BACKGROUND: In 1989, a shared or integrated care scheme was developed for hospital outpatients with asthma, using the computerized patient record system of Grampian Health Board, Scotland. Patients with asthma attending hospital clinics were entered into this scheme and were invited to attend their general practitioner instead of an outpatient clinic for review of their asthma. Three-monthly questionnaires covering clinical aspects of asthma were sent to these patients and their general practitioners; the latter then returned them to the specialist. Patients could be recalled to the hospital clinic if either the general practitioner or consultant felt this was necessary and all patients were reviewed after one year by the specialist. The success of integrated care for patients with asthma relies on the cooperation of general practitioners. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate how this scheme worked in general practice, and general practitioners' perceptions of it, in order to identify factors that enhance or inhibit integrated care for patients with asthma in general practice. METHOD: A qualitative survey was carried out with a random, stratified sample of 38 of the 317 general practitioners in the region. Semi-structured interviews were designed to elicit general practitioners' accounts of their operation of integrated care and their attitudes towards the scheme. RESULTS: General practitioners perceived the scheme to have several advantages: the continuity and quality of care provided was improved; and the transmission of information between general practitioner and specialist was enhanced. Regular general practitioner reviews, instigated by standard letters generated by computer, were favoured as being clearly structured. Concerns were raised about the processing of paperwork, and the possibility that unnecessary reviews might be generated. CONCLUSION: Integrated care for asthma patients is an acceptable management option among general practitioners.
BACKGROUND: In 1989, a shared or integrated care scheme was developed for hospital outpatients with asthma, using the computerized patient record system of Grampian Health Board, Scotland. Patients with asthma attending hospital clinics were entered into this scheme and were invited to attend their general practitioner instead of an outpatient clinic for review of their asthma. Three-monthly questionnaires covering clinical aspects of asthma were sent to these patients and their general practitioners; the latter then returned them to the specialist. Patients could be recalled to the hospital clinic if either the general practitioner or consultant felt this was necessary and all patients were reviewed after one year by the specialist. The success of integrated care for patients with asthma relies on the cooperation of general practitioners. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate how this scheme worked in general practice, and general practitioners' perceptions of it, in order to identify factors that enhance or inhibit integrated care for patients with asthma in general practice. METHOD: A qualitative survey was carried out with a random, stratified sample of 38 of the 317 general practitioners in the region. Semi-structured interviews were designed to elicit general practitioners' accounts of their operation of integrated care and their attitudes towards the scheme. RESULTS: General practitioners perceived the scheme to have several advantages: the continuity and quality of care provided was improved; and the transmission of information between general practitioner and specialist was enhanced. Regular general practitioner reviews, instigated by standard letters generated by computer, were favoured as being clearly structured. Concerns were raised about the processing of paperwork, and the possibility that unnecessary reviews might be generated. CONCLUSION: Integrated care for asthmapatients is an acceptable management option among general practitioners.
Authors: Sarah Hewlett; John Kirwan; Jon Pollock; Kathryn Mitchell; Maggie Hehir; Peter S Blair; David Memel; Mark G Perry Journal: BMJ Date: 2004-11-16
Authors: Annette J Berendsen; Wim H G M Benneker; Betty Meyboom-de Jong; Niek S Klazinga; Jan Schuling Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2007-01-05 Impact factor: 2.655