-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Theoretical frameworks provide generalised accounts of illness action although empirical studies of the process are still in short supply. This study of upper limb pain provided a case study of illness action; as it is a common condition, there is uncertainty about its treatment and management, orthodox and non-orthodox care are seen as legitimate sources of help and it is linked with a range of causes. Face-to-face informal interviews were carried out with 47 informants with upper limb pain and their practitioners (n= 19). The data were analysed in two different ways. The general stages of the illness action process were identified through a descriptive analysis of the upper limb pain sufferers' accounts and the policies and practices reported by their practitioners. Then, case studies were constructed to depict individual pathways through healthcare and consequences for sufferers. The illness action process was characterised by the normalisation and accommodation of pain informed by a discourse that predominantly invoked ageing and the wear and tear of the body. Practitioners also preferred to adopt a biomechanical approach and were reluctant to attribute psychosocial labels. The case studies illustrated the divergent, negotiated and opportunistic nature of the process and showed that the use of both orthodox and non-orthodox care formed only part of strategies used to manage upper limb pain. Sufferers evaluated the care they received in terms of pain alleviation, and were resigned to searching for the best way of living with their pain.
Sociology of Health & Illness 05/2007; 29(3):321-46. · 1.88 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Beliefs and mental well-being could influence decisions to consult about upper limb pain and satisfaction with care.
To describe beliefs about upper limb pain in the community and explore associations of beliefs and mental health with consulting and dissatisfaction.
Questionnaires were mailed to 4998 randomly chosen working-aged patients from general practices in Avon. We asked about upper limb pain, consulting, beliefs about symptoms, dissatisfaction with care, somatizing tendency (using elements of the Brief Symptom Inventory) and mental well-being (using the Short-Form 36). Associations were explored by logistic regression.
Among 2632 responders, 1271 reported arm pain during the past 12 months, including 389 consulters. A third or more of responders felt that arm pain sufferers should avoid physical activity, that problems would persist beyond 3 months, that a doctor should be seen straightaway and that neglect could lead to permanent harm. Consulters were significantly more likely to agree with these statements than other upper limb pain sufferers. The proportion of consultations attributable to such beliefs was substantial. Dissatisfaction with care was commoner in those with poor mental health: the OR for being dissatisfied (worst versus best third of the distribution) was 3.2 (95% CI 1.2-8.5) for somatizing tendency and 2.4 (95% CI 1.3-4.7) for SF-36 score. Both factors were associated with dissatisfaction about doctors' sympathy, communication and care in examining.
Negative beliefs about upper limb pain are common and associated with consulting. Somatizers and those in poorer mental health tend, subsequently, to feel dissatisfied with care.
Family Practice 01/2007; 23(6):609-17. · 1.50 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The uncertainty about the status of upper limb disorders (ULDs), particularly the non-specific conditions, is believed to have consequences for clinical management and patient care.
This paper presents evidence about how sufferers with ULDs respond to their pain, how their pain is managed, when and who they go to for formal help and how sufferers evaluate the care they receive.
The data analysis is derived from face-to-face, informal interviews with sufferers with a broad spectrum of upper limb disorders (n = 47). These informants were selected according to strict criteria from a 'screening' postal survey of the working population (25-64 years) in south-west England (n = 2781).
Ideas about causation were crucial to understanding patterns of illness action and help seeking behaviour. The common strategy was to wait and see what happens as the pain was believed to be a natural part of the ageing process. Explanations invoking psychosocial and work related causes were less common and tended to be used when biomechanical explanations were no longer appropriate. Self-management was the preferred strategy but orthodox practitioners were usually the first choice for formal care. Complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) were popular but were used to complement orthodox care. Practitioners were evaluated mainly in terms of their ability to alleviate pain.
There is a need for orthodox and non-orthodox care to be closely integrated in primary care and GPs should not depend on orthodox medications alone when caring for patients with upper limb pain.
Family Practice 03/2006; 23(1):91-105. · 1.50 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is considerable uncertainty over the diagnosis, treatment and management of upper limb pain, which has implications for patient care. Research into patient experiences and evaluation of health-care has been neglected and the study presented here aims to fill this gap.
