Shuttle case records: link between general practice and the specialist unit.

General practitioners have participated in the long term follow up of 367 patients who have undergone treatment with potent antirheumatic drugs at this hospital. Over the past two and a half years we have used the "shuttle case record" system, whereby patients'' records are mailed back and forth between our department and general practitioners. This seems to work well. It is safe for the patients, and they save time and money in travel. The general practitioners like it, it improves communication between them and the specialist unit, and it enables the specialist unit to use its resources and manpower more effectively. The system may also be used to monitor patients with other chronic disorders, and it may be a valuable tool for doing research in general practice.     

Usefulness of letters from hospitals to general practitioners.

In an investigation of the communication between specialist hospital departments and general practitioners 97 general practitioners were asked to say how important selected items of information that the hospital could pass on would be for management of a patient receiving chemotherapy. In addition, the records of 68 patients were examined for coverage of these topics. General practitioners considered technical topics to be more important than social ones. Hospital letters covered technical topics well, apart from details of possible side effects, but did not do the same even for the two social topics that most doctors considered to be essential--namely, what patients have been told about their diagnosis and prognosis. Letters from hospitals to general practitioners cover technical topics well but should include more information relating to the social aspects of the patient''s disease.     

General practitioners' attitudes to professional reaccreditation.

OBJECTIVE--To determine the views of general practitioners about professional reaccreditation. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire. SUBJECTS--All 278 general practitioner principals working in Cleveland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--General practitioner characteristics; attitudes to reaccreditation; and views on the development, conduct, content, and format of reaccreditation. RESULTS--210 out of 278 (76%) general practitioners responded to the questionnaire. 128 (61%) agreed that general practitioners should undergo reaccreditation. 149 (72%) thought the General Medical Services Committee and local medical committees were appropriate bodies to lead its development. 120 respondents suggested that reaccreditation should be carried out by assessors appointed by the doctor''s own local medical committee. The most favoured interval between reaccreditation episodes was 10 or more years. 152 doctors thought that doctors who failed reaccreditation should be advised on education and reassessed soon afterwards. Clinical knowledge (82%), clinical skill (82%), prescribing practices (67%), standards of medical record keeping (60%), and consultation behaviour (58%) were the most popular subjects for scrutiny. 138 (67%) respondents felt that reaccreditation should be part of continuing medical education. CONCLUSION--Most general practitioners support professional reaccreditation. They believe the process should be led by the profession, be educational, and take account of a range of professional activities.     

Findings of a national survey of the role of general practitioners in the treatment of opiate misuse: views on treatment.

An important component of government policy on services for drug misusers is to encourage general practitioners to take a more active role. There are, however, some indications that general practitioners regard drug misusers as undesirable patients, although no evidence is available. As part of a wider investigation of the role of general practitioners in the treatment of opiate misuse, a questionnaire, which was sent in mid-1985 to a 5% random sample of general practitioners in England and Wales, included a section designed to elicit their views on policy and treatment connected with opiate misuse. The results showed that although most general practitioners consider opiate misuse to be a priority concern for the Health Service, they also generally regard opiate misusers as especially difficult to manage, beyond their competence to treat, and less acceptable as patients than others in need of care. General practitioners who have qualified recently were somewhat less unfavourable in their views. These findings suggest that the effective implementation of government policy will require trying to modify general practitioners'' attitudes and providing support for them.     

Findings of a national survey of the role of general practitioners in the treatment of opiate misuse: dealing with the opiate misuser.

Because there has been a substantial increase in the scale of drug misuse general practitioners have become increasingly concerned in responding to this problem. Little is known, however, about how general practitioners manage drug misusers. The findings from a national survey carried out in mid-1985 of a 5% random sample of general practitioners in England and Wales show the extent to which various actions were undertaken by general practitioners who reported on the consultation with the opiate misuser whom they last attended. In more than half of the cases the opiate misuser had been under the care of the general practitioners for this problem for at least six months. The findings indicate that most general practitioners refer these patients to specialist drug dependence clinics or to general psychiatric services but rarely to other agencies. Opiate drugs had been prescribed in nearly a third of cases. The rate of notification to the Home Office conforms with that in other studies and indicates a high degree of undernotification. More detailed study of general practitioners'' activities in managing drug misusers is needed.     

Adding retinal photography to screening for diabetic retinopathy: a prospective study in primary care.

