P < .001). Most respondents (81.2%) were concerned with ADHD medication diversion, and 84.2% believed that diversion or abuse is a problem overall. Respondents indicated they are unprepared to provide patient education on decisions about pharmacotherapy or behavioral therapy choices for adult ADHD.Conclusion:There is an opportunity to enhance safety and effectiveness of ADHD management in young adults. Additional resources and interventions are needed to improve medication management, reduce misuse, and ensure safe and appropriate use of stimulants.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190071
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Physicians' Response to Patients' Quality-of-Life Goals

    • Authors: Purkaple, B. A; Nagykaldi, Z. J, Allahyar, A, Todd, R, Mold, J. W.
      Pages: 71 - 79
      Abstract: Purpose:Patients are able to participate in quality-of-life (QOL) discussions, but clinicians struggle to incorporate this information into encounters and shared decision making. We designed a study to determine if a clinician-initiated prompt could make patient visits more goal directed.Methods:Patients were given a previsit questionnaire that included QOL questions. Physicians in the control were given no further prompting. The intervention physicians were prompted to ask a QOL question: what things are you unable to do because of your health problems today' A 2-pronged design was used: 1 prepost group where 3 physicians participated in 5 control and 5 intervention encounters (n = 30) and a randomized group in which 11 physicians and their patients were randomly assigned to control or intervention groups (n = 30). Video recordings of the encounters were reviewed to determine if QOL goals were mentioned and if they were utilized in decision making.Results:Fifty-seven (95%) of the 60 patients provided written answers to at least 1 of the QOL questions on the intake form. QOL goals were mentioned during intervention encounters more often than in control groups. QOL information was used in shared decision making in only 4 of the 30 (13%) intervention encounters.Conclusions:Physicians were able to engage in QOL discussions with their patients, but did not translate that information to medical decision making. More research is needed to understand why clinicians opt not to use QOL information and how to make communication more goal directed.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190169
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • National Survey of Decision-Making for Antidepressants and Educational

    • Authors: Brodney, S; Fowler, F. J, Stringfellow, V, Valentine, K. D, Barry, M. J.
      Pages: 80 - 90
      Abstract: Background:Despite recommendations to screen adults for depression in primary care, little is known about how people across education levels decide to treat their depression and factors that influence their decision.Methods:We conducted a secondary analysis of a national, probability-based web survey in English-speaking adults aged 40 or older living in the United States who reported they discussed starting or continuing an antidepressant with their clinician in the past 2 years. Respondents answered questions about knowledge, decision-making process, and demographics. Education level was analyzed using 5 ordered categories. The Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process score was used to assess patient involvement. Descriptive statistics, 2 tests, analysis of variance, and regression models were used to describe the data and test associations.Results:Of the 5682 people invited, 3396 answered questions about health decisions (59.8% response rate) and 385 reported discussing antidepressants. The mean percentage of knowledge questions answered correctly increased as education level increased (P = .008). The mean SDM Process score also increased with education (P = .001). There was an association between education and who made the treatment decision, suggesting that for respondents with less education, the clinician was more likely to decide (P = .001). Respondents with less education were less likely to report they would definitely make the same decision again (P = .000).Conclusions:Those with less education were even less informed, had lower SDM Process scores and were less likely to think they made the right decision about antidepressants. There is a need to ensure patients are better informed about and involved in treatment for depression.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190120
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Sickle-Cell Disease Co-Management, Health Care Utilization, and
           Hydroxyurea Use

