Patient perspectives on test result communication in primary care: a qualitative study

Litchfield, Ian; Bentham, Louise; Lilford, Richard; McManus, Richard J; Greenfield, Sheila

doi:10.3399/bjgp15x683929

Cited by 35 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…26 A qualitative study found that some patients say they were unaware of their responsibility to follow up investigations. 27 Some patients assume that "no news is good news," taking no action to chase test results even if they do not feel better or develop new symptoms. 23…”

Section: Does Giving Responsibility To Patients Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can safety-netting improve cancer detection in patients with vague symptoms?

Nicholson

Mant

Bankhead

2016

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Does Giving Responsibility To Patients Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can safety-netting improve cancer detection in patients with vague symptoms?

Nicholson

Mant

Bankhead

2016

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…13 Patients may underestimate the significance of symptoms, hesitate to re-consult, be concerned about wasting the doctor's time, or may be unaware of their responsibility to follow up investigations. [16][17][18][19] Variable processes for test follow-up in primary care have been described. 20 International comparisons show a reliance on individual GPs' bespoke inconsistent strategies to overcome system failures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GPs’ understanding and practice of safety netting for potential cancer presentations: a qualitative study in primary care

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Demand has now reached unprecedented levels (2,5) within an evolving model of service delivery that requires clinical and non-clinical members of the primary care team adapt to providing care in a far more complex and dynamic environment. (6)(7)(8) Amongst the most visible of these are receptionists who not only undertake an array of administrative duties (9, 10) but also fulfil clinically relevant tasks such as triaging patients, reporting results, or administering screening (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) all without any requisite qualifications (10). The failure of receptionists to successfully fulfil these responsibilities has potentially serious implications for patient outcomes and safety (15,(20)(21)(22).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quantitative assessment of the parameters of the role of receptionists in modern primary care using the work design framework

Burrows

Gale

Greenfield

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Amidst increased pressures on General Practice across England, the receptionist continues to fulfil key administrative and clinically related tasks. The need for more robust support for these key personnel to ensure they stay focussed and motivated is apparent, however to be effective a more systematic understanding of the parameters of their work is required. Here we present a valuable insight into the tasks they fulfil their relationship with colleagues and their organisation, and their attitudes and behaviour at work collectively defined as their ‘work design’. Methods Our aim was to quantitatively assess the various characteristics of receptionists in primary care in England using the validated Work Design Questionnaire (a 21 point validated questionnaire, divided into four categories: task, knowledge and social characteristics and work context with a series of sub-categories within each). This was available online and in addition 500 postal questionnaire were sent to a random sample of 100 general practices across England. An online cross-sectional survey was employed with receptionists (N=54). Additionally (N=16; RR=3.1%). Results Seventy participants completed the WDQ; 54 completed the survey online 16 completed the postal version (response rate of 3.1%). Receptionists reported high task variety, task significance and, high level of information processing and knowledge demands, confirming the high cognitive load placed on them by performing numerous yet significant tasks. This complex role required an array of skills, to accommodate their various administrative, communicative, problem solving and decision-making duties they have, and there was a reliance on colleagues for support and feedback. Conclusion Research with modern GP receptionists is sparse and little is known formally regarding the parameters of the role. This research explores the work design of GP receptionists and offers clinicians in practice a practical overview of this important and essential role and its implications for the modern GP practice. We suggest a number of ways in to better support the modern receptionist, including separating complex tasks to avoid the errors involved with high cognitive load, providing informal feedback and developing training programmes.

show abstract

Patient perspectives on test result communication in primary care: a qualitative study

Cited by 35 publications

References 24 publications

Can safety-netting improve cancer detection in patients with vague symptoms?

Can safety-netting improve cancer detection in patients with vague symptoms?

GPs’ understanding and practice of safety netting for potential cancer presentations: a qualitative study in primary care

A quantitative assessment of the parameters of the role of receptionists in modern primary care using the work design framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About