4.4 Article

More time for complex consultations in a high-deprivation practice is associated with increased patient enablement

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE
卷 57, 期 545, 页码 960-966

出版社

ROYAL COLL GENERAL PRACTITIONERS
DOI: 10.3399/096016407782604910

关键词

holistic health; physician-patient relations; socioeconomic factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Evidence of the beneficial effects of longer consultations in general practice is limited. Aim To evaluate the effect of increasing consultation length on patient enablement in general practice in an area of extreme socioeconomic deprivation. Design of study Longitudinal study using a 'before and after' design. Setting Keppoch Medical Centre in Glasgow, which serves the most deprived practice area in Scotland. Method Participants were 300 adult patients at baseline, before the introduction of longer consultations, and 324 at follow-up, more than 1 year after the introduction of longer consultations. The intervention studied was more time in complex consultations. Patient satisfaction, perceptions of the GPs' empathy, GP stress, and patient enablement were collected by face-to-face interview. Additional qualitative data were obtained by individual interviews with the GPs, relating to their perceptions of the impact of the longer consultations. Results Response rates of 70% were obtained. Overall, 53% of consultations were complex. GP stress was higher in complex consultations. Patient satisfaction and perception of the GPs' empathy were consistently high. Average consultation length in complex consultations was increased by 2.5 minutes by the intervention. GP stress in consultations was decreased after the introduction of longer consultations, and patient enablement was increased. GPs' views endorsed these findings, with more anticipatory and coordinated care being possible in the longer consultations. Conclusion More resource to provide more time in complex consultations in an area of extreme deprivation is associated with an increase in patient enablement.

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

4.4
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