A series of panel surveys conducted among representative samples of self-employed general practitioners has been carried out in different regions of YYY, since the mid-2000s. Its aim is to shed light on the practices, working conditions, and opinions of these professionals, as well as their evolution and the existence of territorial specificities.The aim of this survey was to explore interprofessional collaborations: the frequency and content of exchanges with colleagues specialized in general practice or other medical disciplines, and with other health professionals.A total of 1,550 practitioners in YYY, including 300 in the XXX region, were surveyed on this topic in 2022. Data collection was conducted online (self-administered questionnaire) or by telephone. Analyses accounted for the sampling design (complex stratification) and non-response adjustment.In 2022, nurses were the health professionals with whom general practitioners in the XXX region most frequently exchanged information: 68% reported sharing medical information with them at least once a week or daily; 58% exchanged with other general practitioners, 57% with pharmacists, 54% with physicians from other specialties, and 17% with physiotherapists.Compared to a similar survey conducted fifteen years earlier, the proportions of practitioners regularly exchanging with general practitioner colleagues and with nurses have increased significantly, while those related to exchanges with specialists and pharmacists remained stable. Moreover, general practitioners in the XXX region differ from their counterparts in other regions by engaging in more frequent exchanges with other physicians (organization of appointments or hospital admissions, or when seeking opinions on diagnoses or patient management).These results highlight changes and territorial disparities in interprofessional collaboration practices. They can be linked to both local and national organizational changes within the healthcare system, as well as to evolving population needs.

Patients with psychiatric disorders are exposed to cardio-metabolic complications when treated with second-generation neuroleptics. How can IPA in MSP improve prevention and identification of cardiovascular risk factors in such patients ?Main objective: to evaluate the application of the ANSM recommendations and hygienic and dietary rules in patients treated with second-generation neuroleptics followed by the IPA in MSP. Secondary objective: to compare the care of patients exclusively followed by the general practitioner with the joint follow-up with the IPA, in order to measure the contribution of IPA work.Multicenter retrospective observational study from January to December 2024 via WEDA software. Two groups compared: patients followed by the general practitioner alone (GP) and those followed by the GP/IPA duo in two MSPs. The presence or absence of: sex, age, weight, BMI, umbilical circumference, blood glucose, lipid profile, blood pressure, tobacco, alcohol, illicit substances were recorded Inclusion criteria: adult patients, patients falling within the scope of the IPA treated with second-generation neuroleptics. Comparisons of the data from the GP and GP/IPA groups were performed with a chi-2 assay  with the biostatTGV software.103 cases were reviewed. 41 were followed by GPs/IPAs. There is an increase in the number of items recorded by IPAs in the files compared to the activity of the GPs. For weight, blood sugar and lipid profile, this increase is statistically significant.IPAs know and apply medical recommendations. Their work improves record-keeping in primary care. As indicated in the international literature, the GP/IPA dyad reinforces the quality of follow-up in primary care. Strengths: Poorly studied population, data from real practice, enhancement of the role of the IPA. Limitations: Few IPAs working in primary care, retrospective study, recommendations dating from 2010. Opening: Creation of a consultation grid for the IPA. It could be subject to later validation.Collaboration between professionals in MSPs, particularly between GPs and IPAs, can improve the health of these patients.

