Duties of a doctor: UK doctors and good medical practice.

Quality in health care : QHC Pub Date : 2000-03-01
I C McManus, D Gordon, B C Winder
{"title":"Duties of a doctor: UK doctors and good medical practice.","authors":"I C McManus,&nbsp;D Gordon,&nbsp;B C Winder","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the responses of UK doctors to the General Medical Council's (GMC) Good Medical Practice and the Duties of a Doctor, and to the GMC's performance procedures for which they provide the professional underpinning.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Questionnaire study of a representative sample of UK doctors.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>794 UK doctors, stratified by year of qualification, sex, place of qualification (UK v non-UK), and type of practice (hospital v general practice) of whom 591/759 (78%) replied to the questionnaire (35 undelivered).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>A specially written questionnaire asking about awareness of Good Medical Practice, agreement with Duties of a Doctor, amount heard about the performance procedures, changes in own practice, awareness of cases perhaps requiring performance procedures, and attitudes to the performance procedures. Background measures of stress (General Health Questionnaire, GHQ-12), burnout, responses to uncertainty, and social desirability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most doctors were aware of Good Medical Practice, had heard the performance procedures being discussed or had received information about them, and agreed with the stated duties of a doctor, although some items to do with doctor-patient communication and attitudes were more controversial. Nearly half of the doctors had made or were contemplating some change in their practice because of the performance procedures; a third of doctors had come across a case in the previous two years in their own professional practice that they thought might merit the performance procedures. Attitudes towards the performance procedures were variable. On the positive side, 60% or more of doctors saw them as reassuring the general public, making it necessary for doctors to report deficient performance in their colleagues, did not think they would impair morale, were not principally window dressing, and were not only appropriate for problems of technical competence. On the negative side, 60% or more of doctors thought the performance procedures were not well understood by most doctors, were a reason for more defensive practice, and could not be used for problems of attitude. Few differences were found among older and younger doctors, hospital doctors, or general practitioners, or UK and non-UK graduates, although some differences were present.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most doctors working in the UK are aware of Good Medical Practice and the performance procedures, and are in broad sympathy with Duties of a Doctor. Many attitudes expressed by doctors are not positive, however, and provide areas where the GMC in particular may wish to encourage further discussion and awareness. The present results provide a good baseline for assessing changes as the performance procedures become active and cases come before the GMC over the next few years.</p>","PeriodicalId":20773,"journal":{"name":"Quality in health care : QHC","volume":"9 1","pages":"14-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1743494/pdf/v009p00014.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in health care : QHC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the responses of UK doctors to the General Medical Council's (GMC) Good Medical Practice and the Duties of a Doctor, and to the GMC's performance procedures for which they provide the professional underpinning.

Design: Questionnaire study of a representative sample of UK doctors.

Subjects: 794 UK doctors, stratified by year of qualification, sex, place of qualification (UK v non-UK), and type of practice (hospital v general practice) of whom 591/759 (78%) replied to the questionnaire (35 undelivered).

Main outcome measures: A specially written questionnaire asking about awareness of Good Medical Practice, agreement with Duties of a Doctor, amount heard about the performance procedures, changes in own practice, awareness of cases perhaps requiring performance procedures, and attitudes to the performance procedures. Background measures of stress (General Health Questionnaire, GHQ-12), burnout, responses to uncertainty, and social desirability.

Results: Most doctors were aware of Good Medical Practice, had heard the performance procedures being discussed or had received information about them, and agreed with the stated duties of a doctor, although some items to do with doctor-patient communication and attitudes were more controversial. Nearly half of the doctors had made or were contemplating some change in their practice because of the performance procedures; a third of doctors had come across a case in the previous two years in their own professional practice that they thought might merit the performance procedures. Attitudes towards the performance procedures were variable. On the positive side, 60% or more of doctors saw them as reassuring the general public, making it necessary for doctors to report deficient performance in their colleagues, did not think they would impair morale, were not principally window dressing, and were not only appropriate for problems of technical competence. On the negative side, 60% or more of doctors thought the performance procedures were not well understood by most doctors, were a reason for more defensive practice, and could not be used for problems of attitude. Few differences were found among older and younger doctors, hospital doctors, or general practitioners, or UK and non-UK graduates, although some differences were present.

Conclusions: Most doctors working in the UK are aware of Good Medical Practice and the performance procedures, and are in broad sympathy with Duties of a Doctor. Many attitudes expressed by doctors are not positive, however, and provide areas where the GMC in particular may wish to encourage further discussion and awareness. The present results provide a good baseline for assessing changes as the performance procedures become active and cases come before the GMC over the next few years.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医生的职责:英国医生和良好的医疗实践。
目的:评估英国医生对总医学委员会(GMC)良好医疗规范和医生职责的反应,以及他们提供专业基础的GMC绩效程序。设计:对具有代表性的英国医生样本进行问卷调查。受试者:794名英国医生,按资格年份、性别、资格地点(英国vs非英国)和执业类型(医院vs全科执业)进行分层,其中591/759人(78%)回答了问卷(35名未分娩)。主要结果测量:一份专门的书面问卷,询问对良好医疗规范的认识、对医生职责的同意、对履行程序的了解程度、自己执业的变化、对可能需要履行程序的病例的认识以及对履行程序的态度。背景测量压力(一般健康问卷,GHQ-12),倦怠,对不确定性的反应和社会期望。结果:大多数医生了解良好医疗规范,听说过正在讨论的履行程序或收到过有关信息,并同意医生所规定的职责,但一些与医患沟通和态度有关的项目争议较大。近一半的医生已经或正在考虑改变他们的做法,因为执行程序;在过去两年中,三分之一的医生在他们自己的专业实践中遇到过一个他们认为可能值得进行表演程序的病例。对执行程序的态度各不相同。从积极的方面来看,60%或更多的医生认为他们可以让公众放心,使医生有必要报告同事的不足之处,不认为他们会损害士气,主要不是装点门面,而且不仅适用于技术能力问题。在消极方面,60%或更多的医生认为大多数医生没有很好地理解表演程序,这是更多防御性练习的原因,并且不能用于态度问题。尽管存在一些差异,但在老年和年轻医生、医院医生、全科医生、英国和非英国毕业生之间几乎没有发现差异。结论:大多数在英国工作的医生都知道良好的医疗规范和执行程序,并且对医生的职责有广泛的同情。然而,医生们表达的许多态度并不积极,并提供了GMC特别希望鼓励进一步讨论和认识的领域。目前的结果为评估绩效程序的变化提供了一个很好的基线,因为在接下来的几年里,GMC会收到一些案例。
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:481959085
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