Working with General Practitioners

1988 ◽  
Vol 153 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Horder
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Central Theme ◽  
Or Education ◽  
New Ways Of Working ◽  
Working Together

Psychiatrists and general practitioners have found new ways of working together in the last ten years, but there have also been separate activities which could develop into rivalry. These opportunities and dangers are the central theme of this paper. Ways are considered in which the psychiatry of general practice differs from the experience of psychiatrists. Forms of help are suggested which general practitioners need from psychiatrists, whether in clinical practice or education.

scholarly journals Exploration of sedentary behaviour among general practitioners: protocol for a mixed methods study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Richard S. Mayne ◽  
Nigel D. Hart ◽  
Neil Heron
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
New Ways Of Working ◽  
Adverse Health Outcomes ◽  
Sequential Mixed Methods ◽  
Working Day

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Many general practitioners (GPs) are sedentary for most of their working day. Levels of sedentary behaviour may have been exacerbated by increased use of telemedicine in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as this is traditionally performed while sitting down. Excessive sedentary behaviour is associated with many adverse health outcomes and increased all-cause mortality. This study will gain quantitative data on levels of sedentary behaviour among GPs and general practice specialty trainees (GPSTs), to identify to what extent general practice is a sedentary occupation, as well as qualitative data regarding the barriers and facilitators to reducing sedentary behaviour in the general practice setting.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The study follows a sequential, mixed-methods model. The first stage will involve the dissemination of a questionnaire survey, where participants self-estimate their sedentary behaviour on a working day and on a non-working day. The second stage will use thigh-worn accelerometers and a sleep/work log to obtain objective data regarding sedentary behaviour among a purposive subset of participants who responded to the questionnaire. The third stage will involve semi-structured interviews with a purposive subset of accelerometer study participants, analysed with the application of a theoretical framework regarding the acceptability of healthcare interventions.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper outlines a protocol for a sequential, mixed-methods study exploring sedentary behaviour among GPs and GPSTs. Findings of this study will shed light on the new ways of working as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will be relevant to clinicians working in similar primary care settings throughout the world.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Trial Registration:</strong> ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04556695. Date of registration: 21<sup>st</sup> September 2020.</p><p class="abstract"> </p>

Paediatric emergency department referrals from primary care

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 691
Author(s):  
Erin Turbitt ◽  
Gary Lee Freed
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Absolute Number ◽  
Patterns Of Care ◽  
Or Education ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Number Of Children

Background Over the last decade, paediatric referrals from general practitioners (GPs) to the emergency department (ED) have increased by 60% in Australia. Objective To investigate the characteristics of Victorian children referred by GPs to the ED with lower-urgency conditions. Method Data were collected from four hospital EDs in Victoria, May–November 2014. Parents attending the ED with their child triaged as lower urgency were surveyed. Descriptive, frequency, and bivariate analyses were performed. Results Of the 1150 responses, 28% (320) visited their GP before attending ED. Of these 66% (212), were referred by their GP. A greater proportion with injury than illness (84% vs 59%; P < 0.0001) was referred to the ED if they had first visited their GP. Conclusion Motivations of GPs to send lower-urgency injured and ill children to ED are not well understood. The high number of referrals from GPs to the ED for lower urgency conditions suggests attention by policy makers and health professionals must be paid to the current patterns of care of children in general practice. What is known about the topic? Paediatric referrals in Australia from GPs to EDs have increased in the last decade, along with the absolute number of children in Victoria presenting to the ED. What does this paper add? A significant number of children (66%) who attend the GP before visiting the ED are referred to the ED for their lower urgency condition. What are the implications for practitioners? It may be appropriate for GPs to be further supported to manage lower urgency conditions, through better resources or education.

A Grief Diagnostic Instrument for General Practice

2006 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Clark ◽  
John Marley ◽  
Janet E. Hiller ◽  
Catherine Leahy ◽  
Nicole Pratt
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Validation Studies ◽  
Diagnostic Instrument ◽  
Sensitive Measure

Assisting patients to deal with loss is a major, yet unrecognized, role of general practitioners. Although instruments exist for measuring grief resulting from a given loss, such as bereavement, none exists that detects and measures grief from any loss. This study describes the development of the Grief Diagnostic Instrument for this purpose in general practice patients. Evaluation showed it to be a concise, valid, reliable and sensitive measure, and acceptable to general practice patients. The instrument investigates and measures grief from multiple losses rather than a single loss compared to other grief scales. Suggestions have been made for further validation studies. Its use in future grief research and clinical practice are described.

