Kendrick T, Burns T, Freeling P
St George's Hospital Medical School, London.
BMJ. 1995 Jul 8;311(6997):93-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.6997.93.
To assess the impact of teaching general practitioners to carry out structured assessments of their long term mentally ill patients.
Randomised controlled trial.
Sixteen group general practices in South Thames (west) region.
440 adults disabled by long term mental illness.
Patients were identified by using practice data with help from local psychiatric and social services. In eight practices the practitioners were taught a structured assessment schedule to use with patients every six months for two years.
Changes in drug treatments, referrals, consultation rates, and recording of preventive health data in the two years after intervention.
Follow up data were available on 373 patients (84.7%). At least one structured assessment was recorded for 127 patients in the intervention group but only 29 had four assessments recorded. Participating practitioners considered the structured assessment to be time consuming and reported that it did not often lead directly to changes in treatment or referrals. Changes in treatment with neuroleptic drugs and referrals to community psychiatric nurses, however, were significantly more frequent in the intervention group (differences for intervention group minus control group adjusted for activity in two years before intervention were 14.3% (95% confidence interval 4.3% to 24.33%; P < 0.01) for neuroleptic drugs and 13.3% (2.0% to 24.6%; P < 0.05) for referrals). There were no significant differences in psychiatric admissions, use of the Mental Health Act, drug overdoses, prescriptions, referrals or admissions for physical problems, consultation rates, continuity of care, or recording of preventive data.
Teaching general practitioners about the problems of long term mentally ill patients may increase their involvement in patients' psychiatric care. Regular structured assessments do not seem feasible in routine surgery appointments. More training for general practitioners and increased resources such as more nurse time may be necessary if improvements in care of long term mentally ill patients in general practice are to be generalised.
评估培训全科医生对长期患有精神疾病的患者进行结构化评估的影响。
随机对照试验。
南泰晤士(西部)地区的16家团体全科诊所。
440名因长期精神疾病而致残的成年人。
在当地精神科和社会服务机构的帮助下,利用诊所数据识别患者。在8家诊所,培训医生使用结构化评估表,每六个月对患者进行一次评估,为期两年。
干预后两年内药物治疗、转诊、会诊率以及预防性健康数据记录的变化。
373名患者(84.7%)有随访数据。干预组中127名患者至少记录了一次结构化评估,但只有29名患者有四次评估记录。参与的医生认为结构化评估耗时,且表示这并不常直接导致治疗或转诊的改变。然而,干预组中使用抗精神病药物的治疗变化和转诊至社区精神科护士的情况明显更频繁(干预组减去对照组的差异,经干预前两年活动调整后,抗精神病药物为14.3%(95%置信区间4.3%至24.33%;P<0.01),转诊为13.3%(2.0%至24.6%;P<0.05))。在精神科住院、《精神健康法》的使用、药物过量、处方、身体问题的转诊或住院、会诊率、连续护理或预防性数据记录方面,没有显著差异。
培训全科医生了解长期患有精神疾病患者的问题可能会增加他们对患者精神护理的参与度。在常规门诊预约中,定期进行结构化评估似乎不可行。如果要在全科医疗中普遍改善对长期患有精神疾病患者的护理,可能需要对全科医生进行更多培训,并增加资源,如更多护士的工作时间。