A two-staged, mixed methodology was adopted. Phase 1 involved a postal survey of a random sample (n = 2781) of the working age population (25-64) of an area in south-west England. Phase 2 consisted of follow-up, informal face-to-face interviews with a purposive sample of 47 informants identified, according to pre-defined criteria, from the survey sample.
Our data showed that concerns about the effectiveness of treatments for alleviating pain were fundamental to users' evaluations of both orthodox and non-orthodox health-care. This took priority over the need for a diagnosis and other information. There was a general recognition that the treatments available were, at least, only partially effective and the pragmatic approach led some to eventually withdraw from both orthodox care and complementary and alternative medicines (CAM).
Patients' priorities for health-care, in this context, were perceived to involve the provision of treatments which alleviated pain and were safe and painless. Orthodox and non-orthodox care needed to be more closely integrated into primary care services.
Health Expectations 07/2005; 8(2):149-60. · 2.32 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: General practitioner (GP) prescribing accounts for about 10% of NHS expenditure. GPs at the top of the range have annual prescribing costs that are almost twice as much as those at the bottom of the range. This variation cannot be accounted for purely in terms of differences in underlying need for health care.
To describe the relationship between GPs' prescribing costs and their attitudes towards prescribing decisions and prescribing information sources, and to identify potentially modifiable attitudinal and behavioural factors associated with high cost prescribing.
A postal questionnaire was designed on the basis of hypotheses developed from a literature search and an earlier qualitative survey. This questionnaire was sent to a national sample of GPs with equal numbers of practices in the upper, middle, and lowest quintile of prescribing costs.
GP practices in England.
1714 GPs in NHS practice.
GPs' self-reported practices, attitudes and personal characteristics.
There was a 64% response rate. Responders were more likely to be from larger practices, in less deprived areas, and with lower prescribing costs than were non-responders. Multivariable analysis showed that GPs with high prescribing costs were significantly more likely to work in dispensing practices, in practices with low income populations, in single handed practices, and in practices without a GP trainer. They were also significantly more likely to see drug company representatives more frequently, to prescribe newly available drugs more freely, to prescribe more readily to patients who expect a prescription, to report high levels of frustration from lack of time in the consultation, to find unsatisfactory those consultations which ended in advice only, and to express dissatisfaction with their review methods for repeat prescribing. They were significantly less likely to find useful criticism of prescribing habits by colleagues, and to check the BNF rather than other sources when uncertain about an aspect of drug treatment.
While they cannot be held to have a causal relationship, the pattern of attitudes towards prescribing of GPs in the highest quintile of prescribing costs provide the basis for developing an educational intervention which may be an acceptable method of modifying the attitudes of GPs and consequently reducing their prescribing costs.
Quality and Safety in Health Care 03/2003; 12(1):29-34. · 1.68 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Inappropriate prescribing has the potential to harm both the individual and society. Previous research has identified doctor or demographic characteristics that influence prescribing variation but which were not amenable to change.
To identify modifiable factors associated with GP prescribing variance and cost.
Qualitative research methods were used in semi-structured taped interviews with 17 GPs in Avon, South West NHS Region, UK.
GPs considered themselves cautious and conservative prescribers. Prescribing decisions often were justified by the prescriber, despite conflicting clinical or cost arguments. A personally developed drug formulary was used to reduce dilemmas potentially associated with prescribing uncertainty. Willingness to reflect upon, and measure, prescribing habits against set professional standards varied considerably. The absence of monitoring mechanisms of prescribing decisions, coupled with under utilization of the community pharmacist, resulted in uncertain prescribing outcomes. Some GPs found it difficult to keep up to date professionally due to perceived time constraints. Excessive patient demand was considered to influence their prescribing, but GPs stated that they were not unduly influenced by the drug representative.
Prescribing makes a considerable impact on health and budgets and yet remains a contentious issue. Improved partnerships between patient, doctor and pharmacist must be established. Better prescribing decision monitoring and support through policy development and educational intervention is needed to reduce prescribing uncertainty. Newly established Primary Care Groups may need to reflect upon the difficulties facing prescribers, particularly when prescribing within cash-limited budgets, to avoid discord between prescribing behaviour and local policy development.
