PurposeThroughout the world, healthcare policy has committed to delivering integrated models of care. The interface between primary–secondary care has been identified as a particularly challenging area in this regard. To that end, this study aimed to examine the issue of integrated care from general practitioners’ (GPs) perspectives in Ireland.Design/methodology/approachThis multimethod study involved a cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews with GPs in the Ireland East region. A total of 1,274 GPs were identified from publicly available data as practising in the region, of whom the study team were able to identify 430 GPs with email addresses. An email invite was sent to 430 potential participants asking them to complete a 34-item online questionnaire and, for those who were willing, an in-depth interview was conducted with a member of the study team.FindingsIn total, 116 GPs completed the survey. Most GPs felt that enhancing integration between primary and secondary care in Ireland was a priority (n = 109, 93.9%). Five themes concerning the state of integrated care and initiatives to improve matters were identified from semi-structured interviews with 12 GPs.Originality/valueThe uniqueness of this study is that it uses a multimethod approach to provide insight into current GP views on the state of integrated care in Ireland, as well as their perspectives on how to improve integration within the Irish healthcare system.

Background: The care provided in general practice to intravenous drug users (IDUs) with hepatitis C (HCV) extends beyond opioid substitution therapy. An aggregated analysis of HCV service utilization within general practice specifically related to diagnosis and treatment outcomes remains unknown from previous literature. Aims: This study aims to estimate the prevalence of HCV and analyze data related to the diagnosis and treatment-related outcomes of HCV patients with a history of intravenous drug use in the general practice setting. Design and setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis in general practice. Methods: This review included studies published in the following databases: EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Two reviewers independently extracted data in standard forms in Covidence. A meta-analysis was done using a DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model with inverse variance weighting. Results: A total of 20,956 patients from 440 general practices participated in the 18 selected studies. A meta-analysis of 15 studies showed a 46% (95% confidence interval (CI), 26–67%) prevalence rate of hepatitis C amongst IDUs. Genotype information was available in four studies and treatment-related outcomes in 11 studies. Overall, treatment uptake was 9%, with a cure rate of 64% (95% CI, 43–83%). However, relevant information, such as specific treatment regimens, treatment duration and doses, and patient comorbidities, was poorly documented in these studies. Conclusion: The prevalence of HCV in IDUs is 46% in general practice. Only ten studies reported HCV-related treatment outcomes; however, the overall uptake rate was below 10%, with a cure rate of 64%. Likewise, the genotypic variants of HCV diagnoses, medication types, and doses were poorly reported, suggesting a need for further research into this aspect of care within this patient group to ensure optimal treatment outcomes.