• BMJ · Oct 1989

    Comparative Study

    Consultations in general practice: a comparison of patients' and doctors' satisfaction.

    • A Rashid, W Forman, C Jagger, and R Mann.
    • St Matthew's Medical Centre, Leicester.
    • BMJ. 1989 Oct 21; 299 (6706): 1015-6.

    ObjectiveTo provide an objective means of assessing patients' and doctors' satisfaction with a consultation.DesignQuestionnaire study of patients and general practitioners after consultations.SettingUrban general practice.Subjects250 Patients attending consecutive consultations conducted by five general practitioners.Main Outcome MeasureIdentification of deficiencies within a consultation as perceived by both doctors and patients.ResultsThe doctor's and patient's questionnaires for each consultation were matched and the results analysed on a group basis. The response rate for individual questions was high (81-89%). The doctors and patients significantly disagreed about the doctors' ability to assess and put patients at ease, to offer explanations and advice on treatment, and to allow expression of emotional feelings and about the overall benefit that the patients gained from the consultation. In all cases of disagreement the doctor had a more negative view of the consultation than the patient.ConclusionsThe results of giving structured questionnaires on consultations to both patients and doctors could be a useful teaching tool for established doctors or those in training to improve the quality and sensitivity of care they provide.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…