    • Authors: Crego, N; Douglas, C, Bonnabeau, E, Earls, M, Eason, K, Merwin, E, Rains, G, Tanabe, P, Shah, N.
      Pages: 91 - 105
      Abstract: Background:Sickle-cell disease (SCD) causes significant morbidity, premature mortality, and high disease burden, resulting in frequent health care use. Comanagement may improve utilization and patient adherence with treatments such as Hydroxyurea. The purpose of this study was to describe acute-care utilization in Medicaid-enrolled patients with SCD, patient factors associated with comanagement, and adherence to Hydroxyurea.Methods:Data from 2790 patients diagnosed with SCD, age 1 to 65+ years, enrolled at least 1 month in North Carolina Medicaid between March 2016 and February 2017, were analyzed. Outpatient visits were categorized as primary care, hematologist, and nonhematologist specialist. Nurse practitioners or physician assistants with unidentified specialty type or family practice were categorized separately. Comanagement was defined as a minimum of 1 primary care and 1 hematologist visit/patient during the study period.Results:There were notable age-related differences in utilization of health care services. Only 34.82% of the sample was comanaged. Comanagement was higher in the 1-to-9-year-old (44.88%) and 10-to-17-year-old groups (39.22%) versus the 31-to-45-year-old (30.26%) and 65+-year-old (18.75%) age groups. Age had the greatest influence (AUC = 0.599) on whether or not a patient was comanaged. Only a third of the sample (32.24%) had at least 1 Hydroxyurea (HU) prescription. Age was the most predictive factor of good HUadherence (AUC = 0.6503). Prediction by comanagement was minimal with an AUC = 0.5615.Conclusion:Comanagement was a factor in predicting HUadherence, but further studies are needed to identify the frequency and components of comanagement needed to increase adherence and reduce acute care utilization.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190143
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Primary Care Physicians' Perspectives on the Ethical Impact of the
           Electronic Medical Record

    • Authors: Moerenhout, T; Fischer, G. S, Saelaert, M, De Sutter, A, Provoost, V, Devisch, I.
      Pages: 106 - 117
      Abstract: Objective:The aim of this study is to explore whether specific ethical questions arise with the use of a shared electronic health record (EHR) system, based on the daily experience of primary care physicians (PCPs).Methods:In this qualitative research project, we conducted 14 in-depth semistructured interviews with PCPs in a tertiary hospital setting.Results:We identified 4 themes: 1) PCPs describe the EHR as a medicine with side effects, for which they provide suggestions for improvements; 2) A shared record raises ethical questions related to autonomy and trust; 3) Although use of the EHR often disturbs rapport with the patient, it can also support the patient-doctor interaction when it becomes an active part of the conversation; 4) A shared EHR may cause health care providers (and their relatives) to avoid seeking help for sensitive issues.Discussion:PCPs fear access to results could cause confusion and anxiety in patients, resulting in tensions between autonomy and beneficence. Improved efficiency and quality of care with a shared EHR relies on doctors trusting each other's input to avoid duplicate tests. However, this might compromise a fundamental skeptical attitude in practicing medicine, and we should be aware of a risk of increased confirmation and anchoring bias.Conclusion:The EHR is considered to be a work in progress—EHR design could be improved by examining physicians' coping strategies and implementing their suggestions for improvement. Ethical questions related to autonomy, trust, and the status of records that belong to doctor–patients need to be considered in future research and EHR development.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190154
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Practice Predictors of Buprenorphine Prescribing by Family Physicians

    • Authors: Peterson, L. E; Morgan, Z. J, Borders, T. F.
      Pages: 118 - 123
      Abstract: Introduction:Both opioid use disorder and mortality for opioid overdoses are increasing. Family physicians (FPs) can treat opioid use disorder if they are waivered to prescribe buprenorphine. Our objective was to determine personal, practice, and community characteristics associated with FPs prescribing buprenorphine.Methods:We used data from the 2017 and 2018 American Board of Family Medicine examination registration questionnaire. The questionnaire asked about current prescribing of buprenorphine, as well as about practice size, organization, and location. Logistic regression was used to determine associations between buprenorphine treatment and individual, practice, and county characteristics.Results:The questionnaire had a 100% response rate. After excluding FPs in noncontinuity practices and those who could not be linked to a US county, our final sample was 2726. Only 161 (5.9%) prescribed buprenorphine. Practice in a Federal Qualified Health Center (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 1.98 (95% CI, 1.08, 3.63)), in solo practice (aOR = 2.60 (1.38, 4.92)), or with a mental health professional (aOR = 2.70 (1.73, 4.22)) were positively associated with prescribing buprenorphine. Practice in a rural county or in a whole county mental health professional shortage area were not associated with buprenorphine prescribing.Discussion:Few FPs prescribed buprenorphine, but those in practice settings with supporting mental health services were more likely to prescribe. With their training in the biopsychosocial model and a more even distribution across the rural continuum, FPs are perfectly situated to meet the increasing need for medication-assisted treatment. However, ensuring they have supporting mental health services will be central to having more FPs provide medication-assisted treatment.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190235
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • A Financial Model for Team-Based Opioid Use Disorder Treatment

