Why general practitioners do not implement evidence: qualitative study.

IF 0.4 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY

Hypertension Research in Pregnancy Pub Date : 2001-11-10 DOI:10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1100

A C Freeman, K Sweeney

{"title":"Why general practitioners do not implement evidence: qualitative study.","authors":"A C Freeman, K Sweeney","doi":"10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To explore the reasons why general practitioners do not always implement best evidence.Design: Qualitative study using Balint-style groups.Setting: Primary care.Participants: 19 general practitioners.Main outcome measures: Identifiable themes that indicate barriers to implementation.Results: Six main themes were identified that affected the implementation process: the personal and professional experiences of the general practitioners; the patient-doctor relationship; a perceived tension between primary and secondary care; general practitioners' feelings about their patients and the evidence; and logistical problems. Doctors are aware that their choice of words with patients can affect patients' decisions and whether evidence is implemented.Conclusions: General practitioner participants seem to act as a conduit within the consultation and regard clinical evidence as a square peg to fit in the round hole of the patient's life. The process of implementation is complex, fluid, and adaptive.","PeriodicalId":42505,"journal":{"name":"Hypertension Research in Pregnancy","volume":"1 1","pages":"1100-2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2001-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hypertension Research in Pregnancy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To explore the reasons why general practitioners do not always implement best evidence.

Design: Qualitative study using Balint-style groups.

Setting: Primary care.

Participants: 19 general practitioners.

Main outcome measures: Identifiable themes that indicate barriers to implementation.

Results: Six main themes were identified that affected the implementation process: the personal and professional experiences of the general practitioners; the patient-doctor relationship; a perceived tension between primary and secondary care; general practitioners' feelings about their patients and the evidence; and logistical problems. Doctors are aware that their choice of words with patients can affect patients' decisions and whether evidence is implemented.

Conclusions: General practitioner participants seem to act as a conduit within the consultation and regard clinical evidence as a square peg to fit in the round hole of the patient's life. The process of implementation is complex, fluid, and adaptive.

查看原文本刊更多论文

全科医生为何不实施证据：定性研究。

目的探索全科医生并不总是采用最佳证据的原因：设计：采用巴林式小组进行定性研究：参与者：19 名全科医生19 名全科医生：主要结果测量：表明实施障碍的可识别主题：结果：确定了影响实施过程的六大主题：全科医生的个人和职业经历；病人与医生的关系；初级和二级医疗之间的紧张关系；全科医生对病人和证据的感受；以及后勤问题。医生们意识到，他们对病人的言语选择会影响病人的决定以及证据是否得到实施：全科医生似乎在咨询过程中充当了沟通者的角色，并将临床证据视为病人生活圆孔中的方钉。实施过程是复杂、多变和适应性的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Hypertension Research in Pregnancy OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-

自引率

50.00%

发文量