Review: The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness

Author(s):  
Donald W. Winnicott

Winnicott’s review of Michael Balint’s The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness discusses Balint’s work in the Tavistock Clinic as pertaining to general practice and as a good medium for the spread of psychotherapy along psycho-analytic lines. Winnicott notes that it is possible that analysts are not well aware of the tremendous number of patients who are dealt with successfully by general practitioners without being in analysis at all.

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanne Lykke Lundstrøm ◽  
Kasper Edwards ◽  
Thomas Bøllingtoft Knudsen ◽  
Pia Veldt Larsen ◽  
Susanne Reventlow ◽  
...  

Background. Relational coordination (RC) and organisational social capital (OSC) are measures of novel aspects of an organisation’s performance, which have not previously been analysed together, in general practice. Objectives. The aim of this study was to analyse the associations between RC and OSC, and characteristics of general practice. Methods. Questionnaire survey study comprising 2074 practices in Denmark. Results. General practitioners (GPs) rated both RC and OSC in their general practice higher than their secretaries and nurses. The practice form was statistically significantly associated with high RC and OSC. RC was positively associated with the number of patients listed with a practice per staff, where staff is defined as all members of a practice including both owners and employees. Conclusion. The study showed that RC and OSC were significantly associated with type of profession and practice type. RC was also found to be significantly positively associated with number of patients per staff. However, the low response rate must be taken into consideration when interpreting the self-reported results of this study.


1990 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 727-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila M. Curran ◽  
Ian M. Pullen

The practice of out-patient psychiatry has undergone a number of significant developments in recent years: the number of patients referred by general practitioners has steadily increased: a large number of psychiatrists are now seeing patients in the primary care setting and more patients are being seen on one occasion only.


2005 ◽  
Vol 187 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andor E. Simon ◽  
Christoph Lauber ◽  
Katja Ludewig ◽  
Hellmuth Braun-Scharm ◽  
Daniel S. Umbricht

BackgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs) have an important role in the care of patients with chronic schizophrenia and of those in the early phases of this disorder.AimsTo obtain information about the number of patients in the early and chronic stages of schizophrenia seen in general practice; the needs and attitudes of GPs, their diagnostic knowledge concerning early phases of schizophrenia and their knowledge and practice concerning treatment of patients with first-episode and multi-episode schizophrenia.MethodApostal survey was conducted among randomly selected GPs in Switzerland.ResultsAtotal of 1089 GPs responded to the survey. Early psychosis had a low prevalence in general practice, and GPs expressed a wish for specialised, low-threshold referral services. Diagnostic and treatment knowledge showed inconsistencies. Most GPs said they would treat first-episode schizophrenia with antipsychotics, but only a third recommended maintenance treatment after a first episode of schizophrenia that would conform with international recommendations.ConclusionsEasily accessible, low-threshold referral services are pivotal in supporting GPs in the management and treatment of emerging schizophrenia in primary healthcare patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Stumm ◽  
Cornelia Thierbach ◽  
Lisa Peter ◽  
Susanne Schnitzer ◽  
Lorena Dini ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In Germany, a decreasing number of general practitioners (GPs) face a growing number of patients with multimorbidity. Whilst care for patients with multimorbidity involves various healthcare providers, the coordination of this care is one of the many responsibilities of GPs. The aims of this study are to identify the barriers to the successful coordination of multimorbid patient care and these patients’ complex needs, and to explore the support needed by GPs in the care of multimorbid patients. Interviewees were asked for their opinion on concepts which involve the support by additional employees within the practice or, alternatively, external health care professionals, providing patient navigation. Methods Thirty-two semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 GPs and 16 medical practice assistants (MPAs) from 16 different practices in Berlin. A MPA is a qualified non-physician practice employee. He or she undergoes a three years vocational training which qualifies him or her to provide administrative and clinical support. The interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using the framework analysis methodology. Results The results of this paper predominantly focus on GPs’ perspectives of coordination within and external to general practice. Coordination in the context of care for multimorbid patients consists of a wide range of different tasks. Organisational and administrative obstacles under the regulatory framework of the German healthcare system, and insufficient communication with other healthcare providers constitute barriers described by the interviewed GPs and MPAs. In order to ensure optimal care for patients with multimorbidity, GPs may have to delegate responsibilities associated with coordinating tasks. GPs consider the deployment of an additional specifically qualified employee inside the general practice to take on coordinative and social and legal duties to be a viable option. Conclusions The cross-sectoral cooperation between all involved key players working within the healthcare system, as well as the coordination of the whole care process, is seemingly challenging for GPs within the complex care system of multimorbid patients. GPs are generally open to the assignment of a person to support them in coordination tasks, preferably situated within the practice team.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Broholm-Jørgensen ◽  
Siff Monrad Langkilde ◽  
Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen ◽  
Pia Vivian Pedersen

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.