    • Authors: Farrar, M; White, Z, Hulkower, S, Fagan, E. B, Wilson, C. G.
      Pages: 124 - 128
      Abstract: Introduction:Opioid use disorder (OUD) affects 2 million Americans, yet many patients do not receive treatment. Lack of team-based care is a common barrier for office-based opioid treatment (OBOT). In 2015, we started OBOT in a family medicine practice. Based on our experiences, we developed a financial model for hiring a team member to provide nonbillable OBOT services through revenue from increased patient volume.Methods:We completed a retrospective chart review from July 2015 to December 2016 to determine the average difference in medical visits per patient per month pre-OBOT versus post-OBOT. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of visits coded as a Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5, and the percentage of patients with Medicaid, private insurance, or self pay. With this information, we extrapolated to build a financial model to hire a team member to support OBOT.Results:Twenty-three patients received OBOT during the study period. There was a net increase of 1.93 visits per patient per month (P < .001). Fourteen patients were insured by Medicaid, 7 had private insurance, and 2 were self pay. Twenty-three percent of OBOT visits were Level 3, 69% were Level 4, and 8% were Level 5. Assuming all visits were reimbursed by Medicaid and accounting for 20% cost of business, treating 1 existing patient for 1 year would generate $1,439. Treating 1 new patient would generate $1,677.Conclusions:In a fee-for-service model, the revenue generated from increased medical visits can offset the cost of hiring a team member to support nonbillable OBOT services.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190228
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • A Change Management Case Study for Safe Opioid Prescribing and Opioid Use
           Disorder Treatment

    • Authors: Sokol, R; Schuman-Olivier, Z, Batalden, M, Sullivan, L, Shaughnessy, A. F.
      Pages: 129 - 137
      Abstract: Background:Given that prescribing practices have contributed to the current opioid epidemic and that primary care clinicians are the largest prescribers of opioids, family physicians must consider the twin goals of safely prescribing opioids for patients with chronic pain while effectively identifying and treating those who have developed opioid use disorder (OUD). However, family physicians may feel constrained by a culture and systems in their offices that do not support achieving these twin goals.Methods:In a family medicine clinic within a larger academic institution that cares for an underserved, multicultural patient population in the greater Boston area, we provide a case study that illustrates the twin goals of safe opioid prescribing and treating OUD. We used 2 models of change management—Lewin's Three-Step Change Theory and the McKinsey 7S Model of Change—as a framework to describe our 5-year process of using cultural and structural elements to support these efforts.Results:Deliberate use of change management theory to support both safe opioid prescribing and treating patients with OUD over the past 5 years resulted in changes to the practices, people, skills, and infrastructure within our clinic. These changes have demonstrated a sense of stability and sustainability and hence now represent our clinic's current culture.Conclusion:The Lewin and 7S models of change can be helpful guides to creating and maintaining a foundation of office-wide culture and structural support to meet the twin goals of safe opioid prescribing and treating patients with OUD.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190223
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Opioid Prescriptions for New Low Back Pain: Trends and Variability by

    • Authors: Raad, M; Pakpoor, J, Harris, A. B, Puvanesarajah, V, Marrache, M, Canner, J. K, Jain, A.
      Pages: 138 - 142
      Abstract: Background:The United States is facing a widespread opioid epidemic that disproportionately affects the working-age population. In the clinical setting, new low back pain is one of the most common reasons for opioid prescriptions, despite national recommendations advising against their use until nonopioid treatments have been trialed. In this study, we aimed to examine national opioid prescribing practices among primary care physicians after the evaluation of low back pain in working-age patients.Method:This study used a national claims database's billing codes to identify patients in the outpatient setting with a new encounter for isolated low back pain following a 1-year look-back period. The primary outcome was whether an opioid prescription was filled within 30 days after the encounter. Patients with a daily morphine milligram equivalence (MME/day) known to be associated with a higher risk of overdose were also analyzed.Results:A total of 418,565 patients between January 1, 2011 and November 30, 2016 were included. The proportion of patients with filled opioid prescriptions declined significantly between 2011 and 2016 (P < .01; 28.5% in 2011, 27.6% in 2012, 26.3% in 2013, 25.5% in 2014, 23.5% in 2015, and 20.4% in 2016). Nationally, the proportion of patients with a filled opioid prescription varied significantly between states (P < .01), ranging from 12.9% in Hawaii to 33.6% in Arkansas.Discussion:We found that the overall frequency of opioid prescriptions for low back pain is decreasing nationally, which speaks favorably for future initiatives to change physician prescribing patterns. However, we identified that there is large variation in prescribing patterns among physicians in different states.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190254
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Anti-Hypertensive Medication Combinations in the United States

