BACKGROUND: A general practice-based hormone replacement therapy clinic was set up in one practice following the introduction of the 1990 contract for general practitioners. The funding for this clinic was withdrawn in 1993. AIM: A study was undertaken to measure reported satisfaction with care among women receiving hormone replacement therapy in the dedicated clinic and among those receiving treatment in normal general practice consultations. METHOD: Questionnaires were sent to all women in the practice who were currently using or who had used hormone replacement therapy in the last 12 months. The questionnaire sought biographical details, and asked whether the women had had a hysterectomy, and whether they attended the clinic for their hormone replacement therapy. Women's satisfaction with their care was assessed by scoring 12 statements using a five-point Likert-type scale. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty seven women replied (80%), of whom 60% had attended the practice's clinic. Analysis of the ratings of the 12 statements revealed a significant difference between those attending the clinic for their hormone replacement therapy and those attending normal general practice consultations, suggesting that those attending the clinic rated their care more highly than those who received their hormone replacement therapy from elsewhere in the practice. CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction with care was higher among women who attended the hormone replacement therapy clinic than among those who did not. Possible reasons for this difference are discussed. Research in other practices may determine whether this finding is more widespread. General practitioners are having to balance the short- and long-term benefits of running such clinics against the resources available for them. Information about measurable benefits, such as patient satisfaction, might help with future decisions about the organization of care within general practice.
BACKGROUND: A general practice-based hormone replacement therapy clinic was set up in one practice following the introduction of the 1990 contract for general practitioners. The funding for this clinic was withdrawn in 1993. AIM: A study was undertaken to measure reported satisfaction with care among women receiving hormone replacement therapy in the dedicated clinic and among those receiving treatment in normal general practice consultations. METHOD: Questionnaires were sent to all women in the practice who were currently using or who had used hormone replacement therapy in the last 12 months. The questionnaire sought biographical details, and asked whether the women had had a hysterectomy, and whether they attended the clinic for their hormone replacement therapy. Women's satisfaction with their care was assessed by scoring 12 statements using a five-point Likert-type scale. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty seven women replied (80%), of whom 60% had attended the practice's clinic. Analysis of the ratings of the 12 statements revealed a significant difference between those attending the clinic for their hormone replacement therapy and those attending normal general practice consultations, suggesting that those attending the clinic rated their care more highly than those who received their hormone replacement therapy from elsewhere in the practice. CONCLUSION:Patient satisfaction with care was higher among women who attended the hormone replacement therapy clinic than among those who did not. Possible reasons for this difference are discussed. Research in other practices may determine whether this finding is more widespread. General practitioners are having to balance the short- and long-term benefits of running such clinics against the resources available for them. Information about measurable benefits, such as patient satisfaction, might help with future decisions about the organization of care within general practice.