K Thorley1, R Haigh2, A Pearson2. 1. Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health Research, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK, kevanthorley@doctors.org.uk. 2. Peninsula Medical School, Plymouth, Devon PL6 8BU, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An audit of working age patients' records in two Cornish general practices in 2012 found infrequent and inconsistent recording of patients' occupations. A concurrent survey of general practitioners (GPs) in Cornwall found that a majority of them believed it was important to do so. AIMS: To review occupation recording in the same practices a year later and to audit a third practice, following the introduction of the electronic fit note. To repeat the survey of attitudes to recording occupation in GPs in Cornwall. METHODS: We manually checked 300 randomly selected patient records in Practice A and electronically searched all records of working age patients (aged 16-65 years) in Practices B and C for recorded occupation. We sent an electronic survey of attitudes to recording occupation to 202 GPs in Cornwall. RESULTS: Recording of occupation increased from 17 to 30% of records (χ(2) = 15, P < 0.001) in Practice A and from 12 to 14% (χ(2) = 16.5, P < 0.001) in Practice B. In Practice C, 1% of records had occupation recorded and coded. The proportion of GPs in Cornwall who said that it is important to records patients' occupation increased from 70 to 90% (Fisher's exact statistic 0.01, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Recording of patients' occupation increased in both practices from 2012 to 2013, but remains infrequent and inconsistent and the very low levels in a third practice not previously audited is of concern.
BACKGROUND: An audit of working age patients' records in two Cornish general practices in 2012 found infrequent and inconsistent recording of patients' occupations. A concurrent survey of general practitioners (GPs) in Cornwall found that a majority of them believed it was important to do so. AIMS: To review occupation recording in the same practices a year later and to audit a third practice, following the introduction of the electronic fit note. To repeat the survey of attitudes to recording occupation in GPs in Cornwall. METHODS: We manually checked 300 randomly selected patient records in Practice A and electronically searched all records of working age patients (aged 16-65 years) in Practices B and C for recorded occupation. We sent an electronic survey of attitudes to recording occupation to 202 GPs in Cornwall. RESULTS: Recording of occupation increased from 17 to 30% of records (χ(2) = 15, P < 0.001) in Practice A and from 12 to 14% (χ(2) = 16.5, P < 0.001) in Practice B. In Practice C, 1% of records had occupation recorded and coded. The proportion of GPs in Cornwall who said that it is important to records patients' occupation increased from 70 to 90% (Fisher's exact statistic 0.01, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Recording of patients' occupation increased in both practices from 2012 to 2013, but remains infrequent and inconsistent and the very low levels in a third practice not previously audited is of concern.
Authors: Cornelis A de Kock; Peter L B J Lucassen; Hans Bor; J André Knottnerus; Peter C Buijs; Romy Steenbeek; Antoine L M Lagro-Janssen Journal: Eur J Gen Pract Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 1.904