scholarly journals The influence of funding models on collaboration in Australian general practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan McInnes ◽  
Kath Peters ◽  
Andrew Bonney ◽  
Elizabeth Halcomb
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Registered Nurses ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Naturalistic Inquiry ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Australian General Practice ◽  
Working Together ◽  
General Practices

Despite more nurses working in Australian general practice, there has been limited investigation exploring ways that general practitioners and registered nurses work together to deliver clinical care. However, it has been postulated that the small business structure, common in Australian general practices, might influence collaboration between these two groups of health professionals. This paper presents one theme from a larger qualitative study. Eight general practitioners and fourteen registered nurses working in general practice participated in semistructured face-to-face interviews between February and May 2015. Naturalistic inquiry was adopted to elicit and explore the narrative accounts of participants about working together in general practice. An inductive process of thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and report patterns and themes. Ancillary costs associated with the employment of registered nurses in general practice and the time registered nurses took to undertake procedural services were a concern for general practitioners. Registered nurses did not always work to their full scope of practice and many felt that their expertise was not appropriately remunerated. Findings suggested that fee for service-funding models can negatively influence collaboration between general practitioners and registered nurses working in general practice.

scholarly journals ‘Motivational work’: a qualitative study of preventive health dialogues in general practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Broholm-Jørgensen ◽  
Siff Monrad Langkilde ◽  
Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen ◽  
Pia Vivian Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Support System ◽  
Preventive Intervention ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Clinical Encounter ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Municipal Health

Abstract Background The aim of this article is to explore preventive health dialogues in general practice in the context of a pilot study of a Danish primary preventive intervention ‘TOF’ (a Danish acronym for ‘Early Detection and Prevention’) carried out in 2016. The intervention consisted of 1) a stratification of patients into one of four groups, 2) a digital support system for both general practitioners and patients, 3) an individual digital health profile for each patient, and 4) targeted preventive services in either general practice or a municipal health center. Methods The empirical material in this study was obtained through 10 observations of preventive health dialogues conducted in general practices and 18 semi-structured interviews with patients and general practitioners. We used the concept of ‘motivational work’ as an analytical lens for understanding preventive health dialogues in general practice from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients. Results While the health dialogues in TOF sought to reveal patients’ motivations, understandings, and priorities related to health behavior, we find that the dialogues were treatment-oriented and structured around biomedical facts, numeric standards, and risk factor guidance. Overall, we find that numeric standards and quantification of motivation lessens the dialogue and interaction between General Practitioner and patient and that contextual factors relating to the intervention framework, such as a digital support system, the general practitioners’ perceptions of their professional position as well as the patients’ understanding of prevention —in an interplay—diminished the motivational work carried out in the health dialogues. Conclusion The findings show that the influence of different kinds of context adds to the complexity of prevention in the clinical encounter which help to explain why motivational work is difficult in general practice.

scholarly journals How to set up a postmortem facility in a farm animal practice

Livestock ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 196-201
Author(s):  
John F Mee ◽  
Rhona Ley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Farm Animal ◽  
Small Animals ◽  
Animal Medicine ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Postmortem Examinations

Postmortem examinations can be a useful diagnostic tool in farm animal medicine; however, they are often avoided in general practice because of a lack of appropriate facilities and expertise/familiarity with techniques. This article describes the setting up of a basic facility to allow general practitioners to perform postmortem examinations of calves, small ruminants and other small animals, e.g. poultry.

scholarly journals Quality improvement in general practice: what do GPs and practice managers think? Results from a nationally representative survey of UK GPs and practice managers