The XXX population is aging. In 2020, people over 65 represented 20,5% of the population, compared to 19,7% in 2018. By 2040, one in four persons in four will be over 65. One in three people over the age of 65 falls each year, resulting in more than 9300 deaths. This morbidity and mortality rate inspired the team of the XXX multi-professional health center (MHC) in XXX t to look at this issue. The goal was to reduce falls among older adults by addressing modifiable risk factors.The target audience was patients over the age of 70 consulting at the MHC in XXX. We conducted an information campaign to the target audience consulting at the MHC the opportunity to make an appointment for a general medical consultation dedicated to the risk of falls. The assessment was carried out using a questionnaire completed with the physician covering nutritional status, physical activity, walking, rapid cognitive assessment, environmental assessment, and prescription review. A satisfaction questionnaire was then given to the patient. The analysis of the results focused on the number of flyers distributed, the number of consultations carried out, and the satisfaction questionnaire.We realized 13 dedicated consultations between October and November 2024. 70% of patients had never discussed the risks of falls with a healthcare professional. One-third of patients were offered a change in their prescription, 80% specialized care, and 70% home adaptations.  The questionnaire was not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to be completed in 20 minutes. It could serve as the basis for a systematic evaluation.The main strength was the implementation of personalized actions. The main issue is recruitment bias, as it didn't include patients who were being treated at home.Falls are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Our MHC is part of a prevention initiative aimed at the local population through dedicated consultations, highlighting that the subject is rarely discussed even though action can be taken.

The XXX has the higher maternal mortality rate according to the 7th ENCMM. Suicide was the first cause of mortality (17%). The majority of the factors were avoidable.The lack of inter professional communication and the lack of access with medical support by the patient were the principal factors in studied cases, with the lack of description of their vulnerabilities.Studying on a chosen area the communication between midwifes (MW) and general practitionner (GP) in primary care in the post partum periodA qualitative study with semi-directive interwiew were done for july 2023 to may 2024. We interwiewed six MW and six GP who worked in a XXX area in XXX. A triangulated analysis was inspired from grounded theory. The transcription was verbatim.MW and GP centralized medical informations to the mother who were the mind actor of their communication. The caregivers felt competent and attentive in post partum period, but they wanted to empowered the mother for her medical follow-up. The GP met the patient while the pediatrical follow-up or the gynecologic one if it was done. MW, GP and mothers seemed to prioritize the baby medical follow-up. The post-partum follow-up was annexed to the baby’s one.The patient is a essential partner for MW and GP communication. Her empowerement by the caregivers were granted. However, caregivers have not to divert from the post partum follow-up because of maternal risk of vulnerabilities and let her alone.As an essential partner between MWs and GPs, patient could have a post partum medical record. Hospital at home program could be more proposed as soon as post partum depression is diagnosed. Caregivers have to be pay attention due to the highest maternal suicide rate in the post partum period.

The dispensing pharmacist plays a pivotal role in patient’s care. Its main mission is to secure and optimize the dispensing act. In this context, the pharmacist may be required to carry out a pharmaceutical intervention (PI), which is defined as “a proposal for a modification of the therapy made at the initiative of the pharmacist, […]”. In cases where the pharmacist observes that the limit of the pharmacy advice has been reached, the patient has a "reinforced obligation" to refer to a qualified practitioner. Consequently, he carries out a PI and assumes responsibility for the guidance.The objective of this study is to describe the characteristics of the orientation when the pharmaceutical intervention resulted in a referral to another health professional.This is a cross-sectional descriptive study of Pharmaceutical Interventions (PIs) in self-medication. The PIs were collected in 201 dispensing pharmacies (2017 – 2024).978 PIs in self-medication led to referral to consultation. With regard to the practitioner to whom the patient is referred, the majority of cases are attributable to general practitioners (n = 740; 75.7%), dentist (n=140; 14.3%) or to emergency department (n=53; 5.4%) Referral to a physician was mainly proposed for pain (n=210; 26.9%). The primary reason for referral was identified as the necessity for a clinical examination (n=512; 65.5%). With regard to the consultation period recommended by the provider, consultations of an urgent nature pertained to 9.4% (n=92) of PIs.General practitioners were the primary health professionals targeted, which is consistent with the fact that they can refer patients to a specialist when necessary. Although representing a minority, referral to emergency consultations indicated a tendency for patients to attend pharmacies for critical cases. A concrete example of this phenomenon is the presence of ocular complaints, which are often underestimated by patients.Detecting emergency criteria or need for diagnosis or medical act, the pharmacist plays an important role in guiding the patient through the healthcare system in a context of tension in access to care. In doing so, it improves patient care by avoiding a delay in diagnosis or the occurrence of adverse effects.

