Perceptions of good medical practice in the NHS: a survey of senior health professionals.

A Hutchinson, M Williams, K Meadows, R S Barbour, R Jones
{"title":"Perceptions of good medical practice in the NHS: a survey of senior health professionals.","authors":"A Hutchinson,&nbsp;M Williams,&nbsp;K Meadows,&nbsp;R S Barbour,&nbsp;R Jones","doi":"10.1136/qshc.8.4.213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To categorize senior health professionals' experience with poor medical practice in hospitals and in general practice, to describe perceptions which senior NHS staff have of good medical practice, and to describe how problems of poor medical practice are currently managed.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A postal questionnaire survey. The questionnaire sought perceptions of good medical practice, asked participants to characterise deviations from good practice, and to describe experience with managing poor performance at the time of the introduction of the General Medical Council (GMC) performance procedures.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A range of NHS settings in the UK: hospital trusts, health authorities/boards, local medical committees, community health councils.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Senior health professionals involved in the management of medical professional performance.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Perceptions of what constitutes good medical practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most respondents considered that persistent problems related to clinical practice (diagnosis, management, and outcome and prescribing) would require local management and, possibly, referral to the GMC performance procedures. Informal mechanisms, including informal discussion, education, training, and work shifting, were the most usual means of handling a doctor whose performance was poor. Many took a less serious view of deficiencies in performance on manner and attitude and communication, although consultation skills rather than technical skills comprised the greatest number of complaints about doctors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Senior NHS professionals seem reluctant to consider persistently poor consultation skills in the same critical light as they do persistently poor technical practice. These attitudes may need to change with the implementation of clinical governance and updated guidance from the GMC on what constitutes good medical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":20773,"journal":{"name":"Quality in health care : QHC","volume":"8 4","pages":"213-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.4.213","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in health care : QHC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.4.213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Objectives: To categorize senior health professionals' experience with poor medical practice in hospitals and in general practice, to describe perceptions which senior NHS staff have of good medical practice, and to describe how problems of poor medical practice are currently managed.

Design: A postal questionnaire survey. The questionnaire sought perceptions of good medical practice, asked participants to characterise deviations from good practice, and to describe experience with managing poor performance at the time of the introduction of the General Medical Council (GMC) performance procedures.

Setting: A range of NHS settings in the UK: hospital trusts, health authorities/boards, local medical committees, community health councils.

Subjects: Senior health professionals involved in the management of medical professional performance.

Main measures: Perceptions of what constitutes good medical practice.

Results: Most respondents considered that persistent problems related to clinical practice (diagnosis, management, and outcome and prescribing) would require local management and, possibly, referral to the GMC performance procedures. Informal mechanisms, including informal discussion, education, training, and work shifting, were the most usual means of handling a doctor whose performance was poor. Many took a less serious view of deficiencies in performance on manner and attitude and communication, although consultation skills rather than technical skills comprised the greatest number of complaints about doctors.

Conclusions: Senior NHS professionals seem reluctant to consider persistently poor consultation skills in the same critical light as they do persistently poor technical practice. These attitudes may need to change with the implementation of clinical governance and updated guidance from the GMC on what constitutes good medical practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国民保健制度中对良好医疗实践的看法:对高级卫生专业人员的调查。
目的:对高级卫生专业人员在医院和一般实践中不良医疗实践的经验进行分类,描述高级NHS工作人员对良好医疗实践的看法,并描述目前如何管理不良医疗实践的问题。设计:邮寄问卷调查。调查问卷寻求对良好医疗实践的看法,要求参与者描述偏离良好实践的特征,并描述在引入医学总委员会绩效程序时管理不良绩效的经验。环境:联合王国的一系列国民保健制度环境:医院信托、卫生当局/委员会、地方医疗委员会、社区卫生理事会。研究对象:高级卫生专业人员参与医疗专业绩效管理。主要措施:对什么是良好医疗做法的认识。结果:大多数受访者认为,与临床实践(诊断、管理、结果和处方)相关的持续问题需要当地管理,并可能转介到GMC绩效程序。非正式机制,包括非正式讨论、教育、培训和工作轮班,是处理表现不佳的医生最常用的手段。尽管对医生的投诉最多的是咨询技能而不是技术技能,但许多人对医生在态度、态度和沟通方面的表现不那么重视。结论:高级NHS专业人员似乎不愿意考虑持续较差的咨询技能在相同的关键光,因为他们做持续较差的技术实践。这些态度可能需要随着临床治理的实施和GMC关于什么是良好医疗实践的最新指导而改变。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Engaging patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery and public health. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Preferences and understanding their effects on health. Evidence-based patient empowerment. Performance management at the crossroads in the NHS: don't go into the red.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1