    • Authors: Johansen, M. E; Yun, J, Griggs, J. M, Jackson, E. A, Richardson, C. R.
      Pages: 143 - 146
      Abstract: Background:Examining the anti-hypertensive regimens of individuals with different comorbidities may offer insights into how we can improve hypertension management.Methods:The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2013–2015) was used to describe the most common single-, two-, three-, and four-drug hypertension regimens among hypertensive adults in four different comorbidity groups: 1. Hypertension only; 2. Hypertension and diabetes; 3. Hypertension and cardiovascular disease (coronary heart disease or stroke history); and 4. Hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.Results:15,901 adults with hypertension taking anti-hypertensive medications were included in the study. 58.6% (95% CI: 57.3–59.8) took multiple anti-hypertensive medications, but the proportion of adults taking multiple anti-hypertensives varied by comorbidity group. Regimens including an ACE-inhibitor/ARB were the most prevalent regimens among individuals taking ≥2 anti-hypertensive medications. The most common two-drug regimen for both the hypertension-only and hypertension-diabetes groups was an ACE-inhibitor/ARB with thiazide. The most prevalent regimen for the two cardiovascular disease groups was an ACE-inhibitor/ARB with beta-blocker.Conclusions:Most individuals with hypertension use between 2–5 medications and the medications comprising these regimens vary by comorbidity. The ACCOMPLISH trial suggested that certain combinations may lead to superior cardiovascular outcomes. Research comparing the efficacy of different hypertension medication combinations among individuals with different comorbidities could lead to better patient hypertensionrelated outcomes.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190134
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • An Ethical Framework to Manage Patient Requests for Medical Marijuana

    • Authors: Redinger, M; Fledderman, N, Crutchfield, P.
      Pages: 147 - 151
      Abstract: An increasing number of states are legalizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes despite marijuana use remaining criminalized at the federal level and continued Schedule I status by the US Food and Drug Administration. Many of those states in which medical marijuana is legal require physician involvement to facilitate patient access. In addition, physicians may have ethical objections to medical marijuana use or may not believe there is adequate scientific evidence to support its use. The constellation of these factors creates an ethical quandary for physicians when approached by patients for assistance in accessing medical marijuana. This article provides an ethical framework that provides guidance to physicians in managing these patient requests taking into consideration the above ethically relevant factors.
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190216
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Re: Identifying Problematic Substance Use in a National Sample of
           Adolescents Using Frequency Questions

    • Authors: Zeleznik J.
      Pages: 152 - 152
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190300
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Re: Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Intake in a Rural Family Medicine Clinic

    • Authors: Mullins W.
      Pages: 152 - 153
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2019.01.190316
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Re: A Successful Walk-In Psychiatric Model for Integrated Care

    • Authors: Brinn R. K.
      Pages: 153 - 153
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190317
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Response: Re: A Successful Walk-In Psychiatric Model for Integrated Care

    • Authors: Kroll D. S.
      Pages: 153 - 154
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190364
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • That Clock is Really Big

    • Authors: Minor S.
      Pages: 154 - 154
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190258
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Re: New Allopathic Medical Schools Train Fewer Family Physicians than
           Older Ones

    • Authors: Avery, D. M; Streiffer, R. H.
      Pages: 154 - 155
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.01.190343
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
  • Shaping Keystones in a Time of Transformation: ABFM's Efforts to Advance
           Leadership & Scholarship in Family Medicine

    • Authors: Bazemore, A. W; Ireland, J, Cattoi, R, Newton, W. P.
      Pages: 156 - 159
      PubDate: 2020-01-06T09:00:19-08:00
      DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2019.01.190420
      Issue No: Vol. 33, No. 1 (2020)
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762

Your IP address:
Home (Search)
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-