OBJECTIVE--To evaluate whether adding retinal photography improved community screening for diabetic retinopathy. SETTING--Mobile screening unit at rural and urban general practices in south west England. SUBJECTS--1010 diabetic patients from primary care. DESIGN--Prospective study; patients were examined by ophthalmoscopy by general practitioners or opticians without fundal photographs and again with photographs, and assessments were compared to those of an ophthalmologist. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Whether fundal photography improved the sensitivity of detection of retinopathy and referrable diabetic retinopathy, and whether this sensitivity could be improved by including a review of the films by the specialist. RESULTS--Diabetic retinopathy was detected by the ophthalmologist in 205 patients (20.5%) and referrable retinopathy in 49 (4.9%). The sensitivity of the general practitioners and opticians for referrable retinopathy with ophthalmoscopy was 65%, and improved to 84% with retinal photographs. General practitioners'' sensitivity in detecting background retinopathy improved with photographs from 22% to 65%; opticians'' sensitivity in detecting background retinopathy improved from 43% to 71%. The sensitivity of detecting referrable retinopathy by general practitioners improved from 56% to 80% with photographs; for opticians it improved from 75% to 88%. CONCLUSIONS--Combining modalities of screening by providing photography with specialist review of all films in addition to direct ophthalmoscopy through dilated pupils improves assessment and referral for diabetic retinopathy by general practitioners and opticians. With further training and experience, primary care screeners should be able to achieve a sensitivity that will achieve an effective, acceptable, and economical community based screening programme for this condition.     

Psychiatry in General Practice

Psychiatrists should include the family doctor in their plans for future psychiatric services. The general practitioner now treats most of the patients who seek help for psychiatric disorder and he could not give up his psychiatric practice even if he wanted to. Furthermore, there are not now nor will there ever be enough psychiatrists to take over all patients with mental ills. Most emotionally disturbed patients can be better handled by their family physicians than by a specialist.To provide the best care for emotionally disturbed people the communication between family doctors and psychiatrists must be improved. The specialist must acknowledge the importance of the general practitioner''s role in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment and give him more help. Medical schools must provide better undergraduate and postgraduate psychiatric training for the students who will become family doctors. Health plans and other prepayment agencies should properly compensate the general practitioner for giving psychiatric treatment. The specialist in psychiatry should consult more readily with the general practitioner and help him carry out some of the therapy. General hospitals should permit family doctors to admit mental patients to psychiatric wards in a general hospital and to carry out psychiatric treatment with the help of the specialist in psychiatry.     

Is communication improving between general practitioners and psychiatrists?

General practitioners and psychiatrists communicate mainly by letter. To ascertain the most important items of information that should be included in these letters ("key items") questionnaires were sent to 80 general practitioners and 80 psychiatrists. A total of 120 referral letters sent to psychiatric clinics in 1973 and 1983 were studied, together with the psychiatrists'' replies, and these were rated for the inclusion of "key items." General practitioners'' letters contain less information about the family but more about psychiatric history than they did a decade ago. Overall, psychiatrists'' letters have not changed. Registrars, however, now include noticeably more "key items" than they did 10 years ago, but their letters remain twice the length of those written by consultants. It is suggested that letter writing skills are vital to good patient management and should be taught to postgraduate trainees in general practice and psychiatry.     

For public or profession?--The new GMC performance procedures.

The upheaval in the General Medical Council two decades ago came from doctors not the consumers the council was set up to protect. Since then there have been repeated calls for doctors to improve their self regulation by amending the disciplinary procedures. Private member''s bills have failed and the GMC has now proposed performance procedures to deal with doctors who exhibit a "pattern of poor performance." After months of wide consultation in and outside the medical profession the GMC will decide next week whether to endorse the procedures, which unlike the conduct hearings will be inquiries by peers. Professor Margaret Stacey suggests that the procedures lack clarity, smacking of that "trust me" principle whose subtext is "but I''m not telling you what I''m up to."     

General practitioners,court reports,and alcohol related offences.

General practitioners may have to submit medical reports to the courts on patients who have a suspected alcohol problem, 98% of such requests coming from magistrates courts. When, however, a defendant decides to plead "not guilty" to an offence on the grounds of intoxication general practitioners are often asked to prepare a report to support the plea. We present guidelines on preparing such reports and discuss the implications of the contents.     

Provision of hearing aids: does specialist assessment cause delay?

OBJECTIVE--To identify the main delay in the provision of hearing aids for people with impaired hearing and identify possible problems and short-comings caused by a community based hearing aid dispensing service. DESIGN--Prospective cohort analysis based on data collected from patients on the duration of hearing impairment, from the referral letters in respect of the general practitioners'' findings on otoscopy, and from the ear, nose, and throat assessment in the clinic with respect to the outcome of specialist otoscopy and management of the hearing impairment. SETTING--General ear, nose, and throat outpatient clinic. PATIENTS--100 Consecutive patients aged 19-94 referred by general practitioners for the provision of hearing aids or for assessment and treatment of impaired hearing. RESULTS--Most patients with impaired hearing did not seek medical advice for at least a year. The time from referral by the general practitioner to the provision of a hearing aid was under two months. General practitioners consistently recognised normality on otoscopy but failed to recognise abnormality in eight of 45 cases. Seven patients required further investigation to exclude serious disease and nine had conditions amenable to surgery. CONCLUSIONS--The main cause of delay in treating impaired hearing is failure by patients to seek help promptly. Specialist assessment of patients with impaired hearing is preferable and does not necessarily cause delay in providing hearing aids. The provision of hearing aids should remain a hospital based service.     

