1997
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1870
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What future for continuity of care in general practice?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
94
0
2

Year Published

1998
1998
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 132 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
3
94
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Women in our study highlighted the importance of relational and informational continuity, previously identified by others (Baker et al, 2007;Freeman & Hjortdahl, 1997;Green et al, 2000;Haggerty et al, 2003;Hatem et al, 2008), but also the importance of continuity across pregnancies and across location, reflecting not only relational aspects but also systems of management continuity.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Women in our study highlighted the importance of relational and informational continuity, previously identified by others (Baker et al, 2007;Freeman & Hjortdahl, 1997;Green et al, 2000;Haggerty et al, 2003;Hatem et al, 2008), but also the importance of continuity across pregnancies and across location, reflecting not only relational aspects but also systems of management continuity.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
“…W. Saultz, 2000;The Kings Fund 2011.). It particularly emphasised relational continuity, that is, the importance of an ongoing relationship between a patient and one or more care providers (J. , characterised by personal trust and responsibility (Baker, et al, 2007;Freeman & Hjortdahl, 1997). Today, the healthcare system promotes continuity as a core organisational value affected by environmental influences, communication, patient, professional and system factors (Sparbel & Anderson, 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using these percentages an importance rank order of items for each country was calculated, ranging from 1 (highest priority) to 38 (lowest priority). For this study these rank numbers were categorized into 'high' (rank 1-10), 'medium' (rank [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] and 'low' (rank 21 -38) ( Table 3).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Discontinuity increases levels of uncertainty on both sides, prompting general practitioners to jettison 'wait and see' approaches 29 . This increases the likelihood of false positive tests (and hence iatrogenesis) and reduces the prospects for complaints to resolve spontaneously 31 .…”
Section: Personal Continuity Of Carementioning
confidence: 99%