Bowers, Hannah, Chew-Graham, Carolyn A., Santer, Miriam, van Marwijk, Harm, Terluin, Berend, Kendrick, Tony, Little, Paul, Moore, Michael, Mistry, Manoj, Smith, Debs, Richards, Al, Evans, Bronwyn, Lester, Nicola, Kolahy, Roya and Geraghty, Adam W.A. (2025) ‘We’re all doing different things’: qualitative study exploring primary care practitioners’ perspectives of managing distress. British Journal of General Practice. (doi:10.3399/bjgp.2024.0820).
Abstract
Background: distinguishing emotional distress from mental health problems such as anxiety and depression can be difficult for clinicians. Both commonly present and are managed in primary care. There are likely important differences in the management of emotional distress compared with depression/anxiety, but the current nature of assessment and management is unclear.
Aim: our aim was to explore how emotional distress is understood and how people are managed by a range of practitioners in primary care settings in the UK.
Design and setting: we conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with primary care practitioners in the UK.
Method: online interviews were conducted with practitioners who directly assess patients with mental health symptoms, including General Practitioners (GPs), Nurse Practitioners, Social Prescribers, and Mental Health Practitioners. Recruitment was via a digital poster circulated by Research Delivery Networks. Interviews covered how practitioners understood and identified distress, support provided to patients, and challenges to assessing and managing emotional distress. Verbatim transcriptions were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.
Results: twenty-nine interviews were conducted and four themes developed in collaboration with the wider team, including public contributors: ‘The multifaceted nature of distress’, ‘We’re all doing very different things’, ‘Managing and understanding distress is challenging’, and ‘De-medicalising distress in the face of increasing societal pressures’. Complexity was driven by the wide-ranging professionals involved, complex patient circumstances, systemic challenges, and societal contexts.
Conclusion: identifying and managing emotional distress is complex, variable and challenging. Complexity appears to be increasing through the systemic challenges and range of professionals involved.</jats:p>
More information
Identifiers
Catalogue record
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.