Langworthy J M, Birkelid J
Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Musculoskeletal Research and Clinical Implementation, AECC, Bournemouth, UK.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001 Nov-Dec;24(9):576-81. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2001.118983.
Some within the medical establishment believe that the education and training of chiropractors is grounded in orthodox medicine and that these professional groups share a common language allowing for close dialogue. However, levels of communication and collaboration often remain low. Furthermore, studies have shown chiropractors to be lax in providing written reports to referring clinicians, a practice important to both patient care and interprofessional relationships.
To investigate existing levels of communication between general practitioners (GPs) and chiropractors in Norway and to identify trends in GP preferences for future interprofessional communications.
A postal survey was conducted on a random sample of 230 GPs in Norway.
A response rate of 51% was achieved. All respondents reported having made at least one referral to a chiropractor. Most (63%) referred infrequently, and only 7% communicated often with a chiropractor. Of those who were in contact with a chiropractor, three fourths communicated by telephone. One fifth of the respondents negatively assessed the quality of written reports. Approximately one third of those GPs who had referred patients did not receive a report, despite this being obligatory in Norway. Twelve percent reported problems with terminology. A written report for future reporting was favored by 75% of the GPs, who wanted the report to contain information on examination findings, diagnosis, treatment, and advice given.
In general, communications between GPs and chiropractors in Norway are not ideal, particularly with regard to frequency and written quality. However, this is not unique to Norway. With increasing emphasis on multidisciplinary health care, greater understanding and better communication is needed to optimize the benefits of such an approach to patient management. Relevant, timely, consistent reporting on a reciprocal basis, together with a shared vocabulary, should help this process.
一些医疗机构内部人士认为,脊椎按摩师的教育和培训以正统医学为基础,且这些专业群体拥有共同语言,能够进行密切对话。然而,沟通与协作水平往往依然较低。此外,研究表明脊椎按摩师在向转诊临床医生提供书面报告方面较为懈怠,而这一做法对患者护理和跨专业关系都很重要。
调查挪威全科医生(GP)与脊椎按摩师之间的现有沟通水平,并确定全科医生对未来跨专业沟通的偏好趋势。
对挪威230名全科医生进行随机抽样的邮政调查。
回复率为51%。所有受访者均表示至少向脊椎按摩师转诊过一次。大多数(63%)转诊频率较低,只有7%经常与脊椎按摩师沟通。在与脊椎按摩师有联系的人中,四分之三通过电话沟通。五分之一的受访者对书面报告质量给予负面评价。尽管在挪威提供报告是强制性的,但约三分之一转诊患者的全科医生未收到报告。12%的受访者报告存在术语问题。75%的全科医生赞成提供未来报告的书面报告,他们希望报告包含检查结果、诊断、治疗和所提建议等信息。
总体而言,挪威全科医生与脊椎按摩师之间的沟通并不理想,尤其是在沟通频率和书面质量方面。然而,这并非挪威独有的情况。随着对多学科医疗保健的日益重视,需要更好的理解和沟通,以优化这种患者管理方法的益处。基于互惠原则进行相关、及时、一致的报告,并共享词汇,应有助于这一进程。