Obesity in primary care: A qualitative synthesis of patient and practitioner perspectives on roles and responsibilities

Henderson, E.J.

Abstract

Background Obesity is a top-priority global health issue; however a clear path as to how to address obesity in primary care is not yet in view. Aim To conduct a meta-ethnography of patient and primary care practitioner perspectives of roles and responsibilities in how to address obesity in the UK, in order to inform evidence-based services that are acceptable to and appropriate for patients and practitioners. Design and setting Qualitative synthesis applying meta-ethnographic methods according to the Noblit and Hare monograph. Database searches, in MEDLINE, SSCI, CINAHL and HMIC, were limited to 1997-2012 to examine recent perspectives. Method Full articles of practitioner and/or patient perspectives on obesity services in primary care were reviewed, and included semi- or unstructured interviews and focus groups, and participant observations. Results Nine studies were synthesised with perspectives from patients (n=105) and practitioners (n=144). Practitioners believe patients are responsible for obesity, and that either primary care should not help or is poorly equipped to do so. Patients ‘take responsibility’ by ‘blaming’ themselves, but feel practitioners should demonstrate more leadership. The empowerment of patients to access health services is reliant upon the empowerment of practitioners to take an unambiguous position. Conclusion Primary care has the potential to both perpetuate and counter obesity-related stigma. Primary care needs to come to a firm decision as to what role it will take in the prevention and treatment of obesity. To remain ambiguous runs the risk of losing patients’ confidence and adding to a growing sense of futility.

Citation

Henderson, E. (2015). Obesity in primary care: A qualitative synthesis of patient and practitioner perspectives on roles and responsibilities. British Journal of General Practice, 65(633), e240-e247. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15x684397

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Oct 29, 2014
• Publication Date: Apr 1, 2015
• Deposit Date: Oct 31, 2014
• Publicly Available Date: Jul 29, 2016
• Journal: British Journal of General Practice
• Print ISSN: 0960-1643
• Electronic ISSN: 1478-5242
• Publisher: Royal College of General Practitioners
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 65
• Issue: 633
• Pages: e240-e247
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15x684397
• Public URL: https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1451425