Sibbald B, Wilkie P, Raftery J, Anderson S, Freeling P
Department of General Practice and Primary Care, St George's Hospital Medical School, London.
BMJ. 1992 Jan 4;304(6818):31-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6818.31.
To assess the impact on general practitioners and hospital consultants of hospital outpatient dispensing policies in England.
Postal questionnaire and telephone interview survey of general practitioners and hospital consultants in January 1991.
94 selected major acute hospitals in England.
20 general practitioners in the vicinity of each of 94 selected hospitals and eight consultants from each, selected by chief pharmacists.
Proportions of general practitioners unable to assume responsibility for specialist drugs and of consultants wishing to retain responsibility; association between dispensing restrictions and the frequency of general practitioners being asked to prescribe hospital initiated treatments.
Completed questionnaires were obtained from 1207 (64%) of 1887 general practitioners and 457 (63%) of 729 consultants. 570 (46%) general practitioners felt unable to take responsibility for certain treatments, principally because of difficulty in detecting side effects (367, 30%), uncertainty about explaining treatment to patients (332, 28%), and difficulty monitoring dosage (294, 24%). Among consultants 328 (72%) wished to retain responsibility, principally because of specialist need for monitoring (93, 20%), urgent need to commence treatment (64, 14%), and specialist need to initiate or stabilise treatment (63, 14%). The more restricted the drug supply to outpatients, the more frequently consultants asked general practitioners to prescribe (p less than 0.01) and complete a short course of treatment initiated by the hospital (p less than 0.001).
Restrictive hospital outpatient dispensing shifts clinical responsibility on to general practitioners. Hospital doctors should be able to retain responsibility for prescribing when the general practitioner is unfamiliar with the drug or there is a specialist need to initiate, stabilise, or monitor treatment.
评估英格兰医院门诊配药政策对全科医生和医院会诊医生的影响。
1991年1月对全科医生和医院会诊医生进行邮寄问卷调查和电话访谈。
英格兰94家选定的大型急症医院。
94家选定医院附近的20名全科医生以及每家医院由主任药剂师选出的8名会诊医生。
无法承担专科药物责任的全科医生比例以及希望保留责任的会诊医生比例;配药限制与全科医生被要求开具医院发起治疗处方的频率之间的关联。
1887名全科医生中有1207名(64%)、729名会诊医生中有457名(63%)完成了问卷调查。570名(46%)全科医生认为无法承担某些治疗的责任,主要原因是难以发现副作用(367名,30%)、向患者解释治疗存在不确定性(332名,28%)以及难以监测剂量(294名,24%)。会诊医生中,328名(72%)希望保留责任,主要原因是专科监测需求(93名,20%)、紧急开始治疗的需求(64名,14%)以及专科发起或稳定治疗的需求(63名,14%)。门诊患者的药物供应限制越严格,会诊医生要求全科医生开具处方(p<0.01)并完成医院发起的短疗程治疗的频率越高(p<0.001)。
限制性的医院门诊配药将临床责任转移到了全科医生身上。当全科医生不熟悉药物或存在专科发起、稳定或监测治疗的需求时,医院医生应能够保留处方权。