Relationship continuity

When and why do primary care patients think it is safer?

Penny Rhodes, Caroline Sanders, Stephen Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Doctor–patient continuity is popular with patients and practitioners, and is associated with better outcomes; however, changes in policy and practice organisation have diminished its scope. Although there has been some discussion of safety implications from professionals’ perspective, patients’ views remain largely unexplored. Aim: To explore patients’ understanding of safety in primary care. Design and setting An interview-based study with patients from general practices in the northwest of England. Method: Patients were recruited from five general practices through patient participation groups and posters in waiting rooms, with further participants recruited through snowballing techniques until no new themes emerged. In-depth interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Anonymised transcripts were coded and analysed inductively. Emergent themes were discussed by the team. Results: For patients, relationship continuity was not simply a matter of service quality but an important safety concern that offered greater psychosocial security than consultations with unfamiliar GPs. Relationship continuity enabled the GP to become a repository of information; acquire specialist knowledge of a patient’s condition; become familiar with the patient’s consulting behaviour; provide holistic care; and foster the development of trust. Patients were also aware of the risks: a false sense of security and lack of a fresh perspective. Their desire for continuity varied with the nature of their concerns, psychological vulnerability, and perception of GPs’ qualities and skills. No one supported a return to imposed continuity. Conclusion: Relationship continuity and choice of GP were important safety strategies, neither of which is adequately supported by recent policy changes.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)758-764
Number of pages7
JournalBritish Journal of General Practice
Volume64
Issue number629
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Primary Health Care
Safety
General Practice
Interviews
Patient Participation
Posters
Patient Safety
England
Referral and Consultation
Organizations
Psychology

Cite this

Rhodes, Penny ; Sanders, Caroline ; Campbell, Stephen. / Relationship continuity : When and why do primary care patients think it is safer?. In: British Journal of General Practice. 2014 ; Vol. 64, No. 629. pp. 758-764.
@article{c3aa67e957544848a6dd7b61d1708519,
title = "Relationship continuity: When and why do primary care patients think it is safer?",
abstract = "Background: Doctor–patient continuity is popular with patients and practitioners, and is associated with better outcomes; however, changes in policy and practice organisation have diminished its scope. Although there has been some discussion of safety implications from professionals’ perspective, patients’ views remain largely unexplored. Aim: To explore patients’ understanding of safety in primary care. Design and setting An interview-based study with patients from general practices in the northwest of England. Method: Patients were recruited from five general practices through patient participation groups and posters in waiting rooms, with further participants recruited through snowballing techniques until no new themes emerged. In-depth interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Anonymised transcripts were coded and analysed inductively. Emergent themes were discussed by the team. Results: For patients, relationship continuity was not simply a matter of service quality but an important safety concern that offered greater psychosocial security than consultations with unfamiliar GPs. Relationship continuity enabled the GP to become a repository of information; acquire specialist knowledge of a patient’s condition; become familiar with the patient’s consulting behaviour; provide holistic care; and foster the development of trust. Patients were also aware of the risks: a false sense of security and lack of a fresh perspective. Their desire for continuity varied with the nature of their concerns, psychological vulnerability, and perception of GPs’ qualities and skills. No one supported a return to imposed continuity. Conclusion: Relationship continuity and choice of GP were important safety strategies, neither of which is adequately supported by recent policy changes.",
keywords = "General practice, Patient safety, Patients' perceptions, Primary care, Systems, Trust",
author = "Penny Rhodes and Caroline Sanders and Stephen Campbell",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
doi = "10.3399/bjgp14X682825",
language = "English",
volume = "64",
pages = "758--764",
journal = "Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners",
issn = "0960-1643",
publisher = "Royal College of General Practitioners",
number = "629",

}

Relationship continuity : When and why do primary care patients think it is safer? / Rhodes, Penny; Sanders, Caroline; Campbell, Stephen.

In: British Journal of General Practice, Vol. 64, No. 629, 12.2014, p. 758-764.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relationship continuity

T2 - When and why do primary care patients think it is safer?

AU - Rhodes, Penny

AU - Sanders, Caroline

AU - Campbell, Stephen

PY - 2014/12

Y1 - 2014/12

N2 - Background: Doctor–patient continuity is popular with patients and practitioners, and is associated with better outcomes; however, changes in policy and practice organisation have diminished its scope. Although there has been some discussion of safety implications from professionals’ perspective, patients’ views remain largely unexplored. Aim: To explore patients’ understanding of safety in primary care. Design and setting An interview-based study with patients from general practices in the northwest of England. Method: Patients were recruited from five general practices through patient participation groups and posters in waiting rooms, with further participants recruited through snowballing techniques until no new themes emerged. In-depth interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Anonymised transcripts were coded and analysed inductively. Emergent themes were discussed by the team. Results: For patients, relationship continuity was not simply a matter of service quality but an important safety concern that offered greater psychosocial security than consultations with unfamiliar GPs. Relationship continuity enabled the GP to become a repository of information; acquire specialist knowledge of a patient’s condition; become familiar with the patient’s consulting behaviour; provide holistic care; and foster the development of trust. Patients were also aware of the risks: a false sense of security and lack of a fresh perspective. Their desire for continuity varied with the nature of their concerns, psychological vulnerability, and perception of GPs’ qualities and skills. No one supported a return to imposed continuity. Conclusion: Relationship continuity and choice of GP were important safety strategies, neither of which is adequately supported by recent policy changes.

AB - Background: Doctor–patient continuity is popular with patients and practitioners, and is associated with better outcomes; however, changes in policy and practice organisation have diminished its scope. Although there has been some discussion of safety implications from professionals’ perspective, patients’ views remain largely unexplored. Aim: To explore patients’ understanding of safety in primary care. Design and setting An interview-based study with patients from general practices in the northwest of England. Method: Patients were recruited from five general practices through patient participation groups and posters in waiting rooms, with further participants recruited through snowballing techniques until no new themes emerged. In-depth interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Anonymised transcripts were coded and analysed inductively. Emergent themes were discussed by the team. Results: For patients, relationship continuity was not simply a matter of service quality but an important safety concern that offered greater psychosocial security than consultations with unfamiliar GPs. Relationship continuity enabled the GP to become a repository of information; acquire specialist knowledge of a patient’s condition; become familiar with the patient’s consulting behaviour; provide holistic care; and foster the development of trust. Patients were also aware of the risks: a false sense of security and lack of a fresh perspective. Their desire for continuity varied with the nature of their concerns, psychological vulnerability, and perception of GPs’ qualities and skills. No one supported a return to imposed continuity. Conclusion: Relationship continuity and choice of GP were important safety strategies, neither of which is adequately supported by recent policy changes.

KW - General practice

KW - Patient safety

KW - Patients' perceptions

KW - Primary care

KW - Systems

KW - Trust

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919334393&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/relationship-continuity-primary-care-patients-think-it-safer

U2 - 10.3399/bjgp14X682825

DO - 10.3399/bjgp14X682825

M3 - Article

VL - 64

SP - 758

EP - 764

JO - Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners

JF - Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners

SN - 0960-1643

IS - 629

ER -