4.3 Article

When general practitioners talk about Alcohol: Exploring facilitating and hampering factors for pragmatic case finding

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 153-158

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1403494814565129

关键词

Alcohol-related health problems; general practice; focus groups; quality improvement; communities of practice

资金

  1. Fund for research in General Practice
  2. Norwegian Medical Association
  3. Alcohol and Drug Research Western Norway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The aim was to explore individual and system factors facilitating or hampering pragmatic case finding, an identification strategy based on clinical signs and targeted screening. Study design: Two focus groups with general practitioners were interviewed twice, in the context of a four-session seminar on alcohol and complex drug problems, and an additional focus group interview with general practitioners not attending the seminar. Interviews focused mainly on conditions for talking about alcohol, views on collaboration with colleagues, how they deal with complex issues, and strategies for learning and quality improvement. Results: The participants presented many deliberate strategies for quality improvement and learning together, but there was a tendency to avoid discussing complex case stories or potentially controversial topics with colleagues. Possible barriers to change were presented. The majority of their stories on talking about alcohol coincided well with the concept of pragmatic case finding. The duality between shame and normality, time constraints and a need for structure were the most important individual barriers to an open and respectful conversation about alcohol with patients. Conclusions: Our study supports pragmatic case finding as a relevant and viable strategy for talking about alcohol in general practice, and as an alternative to screening and brief intervention. Quality improvement in practice is strengthened when it is adapted to the clinical setting, and builds on and stimulates the GPs' and staff's own strategies for learning and quality work.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据