Hussey Susan, Hoddinott Pat, Wilson Phil, Dowell Jon, Barbour Rosaline
Research and Development Office NHS Highland, The Greenhouse, Beechwood Business Park North, Inverness IV2 3ED.
BMJ. 2004 Jan 10;328(7431):88. doi: 10.1136/bmj.37949.656389.EE. Epub 2003 Dec 22.
To explore how general practitioners operate the sickness certification system, their views on the system, and suggestions for change.
Qualitative focus group study consisting of 11 focus groups with 67 participants.
General practitioners in practices in Glasgow, Tayside, and Highland regions, Scotland.
Purposive sample of general practitioners, with further theoretical sampling of key informant general practitioners to examine emerging themes.
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.
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.
探讨全科医生如何操作疾病证明系统,他们对该系统的看法以及对变革的建议。
定性焦点小组研究,由11个焦点小组组成,共67名参与者。
苏格兰格拉斯哥、泰赛德和高地地区诊所的全科医生。
全科医生的目的抽样,并对关键信息提供者全科医生进行进一步的理论抽样,以研究新出现的主题。
全科医生认为疾病证明系统未能解决复杂、慢性或可疑病例。他们似乎为该系统的实施制定了各种操作策略。全科医生似乎存在重要的故意滥用该系统的情况,这可能与角色冲突和系统中的不协调有关。医患关系被认为与全科医生目前在疾病证明中的角色相冲突。在做出证明决定时,全科医生会考虑各种各样的因素。他们感受到来自其他系统利益相关者的相互矛盾的要求,并因未能达成不可能的和解而受到指责。他们清楚地认识到在患者护理缺乏连续性时操作该系统的困难。许多人希望要么放弃他们的守门人角色,要么仅在进行重大变革的情况下继续担任该角色。
政策制定者在做出改变之前,需要认识到并考虑到影响作为疾病证明系统守门人的全科医生行为的各种因素及其复杂性。否则,此类改变不太可能带来改善。应考虑除初级保健守门人模式之外的其他模式。