Blundell, N;
Taylor-Phillips, S;
Spitzer, D;
Martin, S;
Forde, I;
Clarke, A;
(2011)
Elective surgical referral guidelines - background educational material or essential shared decision making tool? A survey of GPs' in England.
BMC Family Practice
, 12
, Article 92. 10.1186/1471-2296-12-92.
![[thumbnail of 1471-2296-12-92.pdf]](https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png) |
PDF
1471-2296-12-92.pdf Download (223kB) |
Abstract
Background: To investigate general practitioners' (GPs') attitudes to guidelines for elective surgical referral in England. To understand their use of guidelines, and attitudes to shared decision making in the referral decision.Methods: A questionnaire was developed which investigated attitudes to and use of guidelines. It was given to a stratified random sample 30% (n = 310) drawn from GP lists of 10 English health districts (primary care trusts (PCTs)). GPs were invited to respond online, by telephone, fax or post. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and backwards stepwise logistic regression.Results: Responses were representative of GPs in England, but (despite up to 6 contacts per non-responder) the overall response rate was 41.6% (n = 129; with the range across PCTs of 25-61%). Most responding GPs indicated support for referral guidelines but 18% reported that they had never used them. Less than three per cent reported use for most or all referral decisions. The odds of using guidelines decreased with increasing age, with a ten year increase in age associated with halving odds of use (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.29-0.90). Over 50% of GPs wanted good access to electronic guidelines with expert information and advice on guideline availability. Almost all (> 89%) GPs agreed with sharing referral decisions with patients. Female doctors (OR = 5.2, 95% CI: 1.02-26.3) were more likely to agree with this than male GPs as were those working in larger compared to small or single handed practices (OR = 5.3, 95% CI: 1.4-19.9).Conclusions: This group of responding GPs was supportive of guidelines but used them in different ways. Referral guidelines should have an educational component for background reading; include key messages for internalisation and application; and incorporate mechanisms to facilitate accessibility and appropriate shared decision making with patients.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Elective surgical referral guidelines - background educational material or essential shared decision making tool? A survey of GPs' in England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1186/1471-2296-12-92 |
| Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-12-92 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | © 2011 Blundell et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Keywords: | Family Practice [MeSH], Primary Health Care [MeSH], Referral and Consultation [MeSH] Surgical Procedures, Operative [MeSH], Practice Guidelines [MeSH], CLINICAL-PRACTICE GUIDELINES, PRIMARY-CARE, GENERAL-PRACTICE, PHYSICIANS, PRACTITIONERS, PERSPECTIVES, ATTITUDES, BELIEFS, TRIAL |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1334072 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
