TY - JOUR
AU - H. Bowers
AU - C. A. Chew-Graham
AU - M. Santer
AU - H. Van Marwijk
AU - B. Terluin
AU - T. Kendrick
AU - P. Little
AU - M. Moore
AU - M. Mistry
AU - D. Smith
AU - A. Richards
AU - B. Evans
AU - N. Lester
AU - R. Kolahy
AU - A. W. A. Geraghty
A1 - 
AB - 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 to be important differences in the management of emotional distress compared with anxiety and/or depression, but the current nature of assessment and management is unclear. AIM: 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: 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 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, the support provided to patients, and challenges assessing and managing emotional distress. Verbatim transcriptions were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: In total, 29 interviews were conducted and four themes were 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 demedicalising 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.
AD - School of Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK h.m.bowers@soton.ac.uk.; School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK.; Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Stafford, UK.; School of Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.; Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK.; Department of General Practice, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
AN - 40562443
BT - Br J Gen Pract
C5 - Education & Workforce
CP - 762
DA - Jan 1
DO - 10.3399/bjgp.2024.0820
DP - NLM
ET - 20260101
IS - 762
JF - Br J Gen Pract
LA - eng
N2 - 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 to be important differences in the management of emotional distress compared with anxiety and/or depression, but the current nature of assessment and management is unclear. AIM: 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: 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 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, the support provided to patients, and challenges assessing and managing emotional distress. Verbatim transcriptions were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: In total, 29 interviews were conducted and four themes were 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 demedicalising 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.
PY - 2026
SN - 0960-1643 (Print); 0960-1643
SP - e929
EP - e936+
ST - 'We're all doing different things' - exploring primary care practitioners' perspectives of managing distress: a qualitative study
T1 - 'We're all doing different things' - exploring primary care practitioners' perspectives of managing distress: a qualitative study
T2 - Br J Gen Pract
TI - 'We're all doing different things' - exploring primary care practitioners' perspectives of managing distress: a qualitative study
U1 - Education & Workforce
U3 - 10.3399/bjgp.2024.0820
VL - 76
VO - 0960-1643 (Print); 0960-1643
Y1 - 2026
ER -