Question time.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review surveys of clinicians' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, HealthStar, Embase and CINAHL were searched electronically for English-only surveys published from 1990 to 2000. STUDY SELECTION: We included surveys with responses to one or more of seven propositions (see below). Studies were excluded if they had fewer than 100 respondents or if the response rate was less than 60%. RESULTS: Thirty studies included responses to one or more of the seven items, giving a total of 11 611 responses. The response rate for the included studies was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69%-75%). Clinicians agreed that guidelines were helpful sources of advice (weighted mean, 75%; 66%-83%), good educational tools (71%; 63%-79%) and intended to improve quality (70%; 60%-80%). However, clinicians also considered guidelines impractical and too rigid to apply to individual patients (30%; 23%-36%), that they reduced physician autonomy and oversimplified medicine (34%; 22%-47%), would increase litigation (41%; 32%-49%) and were intended to cut healthcare costs (52.8%; 39%-66%). CONCLUSIONS: Surveys of healthcare providers consistently report high satisfaction with clinical practice guidelines and a belief that they will improve quality, but there are concerns about the practicality of guidelines, their role in cost-cutting and their potential for increasing litigation.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2002

[Patients and quality of primary health care services. Survey of practitioners at the Bahía de Cádiz and La Janda health centers].

AIM: To report the opinions of practitioners at health centers on dimensions of quality that affect user satisfaction. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of focus groups (FG). SETTING: Bahía de Cádiz and La Janda health centers in southwestern Spain. PARTICIPANTS: We studied 4 FG whose participants were staff members of the two health centers: FG1, physicians; FG2, user satisfaction service staff; FG3, social workers; FG4, nurses. The groups were based on the different functions of staff at the two centers. METHOD: The analysis was based on variables in the SERCAL model (an adaptation of the SERVQUAL model for the Spanish health care system) of opinions regarding service quality: access, comfort (tangibles), personalized service (courtesy), competence, and loyalty. The data were analyzed with version N-Vivo of the NUDIST program. RESULTS: All dimensions of the theoretical model were identified by practitioners as constructs of users' perceptions of service quality. Users' and practitioners' views contrasted with and complemented each other to generate a model that could be validated. Access, personalized service and problem-solving (responsiveness) were key variables. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners' opinions provided information of use in improving the quality model. Differences in opinion between users and practitioners merit further study based on an understanding of these groups' values and interests, and on the care provision context. Practitioners identified access, personalized service and problem-solving as features that influenced users' opinions of the quality of the health center.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