primary care research, a key element in improving the quality of primary healthcare, remains underdeveloped in France despite the multiplication of supportive measures. Community health centers (MSPs – Maisons de Santé Pluriprofessionnelles) have been identified as key environments for developing practice-based research networks due to their shared clinical information systems and commitment to quality improvement. Yet, few of them have actually engaged in it. Understanding how healthcare professionals perceive research may help explain this paradox.this study aimed to explore the representations and attitudes toward primary care research among professionals working in a French MSP to identify barriers and facilitators to research engagement.we conducted a qualitative study using a grounded theory approach. Data were collected through a focus group and an individual interview with members of an interprofessional team, including a patient partner. Transcripts were coded using open, axial, and selective coding to identify emerging patterns.participants expressed a strong emotional and professional distance from traditional images of research, perceived as cold, and disconnected from their clinical reality, contrasted with their warm, experiential, and patient-centered practice. However, their collective engagement in empirically-driven, quality-improvement projects revealed underlying research-compatible competencies: evaluation skills, interprofessional collaboration, and structured care processes. Although unaware of it, teams were enacting principles akin to participatory health research and democratic engagement. Research was seen as a potential driver of internal legitimacy and external recognition, particularly when supported by tailored mentorship and grounded in everyday clinical practice.the study highlights how their empirical initiatives could be leveraged into research programs without disrupting clinical activity, provided that acculturation and contextualized support are offered. This overlap between quality improvement and research aligns with humanistic values and promotes equity in health systems. Recognizing experiential knowledge and fostering collaborative inquiry could catalyze a cultural shift toward inclusive and meaningful research in primary care.primary care teams hold untapped potential to lead research from within their practice settings. By offering tailored support grounded in participatory approaches and interprofessional frameworks, MSPs teams can be better equipped to engage in research, thereby enhancing the quality and equity of care delivery.

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) represent 20.6% of general practitioner (GP) consultations. However, GP’ referral practices has been scarcely documented.To describe and analyse GPs’ referral practices, regarding upper limb and spinal MSDs.This cross-sectional survey was conducted among private GPs’ practices between June and September 2025. GPs were asked to complete an online questionnaire about their last patient aged 18 or over, who consulted for MSD symptoms. The questionnaire focused on upper-limb MSDs for GPs who completed they thesis in an odd-numbered year, and on spinal MSDs otherwise. Analyses were performed using R. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Rennes University Hospital (no. 25.50).A total of 197 patient records (110 women, 87 men, aged 49.4 ± 13.7 years) were analysed; 41% described upper limb and 59% spinal MSDs. At least one referral was mentioned in 91% of records, among witch 91% concerned a paramedical professional, 54% a medical doctor, and 13% a non-medical professional. Paramedical referrals for upper limb MSDs were more frequent in case of rotator cuff syndrome diagnosis (p<0.05) and among younger GPs (p<0.05). For spinal MSDs, paramedical referrals were more frequent after a prior consultation of that GP (p<0.05). Medical referrals were more frequent among established GPs (p<0.05), in case of radiating symptoms (p<0.01), severity criteria (p<0.001), symptoms lasting for 6 weeks to 3 months (p<0.001), diagnosis of cervicobrachial neuralgia (p<0.01), orthosis prescription (p<0.05) or an application for social support for disabilities from the MDPH (p<0.05).Paramedical referrals were the most represented, suggesting that MSDs are predominantly managed in primary care. The referral rate was high compared with the literature, which probably reflect a memory bias when GPs are asked to report on their last consultation for MSDs. Referral patterns were particularly influenced by MSDs’ characteristics.The design of research on MSDs must take into account the referral pattern, to ensure the inclusion of the clinical forms relevant to the research objective.