PubMed · 14044281
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R M ACHESON. 1963-08-17. MULTIPLE SCREENING.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(63)93017-4
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
In health care settings, individuals from different disciplines come together to care for patients. Although these groups of health care personnel are generally called teams, they need to earn true team status by demonstrating teamwork. Developing health care teams requires attention to 2 central questions: who is on the team and how do team members work together? This article chiefly focuses on the second question. Cohesive health care teams have 5 key characteristics: clear goals with measurable outcomes, clinical and administrative systems, division of labor, training of all team members, and effective communication. Two organizations are described that demonstrate these components: a private primary care practice in Bangor, Me, and Kaiser Permanente's Georgia region primary care sites. Research on patient care teams suggests that teams with greater cohesiveness are associated with better clinical outcome measures and higher patient satisfaction. In addition, medical settings in which physicians and nonphysician professionals work together as teams can demonstrate improved patient outcomes. A number of barriers to team formation exist, chiefly related to the challenges of human relationships and personalities. Taking small steps toward team development may improve the work environment in primary care practices.
BACKGROUND: The main objective was to compare patient satisfaction in general practice before and after the introduction of a list patient system for general practitioners (GPs) in Norway in 2001. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Postal survey sent to a random sample of inhabitants in Northern and Eastern Norway. A total of 1133 questionnaires from 2000 and 1141 from 2003 were included in the analysis (58% of the sample). RESULTS: From 2000 to 2003 there was a significant increase in the amount of respondents who answered that they were confident to get help if needed, and fewer reported unsuccessful attempts to contact a GP on the phone. Respondents were increasingly very satisfied with most aspects of the doctor-patient relationship and overall satisfaction also improved. We found a reduced proportion of very satisfied respondents in relation to some accessibility aspects. INTERPRETATION: The changes may be interpreted as changes in the quality and accessibility of services and as an expression of changes in expectations to and confidence in the system as a whole. If the changes are related to the new list patient system, it seems to be more successful with regard to quality than to accessibility.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.