Overprescription of cholera vaccine to travellers by general practitioners.

A questionnaire describing five hypothetical patients intending to travel to different countries was sent to 113 general practitioners, who were asked to state which patients they would recommend cholera vaccination to. The response rate was 80%. The general practitioners'' recommendations were compared with those of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. Sixty three of 86 respondents recommended cholera vaccination when it would probably have been unnecessary. A review of common sources of information on cholera vaccination showed that general practitioners are given confusing or inappropriate advice. General practitioners should be educated about when cholera vaccination is necessary; alternatively, the vaccine should be available only through special centres.     

Purchasing for all: an alternative to fundholding.

OBJECTIVE--To evaluate general practitioner participation in a district health authority''s purchasing work. DESIGN--Questionnaire study of 131 Hackney general practitioners and 33 senior health service managers; review of the minutes of 28 meetings of the Hackney General Practitioners'' Forum and the contract between City and Hackney Health Authority and the St Bartholomew''s NHS Trust. SETTING--Hackney General Practitioners'' Forum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--General practitioners'' and managers'' perceptions of how representative and effective the general practitioners'' forum is; proportion of new quality targets and service developments contributed by general practitioners; main issues discussed by the forum and impact on district health authority policy. RESULTS--99 (76%) general practitioners and 27 (82%) managers responded. Both groups perceived the forum as representative. 92% (24/26) of the managers thought the forum was effective but only 74% (70/95) of general practitioners did so, largely because some doubted that the forum was listened to 75% (103/138) of quality targets and 55% (16/29) of service developments planned in the 1993-4 contract were contributed by general practitioners. They also lobbied successfully for more resources for urology and community mental health services. CONCLUSIONS--Input into commissioning via a general practitioners'' forum can be both representative and effective. General practitioners need to work closely to achieve a consensus and those involved need administrative support. The relation between general practice and public health medicine needs to be strengthened.     

Sickness certification system in the United Kingdom: qualitative study of views of general practitioners in Scotland

Objectives To explore how general practitioners operate the sickness certification system, their views on the system, and suggestions for change.Design Qualitative focus group study consisting of 11 focus groups with 67 participants.Setting General practitioners in practices in Glasgow, Tayside, and Highland regions, Scotland.Sample Purposive sample of general practitioners, with further theoretical sampling of key informant general practitioners to examine emerging themes.Results General practitioners believed that the sickness certification system failed to address complex, chronic, or doubtful cases. They seemed to develop various operational strategies for its implementation. There appeared to be important deliberate misuse of the system by general practitioners, possibly related to conflicts about roles and incongruities in the system. The doctor-patient relationship was perceived to conflict with the current role of general practitioners in sickness certification. When making decisions about certification, the general practitioners considered a wide variety of factors. They experienced contradictory demands from other system stakeholders and felt blamed for failing to make impossible reconciliations. They clearly identified the difficulties of operating the system when there was no continuity of patient care. Many wished either to relinquish their gatekeeper role or to continue only with major changes.Conclusions Policy makers need to recognise and accommodate the range and complexity of factors that influence the behaviour of general practitioners operating as gatekeepers to the sickness certification system, before making changes. Such changes are otherwise unlikely to result in improvement. Models other than the primary care gatekeeper model should be considered.     

Community care and the fundholder.

According to the government, clearly agreed local arrangements should enable individual general practitioners to make their full contribution to the new system of community care without getting involved in extra bureaucracy. From 1 April the main part of that contribution will be to refer to social services those patients who seem to need social care. Many general practitioners are worried that such referrals will be complex and time consuming and will generate too much extra work. Moreover, general practitioners may also be asked to see patients specifically to help social workers'' assessment procedures, and many fear that such consultations will overwork and underpay them. General practitioner fundholders already use contracts to spell out what they expect from hospital services. From 1 April they will be able to set up contracts for community health services such as district nursing and chiropody, and possibly this might be extended to social aspects of community care. Over the past 14 months Dr Rhidian Morris and his partners in a fundholding practice in Devon have piloted contracts for all aspects of community care. In this article Dr Morris explains how the most radical part of the pilot project--the contract for social care--was set up. He argues that the lessons on communication that came from what was essentially a fundholding project could apply also to non-fundholding practices.     