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e001309
Author(s):  
Jennifer Gosling ◽  
Nicholas Mays ◽  
Bob Erens ◽  
David Reid ◽  
Josephine Exley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Service Improvement ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Routine Work ◽  
Professional Interest ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundThis paper presents the results of the first UK-wide survey of National Health Service (NHS) general practitioners (GPs) and practice managers (PMs) designed to explore the service improvement activities being undertaken in practices, and the factors that facilitated or obstructed that work. The research was prompted by growing policy and professional interest in the quality of general practice and its improvement. The analysis compares GP and PM involvement in, and experience of, quality improvement activities.MethodsThis was a mixed-method study comprising 26 semistructured interviews, a focus group and two surveys. The qualitative data supported the design of the surveys, which were sent to all 46 238 GPs on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) database and the PM at every practice across the UK (n=9153) in July 2017.ResultsResponses from 2377 GPs and 1424 PMs were received and were broadly representative of each group. Ninety-nine per cent reported having planned or undertaken improvement activities in the previous 12 months. The most frequent related to prescribing and access. Key facilitators of improvement included ‘good clinical leadership’. The two main barriers were ‘too many demands from external stakeholders’ and a lack of protected time. Audit and significant event audit were the most common improvement tools used, but respondents were interested in training on other quality improvement tools.ConclusionGPs and PMs are interested in improving service quality. As such, the new quality improvement domain in the Quality and Outcomes Framework used in the payment of practices is likely to be relatively easily accepted by GPs in England. However, if improving quality is to become routine work for practices, it will be important for the NHS in the four UK countries to work with practices to mitigate some of the barriers that they face, in particular the lack of protected time.

scholarly journals ABC of prescribing exercise as medicine: a narrative review of the experiences of general practitioners and patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. e001050
Author(s):  
Andrew O'Regan ◽  
Michael Pollock ◽  
Saskia D'Sa ◽  
Vikram Niranjan
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Exercise Prescription ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
System Support ◽  
Physician Characteristics ◽  
Cochrane Reviews ◽  
Type Of Exercise ◽  
User Friendly

BackgroundExercise prescribing can help patients to overcome physical inactivity, but its use in general practice is limited. The purpose of this narrative review was to investigate contemporaneous experiences of general practitioners and patients with exercise prescribing.MethodPubMed, Scopus, Science Direct and Cochrane reviews were reviewed using the terms ‘exercise prescription’, ‘exercise prescribing’, ‘family practice’, ‘general practice’, ‘adults’ and ‘physical activity prescribing’.ResultsAfter screening by title, abstract and full paper, 23 studies were selected for inclusion. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies revealed key experiences of general practitioners and patients. Barriers identified included: physician characteristics, patients’ physical and psychosocial factors, systems and cultural failures, as well as ambiguity around exercise prescribing. We present a synthesis of the key strategies to overcome these using an ABC approach: A: assessment of physical activity: involves asking about physical activity, barriers and risks to undertaking an exercise prescription; B: brief intervention: advice, written prescription detailing frequency, intensity, timing and type of exercise; and C: continued support: providing ongoing monitoring, accountability and progression of the prescription. Multiple supports were identified: user-friendly resources, workshops for doctors, guidelines for specific illnesses and multimorbidity, electronic devices, health system support and collaboration with other healthcare and exercise professionals.DiscussionThis review has identified levers for facilitating exercise prescribing and adherence to it. The findings have been presented in an ABC format as a guide and support for general practitioners to prescribe exercise.

scholarly journals How well did Norwegian general practice prepare to address the COVID-19 pandemic?

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e000512
Author(s):  
Ingvild Vatten Alsnes ◽  
Morten Munkvik ◽  
W Dana Flanders ◽  
Nicolas Øyane
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Home Page ◽  
Quality Improvements ◽  
Geographical Differences ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Isolation Room ◽  
Improvement Measures ◽  
The Mean

ObjectivesWe aimed to describe the quality improvement measures made by Norwegian general practice (GP) during the COVID-19 pandemic, evaluate the differences in quality improvements based on region and assess the combinations of actions taken.DesignDescriptive study.SettingParticipants were included after taking part in an online quality improvement COVID-19 course for Norwegian GPs in April 2020. The participants reported whether internal and external measures were in place: COVID-19 sign on entrance, updated home page, access to video consultations and/or electronic written consultations, home office solutions, separate working teams, preparedness for home visits, isolation rooms, knowledge on decontamination, access to sufficient supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) and COVID-19 clinics.ParticipantsOne hundred GP offices were included. The mean number of general practitioners per office was 5.63.ResultsMore than 80% of practices had the following preparedness measures: COVID-19 sign on entrance, updated home page, COVID-19 clinic in the municipality, video and written electronic consultations, knowledge on how to use PPE, and home office solutions for general practitioners. Less than 50% had both PPE and knowledge of decontamination. Lack of PPE was reported by 37%, and 34% reported neither sufficient PPE nor a dedicated COVID-19 clinic. 15% reported that they had an isolation room, but not enough PPE. There were no geographical differences.ConclusionsNorwegian GPs in this study implemented many quality improvements to adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, the largest potentials for improvement seem to be securing sufficient supply of PPE and establishing an isolation room at their practices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document