M André1, L Borgquist, S Mölstad. 1. Centre for Clinical Research, Nissers väg 3, 791 82 Falun, Sweden. Malin.Andre@ltdalarna.se
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rules of thumb used by GPs could be considered as empirical evidence of intuition and a link between science and practice in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to analyse the description of the application of rules of thumb with regard to different situations in general practice. METHODS: An explorative and descriptive study was started with focus group interviews. Four groups with 23 GPs were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed and analysed, and the rules and their application were classified by an editing analysis. RESULTS: A specific set of rules of thumb was used for rapid assessment, when emergency and psychosocial problems were identified. When the main focus of the problems was identified as somatic or psychosocial, the GPs did not disregard the other aspects but described the use of rules in a simultaneous individualizing and generalizing process. The rules contained probability reasoning and risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Rules of thumb seemed to serve as a link between theoretical knowledge and practical experience and were used by the GPs in an act of balance between the individual and the general perspective.
BACKGROUND: Rules of thumb used by GPs could be considered as empirical evidence of intuition and a link between science and practice in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to analyse the description of the application of rules of thumb with regard to different situations in general practice. METHODS: An explorative and descriptive study was started with focus group interviews. Four groups with 23 GPs were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed and analysed, and the rules and their application were classified by an editing analysis. RESULTS: A specific set of rules of thumb was used for rapid assessment, when emergency and psychosocial problems were identified. When the main focus of the problems was identified as somatic or psychosocial, the GPs did not disregard the other aspects but described the use of rules in a simultaneous individualizing and generalizing process. The rules contained probability reasoning and risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Rules of thumb seemed to serve as a link between theoretical knowledge and practical experience and were used by the GPs in an act of balance between the individual and the general perspective.
Authors: Emily A Elstad; Karen E Lutfey; Lisa D Marceau; Stephen M Campbell; Olaf von dem Knesebeck; John B McKinlay Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2010-03-10 Impact factor: 4.634