Livestock ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 196-201
Author(s):  
John F Mee ◽  
Rhona Ley

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e001309
Author(s):  
Jennifer Gosling ◽  
Nicholas Mays ◽  
Bob Erens ◽  
David Reid ◽  
Josephine Exley

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. e001050
Author(s):  
Andrew O'Regan ◽  
Michael Pollock ◽  
Saskia D'Sa ◽  
Vikram Niranjan

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e000512
Author(s):  
Ingvild Vatten Alsnes ◽  
Morten Munkvik ◽  
W Dana Flanders ◽  
Nicolas Øyane

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1284.1-1285
Author(s):  
A. S. Lundberg ◽  
B. A. Esbensen ◽  
E. M. Hauge ◽  
A. De Thurah

Background:Early treatment, before three months from symptom onset of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is essential to increase the likelihood of remission and to prevent permanent joint damage (1). However, it has been shown that only 20% of the patients are seen within the first three months, and the median delay in general practice has been estimated to 4 months (range 2–9) (2).Objectives:To explore the barriers in diagnosing RA from the general practitioners’ (GPs) perspective.Methods:We conducted a qualitative study based on focus group interviews. We recorded the interviews digitally and transcribed verbatim. The transcribed interviews were analyzed based on content analysis (3), by using Nivo 12. Sample size was determined by thematic saturation.Results:In total ten GPs participated in three different focus groups. 40 % were female, mean age was 53 years (range 37-64), and mean year since specialist authorization as GP was 16 years (range 5-23). 60 % of the GPs worked in a practice located within the referral area of a university hospital; the remaining within the referral area of a regional hospital.Four themes emerged in the analysis: 1) When the patient is not a text book example, referring to the difficulty of identifying relevant symptoms among all clinical manifestations from the joints as described by the patients, 2)The importance of maintaining the gatekeeper function, referring to the societal perspective, and the GPs responsibility to refer the right patients to secondary care, 3)Difficulties in referral of patients to the rheumatologist,referring to perceived differences in the collaboration with rheumatologists. The GPs experienced that it was sometimes difficult to be assisted by rheumatologists, especially when the clinical picture was not ‘clear cut’. Finally, (4)Para-clinical testing, can it be trusted?referring to challenges on the evaluation of especially biomarkers.The overarching theme was:Like finding a needle in a haystack, covering the GPs difficulties in detecting RA among the many patients in general practice who appear to be well and at the same time have symptoms very similar to RA.Conclusion:The GPs experienced that RA was a difficult diagnosis to make. The immediate challenge was that RA patient’s initial symptoms often resembled those of more common and less serious conditions, and that investigative findings such as biomarkers can be negative at the early state of the disease. At the same time, the collaboration with rheumatologists was sometimes seen as a hurdle, when the clinical picture was not ‘clear cut’.In order to facilitate earlier diagnosis of RA in general practice, the GPs and rheumatologists need to focus on these barriers by strengthening mutual information and collaboration.Physicians should remain vigilant to patients who have conditions that do not resolve as expected with treatment, who have symptoms that persist, or who do not look well despite negative investigative findings.References:[1]Aletaha D, et al. JAMA, Oct 2018.[2]Kiely P, et al. Rheumatology, Jan 2009.[3]Braun V. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006, 3(2), 77-101Disclosure of Interests:Anne Sofie Lundberg: None declared, Bente Appel Esbensen: None declared, Ellen-Margrethe Hauge Speakers bureau: Fees for speaking/consulting: MSD, AbbVie, UCB and Sobi; research funding to Aarhus University Hospital: Roche and Novartis (not related to the submitted work)., Annette de Thurah Grant/research support from: Novartis (not relevant for the present study)., Speakers bureau: Lily (not relevant for the present study).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document