Hope House Surgery, Radstock, UK.
J Med Ethics. 2010 Jan;36(1):7-11. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.029066.
Ethical guidance from the British Medical Association (BMA) about treating doctor-patients is compared and contrasted with evidence from a qualitative study of general practitioners (GPs) who have been patients. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 GPs who had experienced a significant illness. Their experiences were discussed and issues about both being and treating doctor-patients were revealed. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to evaluate the data. In this article data extracts are used to illustrate and discuss three key points that summarise the BMA ethical guidance, in order to develop a picture of how far experiences map onto guidance. The data illustrate and extend the complexities of the issues outlined by the BMA document. In particular, differences between experienced GPs and those who have recently completed their training are identified. This analysis will be useful for medical professionals both when they themselves are unwell and when they treat doctor-patients. It will also inform recommendations for professionals who educate medical students or trainees.
英国医学协会 (BMA) 关于治疗医患关系的伦理指导与对经历过重大疾病的全科医生 (GP) 的定性研究的证据进行了比较和对比。对 17 名经历过重大疾病的 GP 进行了半结构化访谈。讨论了他们的经历，并揭示了医患双方的问题。采用解释性现象学分析来评估数据。本文使用数据摘录来说明和讨论总结 BMA 伦理指导的三个要点，以了解经验与指导的契合程度。这些数据说明了并扩展了 BMA 文件中概述的问题的复杂性。特别是，确定了经验丰富的 GP 与最近完成培训的 GP 之间的差异。这项分析对于生病时和治疗医患关系时的医疗专业人员都将非常有用。它还将为教育医学生或学员的专业人员提供建议。