Family Practice 03/2000; 17(1):36-41. · 1.50 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study documents the extent of reported computer use by general practitioners (GPs) in consultations with patients, and identifies barriers to their use. There was a 65% response rate from a random sample of 600 GPs in the South and West National Health Service (NHS) region who were sent a questionnaire. Ninety-one per cent (357) had a desktop computer terminal in their consulting rooms. Of these, 98% used the computer to look up information or prescribe medication, 75% entered details about selected problems presented by patients, and 36% entered information about the patient's presenting problem at every consultation. Only 18% used computers to access reference information. Use of the computer for anything other than looking up patient information or prescribing was positively associated with fundholding status and use of a personal computer at home, and was independent of number of years in practice. Sixty-five per cent of responders had positive attitudes to the inclusion of management guidelines on the computer software, and 45% of responders held positive views towards the idea of integrating management guidelines with the patient's personal computerized medical record. Consideration should be given to targeting training at those GPs who appear to be reluctant to use computers during the consultation.
British Journal of General Practice 06/1999; 49(442):381-3. · 1.83 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is concern about the apparent lack of uptake of management and referral guideline information by general practitioners (GPs) in their day-to-day consultations with patients. Little is understood about the barriers to the uptake of guidelines as perceived by GPs.
To explore how GPs gain access to and use guidelines, including computer-based guidelines, in day-to-day consultations with their patients; and to identify the perceived problems and barriers to the use of guidelines in such situations.
Postal questionnaires enquiring about the practices and attitudes towards the use of guidelines in general practice were completed by 391 of 600 randomly selected GPs in the South and West NHS region.
GPs found guidelines a useful method of accessing expert information. Key factors in their uptake were brevity, an authoritative and unbiased source of evidence, and resonance with the GP's usual practices; they also needed to be flexible enough to incorporate individual viewpoints. Guidelines were perceived as being valuable to enable safe delegation of care to other health professionals and for sharing decision-making with patients. Dissemination of guidelines through the medium of computers was acceptable to the majority of GPs. Virtually all (93%) responders reported adapting guidelines to the needs of individual patients. Older GPs from non-fundholding practices were least likely to show a positive attitude towards guidelines.
In principle, there is a very positive attitude towards the use of guidelines in general practice. However, those developing guidelines for use by GPs in the consulting room need to be aware of the factors that facilitate their use in practice. Educational strategies aimed at increasing the use of guidelines need to take into account the significant proportion who show negative attitudes towards guidelines, whose characteristics have been identified in this study.
British Journal of General Practice 02/1999; 49(438):11-5. · 1.83 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Concern about the inadequate take-up of guidelines in general practice has concentrated on problems arising from the process of their development and implementation. However, these perspectives fail to take account of the needs, attitudes and problems of GPs themselves. In this study we aimed to identify barriers to the use of guidelines and opportunities for tackling them, from the point of view of the GP, so that future guideline development and policy could be more sensitive to the needs of GPs in the environment in which they work.
Twenty in-depth semi-structured interviews were audiotaped with GPs from within the Avon Health Authority area, representing GPs with different backgrounds and working environments. The transcribed data collected were analysed using a grounded theory approach.
Utilization of guideline information is complex. GPs' appraisals of the value of guidelines interact with prior knowledge and beliefs, practicalities of existing information storage and retrieval systems, and individual working practices. Conditions where guidelines are most likely to be referred to may be those either very rarely or very commonly presenting in general practice. Key issues for the uptake of guidelines in the consultation are: general preference for certain formats of presentation; reputability and ownership; use of guidelines in shared decision-making; scope for computer-based systems; and GPs' attitudes to time pressures on information-seeking in relation to tolerance of uncertainty.
Local initiatives might usefully explore the possibilities of supporting development of guideline-retrieval systems customized for individual GPs or practices. Novel means of stimulating 'ownership' and demonstrating reputability should be sought. The analysis provides a framework for understanding the complexities of the processes of GPs' use of guidelines in practice which can be useful in explaining the results of trials of guideline effectiveness. Guideline implementation occurs in the context of conflicting pressures for clinical autonomy and professional standardization and quality improvement.
Family Practice 05/1998; 15(2):105-11. · 1.50 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: General practitioner (GP) prescribing accounts for about 10% of NHS expenditure. GPs at the top of the range have annual prescribing costs that are almost twice as much as those at the bottom of the range. This variation cannot be accounted for purely in terms of differences in underlying need for health care.
Qual Saf Health Care. 12(1):29-34.
