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.     

General practitioners' responsibilities to their patients.

The views of general practitioners about their responsibilities for patient care have not been canvassed. A survey of general practitioners was therefore carried out to determine their views. A postal questionnaire, in which general practitioners were asked what they saw as their responsibilities, was sent to 525 principals in Avon and completed by 424, giving a response rate of 81%. The doctors generally agreed that their responsibilities for patient care included problems related to internal medicine, such as managing diabetes and hypertension. Less consensus was found in the replies to questions about technical procedures, such as resection of ingrowing toenails, and gynaecological, orthopaedic, or psychosocial problems. The results supported the view that general practitioners are gradually abandoning technical aspects of medicine to specialists without a compensating role having been defined. In the light of this trend the responsibilities of general practitioners should be clearly defined by the profession.     

General practitioners' management of hypertension in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVE--To assess general practitioners'' attitudes to the diagnosis and management of hypertension in elderly patients. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire to all general practitioners in Leicestershire. RESULTS--360 of 451 general practitioners (80%) responded. 81% (292) reported rechecking an initially high blood pressure on two or three occasions before starting treatment, 56% (202) measured sitting blood pressure only, and just 28% (100) took sitting and standing levels. 36% (128) had no upper age limit for starting anti-hypertensive treatment; of the 58% (206) who did, the median was 80 (range 70-99) years. Blood pressure levels reported for starting treatment in patients aged 70-79 years were 180 (150-240)/106 (90-120) mm Hg. 34% of general practitioners (121) would not treat isolated systolic hypertension. The most popular first line treatment for an elderly hypertensive patient was a thiazide diuretic; only 17% of general practitioners (61) initially tried non-pharmacological methods. 34% (122) would continue anti-hypertensive treatment unchanged in the period immediately after stroke. CONCLUSIONS--The variation among general practitioners in the criteria for the measurement, diagnosis, and treatment of hypertension in elderly patients emphasises the need for clear management guidelines in this age group.     

General practitioners' views about the statutory annual practice report.

OBJECTIVE--To ascertain the views of primary care professionals about the current purpose, uses, potential, and workload implications of the statutory general practice annual report. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire survey. SETTING--General practices in the Northern region. SUBJECTS--All practices in the region that were singlehanded, fundholding, non-fundholding and with more than five partners, and a one in three random sample of all non-fundholding practices (n = 318). RESULTS--263 practices responded (83%). The report took a median of 12 hours to produce (95% confidence interval 11 to 15 hours; interquartile range 7-35). The main perceived purpose of the report was to monitor practice activity (165 respondents; 63% (95% confidence interval 57% to 69%)), but 44 respondents (17%; 13% to 22%) produced it only because it was contractually required. Practices included statutory and non-statutory data in these reports and would have liked comparative practice activity information (155 respondents; 59%) and "good ideas" (165 respondents; 63%) fed back to them. Respondents would have liked the annual report used to improve practice development planning (122 respondents; 46% (40% to 52%)), to facilitate audit (115 respondents; 44% (38% to 50%)), and to influence resource allocation (104 respondents; 40% (34% to 46%)). One hundred and eighteen practices (45%; 39% to 51%) would produce an annual report even if not contractually required. Data collected were perceived to be already available elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS--Primary care professionals have concerns about the current annual report. They would prefer to collect relevant, standardised data which could lead to better audit, planning, and resource allocation.     

General practitioners' attitudes towards AIDS and their perceived information needs.

A short questionnaire on general practitioners'' self perceived and actual knowledge of AIDS and their attitudes to the illness was sent to 1824 general practitioners throughout the United Kingdom. The rate of response was 70%. Women doctors, those who trained overseas, and those who were married tended to have less positive attitudes towards patients with HIV and AIDS, whereas younger doctors, trainers, and members of the Royal College of General Practitioners were more understanding, better informed, and had more positive attitudes. Doctors with the least knowledge about HIV and AIDS and the most negative attitudes towards the illness would benefit from further education, which would be most effectively delivered through the professional journals, the Department of Health and the charitable AIDS organisations.