Article

Family physician attitudes in managing obesity: a cross-sectional survey study

Department of Family Medicine and Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA. .
BMC Research Notes 11/2011; 4(1):473. DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-473
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Obesity is epidemic in primary care. While family physicians care for the consequences of obesity, they do not generally feel confident managing obesity itself. We examined the barriers to obesity management in a sample of family physicians in a primary care practice-based research network (PBRN).
204 family physicians were invited to respond to a survey on physician beliefs about obese patients and causes of obesity. A total of 75 physicians responded to the survey. Responses were factor analyzed using standard techniques. Comments were sorted into ranked themes by the investigators. The results show systemic barriers to obesity management. Seven general factors were identified, with some discrepancy seen in the role of "psychobehavioral causation" between rural and non-rural physicians. Themes derived from the comments reflected frustration with the resources and structure of current primary care systems to be able to deal with obesity.
Our pilot survey suggests that differences in beliefs regarding the causes of obesity may exist between rural and non-rural physicians. Further research in larger, more diverse samples is necessary to further illuminate practice differences. More comprehensive approaches to obesity management, like the Chronic Care Model, are suggested by these results.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Christopher P. Morley, Aug 28, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
348 Views
  • Source
    • "Physicians felt treatment for obesity was ineffective; held negative views of obese patients' appearance and compliance; attributed obesity causation to lifestyle factors; and sought greater compensation in delivering obesity treatment [13]. Similar to other studies, physicians in New York State expressed frustration in attempting to treat obesity [14]. This frustration was based on the extent to which obesity-contributing factors were outside their control, low sense of self-efficacy in treating obesity, and a perceived lack of reimbursement. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity is viewed as a major public health concern, and obesity stigma is pervasive. Such marginalization renders obese persons a "special population." Weight bias arises in part due to popular sources' attribution of obesity causation to individual lifestyle factors. This may not accurately reflect the experiences of obese individuals or their perspectives on health and quality of life. A powerful role may exist for applied social scientists, such as anthropologists or sociologists, in exploring the lived and embodied experiences of this largely discredited population. This novel research may aid in public health intervention planning. Through these studies, applied social scientists could help develop a nonstigmatizing, salutogenic approach to public health that accurately reflects the health priorities of all individuals. Such an approach would call upon applied social science's strengths in investigating the mundane, problematizing the "taken for granted" and developing emic (insiders') understandings of marginalized populations.
    Journal of obesity 03/2014; 2014:267286. DOI:10.1155/2014/267286
  • Source
    • "Obesity is an epidemic among primary care patients as well. While family physicians care for the consequences of obesity, they do not generally feel confident about managing obesity itself [4]. The majority of medical consultations take place in primary care settings and general practitioners (GP) have an opportunity to observe their obese patients’ weight gain for decades [5,6]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity, a threatening pandemic, has an important public health implication. Before proper medication is available, primary care providers will have a distinguished role in prevention and management. Their performance may be influenced by many factors but their personal motivation is still an under-researched area. The knowledge, attitudes and practice were reviewed in this questionnaire study involving a representative sample of 10% of all Hungarian family physicians. In different settings, 521 practitioners (448 GPs and 73 residents/vocational trainees) were questioned using a validated questionnaire. The knowledge about multimorbidity, a main consequence of obesity, was balanced.Only 51% of the GPs were aware of the diagnostic threshold for obesity; awareness being higher in cities (60%) and the highest among residents (90%). They also considered obesity an illness rather than an aesthetic issue.There were wider differences regarding attitudes and practice, influenced by the the doctors' age, gender, known BMI, previous qualification, less by working location.GPs with qualification in family medicine alone considered obesity management as higher professional satisfaction, compared to physicians who had previously other board qualification (77%vs68%). They measured their patients' waist circumference and waist/hip ratio (72%vs62%) more frequently, provided the obese with dietary advice more often, while this service was less frequent among capital-based doctors who accepted the self-reported body weight dates by patients more frequently / commonly. Similar reduced activity and weight-measurement in outdoor clothing were more typical among older doctors.Diagnosis based on BMI alone was the highest in cities (85%). Consultations were significantly shorter in practices with a higher number of enrolled patients and were longer by female providers who consulted longer with patients about the suspected causes of developing obesity (65%vs44%) and offered dietary records for patients significantly more frequently (65%vs52%). Most of the younger doctors agreed that obesity management was a primary care issue.Doctors in the normal BMI range were unanimous that they should be a model for their patients (94%vs81%). More education of primary care physicians, available practical guidelines and higher community involvement are needed to improve the obesity management in Hungary.
    BMC Family Practice 10/2013; 14(1):156. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-14-156 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Primary care providers should counsel overweight patients to lose weight. Rates of self-reported, weight-related counseling vary, perhaps because of self-report bias. We assessed the accuracy and congruence of weight-related discussions among patients and physicians during audio-recorded encounters. We audio-recorded encounters between physicians (n = 40) and their overweight/obese patients (n = 461) at 5 community-based practices. We coded weight-related content and surveyed patients and physicians immediately after the visit. Generalized linear mixed models assessed factors associated with accuracy. Overall, accuracy was moderate: patient (67%), physician (70%), and congruence (62%). When encounters containing weight-related content were analyzed, patients (98%) and physicians (97%) were highly accurate and congruent (95%), but when weight was not discussed, patients and physicians were more inaccurate and incongruent (patients, 36%; physicians, 44%; 28% congruence). Physicians who were less comfortable discussing weight were more likely to misreport that weight was discussed (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.88-10.75). White physicians with African American patients were more likely to report accurately no discussion about weight than white physicians with white patients (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.69). Physician and patient self-report of weight-related discussions were highly accurate and congruent when audio-recordings indicated weight was discussed but not when recordings indicated no weight discussions. Physicians' overestimation of weight discussions when weight is not discussed constitutes missed opportunities for health interventions.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 01/2014; 27(1):70-7. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2014.01.130110 · 1.85 Impact Factor
Show more