Workload of general practitioners before and after the new contract.

OBJECTIVE--To assess changes in general practitioners'' workload associated with the new contract introduced in April 1990. DESIGN--Weekly workload diary completed during four weeks in February-March 1990 and during the same period in 1991. SETTING--Sheffield, United Kingdom. SUBJECTS--All 300 general practitioners on Sheffield Family Health Services Authority list as principals in 1990 and 1991. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Mean number of hours worked per week, number of patients seen each week, and mean time spent per patient. RESULTS--181 (60%) general practitioners responded in 1990 and 163 (54%) in 1991. Of these, 18 (10%) were not working in 1990 and 14 (7%) in 1991. General medical service work increased during a "normal working week" from a mean of 38.6 hours a week in 1990 to 40.6 hours in 1991, and non-general medical service work decreased from 5.4 hours a week to 4.5 hours. Hours spent on call were similar before and after the contract. For the 99 general practitioners who responded in both years, time spent on general medical service duties increased significantly (40.5 h in 1990 v 42.5 h [corrected] in 1991; p = 0.033), mainly due to more time being spent in clinics. Significantly more patients were being seen in clinics (9 v 14; p = 0.001); the average time spent per patient remained at about 8 1/2 minutes during surgeries and 16 minutes for a home visit, and rose from 13 to 14 minutes for patients seen in clinics. The time spent on practice administration fell but not significantly. CONCLUSION--Since the new contract there has been a significant increase in general medical services work, mainly due to more patients being seen in clinics, with no reduction in the time spent per patient.     

The management of ureteral stone; a guide for physicians in general practice

General practitioners are usually the first to observe a patient with ureteral stone, and often they practice in communities where consultation with a urologist is not immediately available. Study of the records of 423 patients with ureteral stone observed in private practice indicates that by following a definite system for diagnosis, relief of pain, determination of contralateral function, control of infection, and prophylaxis, general practitioners can manage the disease in the great majority of cases, and can determine when treatment by a specialist is imperative.     

Combining specialist and primary health care teams for HIV positive patients: retrospective and prospective studies.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a model of health care for HIV positive patients involving specialist, hospital based teams and primary health care teams. DESIGN: One year retrospective and a 2 1/2 year prospective study. SETTING: Two hospitals in West London and 88 general practitioners in 72 general hospitals. SUBJECTS: 209 adults with HIV infection. INTERVENTION: General practitioners enrolled in the project were faxed structured outpatient clinic summaries. When hospital inpatients were discharged, a brief discharge summary was faxed. General practitioners had access to consultant physicians skilled in HIV medicine through a 24 hour mobile telephone service. An HIV/AIDS management and treatment guide containing relevant local information was produced. Quarterly discussion forums for general practitioners were held, and a regular newsletter was produced. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital attendance and general practitioner consultations; perceived benefits and problems of patients and general practitioners. RESULTS: The average length of a hospital inpatient stay was halved for those patients who had participated in the project for two years, and the average number of visits to the outpatient clinic per month fell for patients with AIDS. There was a substantial increase in the number of visits to general practitioners by patients with AIDS and symptomatic HIV infection. Patients and general practitioners both felt that the standard of health care provided had improved. CONCLUSIONS: This model of health care efficiently and effectively utilised existing teams of hospital and primary health care professionals to provide care for HIV positive patients. Simple, prompt, and regular communication systems which provided information relevant to the needs of general practitioners were central to its success.     

Specialist outreach clinics in general practice.

OBJECTIVES--To establish the extent and nature of specialist outreach clinics in primary care and to describe specialists'' and general practitioners'' views on outreach clinics. DESIGN--Telephone interviews with hospital managers. Postal questionnaire surveys of specialists and general practitioners. SETTING--50 hospitals in England and Wales. SUBJECTS--50 hospital managers, all of whom responded. 96 specialists and 88 general practitioners involved in outreach clinics in general practice, of whom 69 (72%) and 46 (52%) respectively completed questionnaires. 122 additional general practitioner fundholders, of whom 72 (59%) completed questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Number of specialist outreach clinics; organisation and referral mechanism; waiting times; perceived benefits and problems. RESULTS--28 of the hospitals had a total of 96 outreach clinics, and 32 fundholders identified a further 61 clinics. These clinics covered psychiatry (43), medical specialties (38), and surgical specialties (76). Patients were seen by the consultant in 96% (107) of clinics and general practitioners attended at only six clinics. 61 outreach clinics had shorter waiting times for first outpatient appointment than hospital clinics. The most commonly reported benefits for patients were ease of access and shorter waiting times. CONCLUSIONS--Specialist outreach clinics cover a wide range of specialties and are popular, especially in fundholding practices. These clinics do not seem to have increased the interaction between general practitioners and specialists.