PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8792498

The third party in general practice consultations.

M Granek·M Weingarten
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of outside agents in doctor-patient consultations. DESIGN: In-depth group discussions with psychoanalytically oriented leadership. SETTING: A Balint group which met weekly for two years. SUBJECTS: 15 senior general practitioners with an interest in teaching. FINDINGS: Outside agents are almost invariably present in general practice consultations. The "third party" in the consultation fitted four separate categories according to its helpful or disturbing, real or projected characteristics. CONCLUSION: The dyadic nature of general practice consultations is illusory. The third party is an inherent component of the consultation and may be used consciously to gain extra insight into the needs of patients and their doctors.

Explore related subjects

ConsultantsCountertransferenceFamily PracticeHumansInterprofessional RelationsPhysician-Patient RelationsPhysicians, FamilyPsychoanalytic TherapySelf-Help GroupsTransference, PsychologyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Granek, M Weingarten. 1996. The third party in general practice consultations.. https://doi.org/10.3109/02813439608997073

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends.

AIM: To evaluate current clinical practice in the UK in the management of the anophthalmic socket; choice of enucleation, evisceration, type of orbital implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. METHODS: All consultant ophthalmologists in the UK were surveyed by postal questionnaire. Questions included their practice subspecialty and number of enucleations and eviscerations performed in 2003. Specific questions addressed choice of implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. RESULTS: 456/896 (51%) consultants responded, of which 162 (35%) had a specific interest in oculoplastics, lacrimal, orbits or oncology. Only 243/456 (53%) did enucleations or eviscerations. 92% inserted an orbital implant after primary enucleation, 69% after non-endophthalmitis evisceration, whereas only 43% did so after evisceration for endophthalmitis (50% as a delayed procedure). 55% used porous orbital implants (porous polyethylene, hydroxyapatite or alumina) as their first choice and 42% used acrylic. Most implants inserted were spherical, sized 18-20 mm in diameter. 57% wrapped the implant after enucleation, using salvaged autogenous sclera (20%), donor sclera (28%) and synthetic Vicryl or Mersilene mesh (42%). A minority (7%) placed motility pegs in selected cases, usually as a secondary procedure. 14% of respondents reported implant exposure for each type of procedure and extrusion was reported by 4% after enucleation and 3% after evisceration. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights contemporary anophthalmic socket practice in the UK. Most surgeons use porous orbital implants with a synthetic wrap after enucleation and only few perform motility pegging.

Consultants↗