Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dearden, A.
Right arrow Articles by Thapar, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dearden, A.
Right arrow Articles by Thapar, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 13, No. 2, 166-169
© Oxford University Press 1996

other

Interruptions during general practice consultations— the patients' view

Andrew Dearden, Matthew Smithers* and Ajay Thapar*

116 Newport Road, Cardiff, CFl 1YT
*Department of General Practice, University of Wales College of Medicine Cardiff, UK

BACKGROUND: Although most aspects of the consultation have been extensively reported there is very little information on the effects of interruptions on the consultation.

OBJECTIVE: We wished to discover the patients' view of interruptions.

METHODS: In this pilot study the sources and frequency of interruptions to the consultations of a single general practitioner were measured. The effects of interruptions on 102 patients whose consultations were interrupted were then ascertained using a simple questionnaire.

RESULTS: The overall interruption rate was found to be 10.2%. The telephone was the commonest source of interruption, accounting for 50% of interruptions. Although most patients did not perceive the interruption as having an important effect on the consultation, 20% of patients did feel that the interruption had a bad effect on the consultation and 40% of patients felt it would have been better not to have been interrupted. A majority of patients (52%) did not feel that the reason for the interruption was important. Although most patients did not feel affected by the interruption, a significant minority (18%) of patients had a strongly negative emotional response to the interruption.

CONCLUSIONS: In view of these findings the need for further work has been highlighted.

Keywords. Consultations, general practitioners, interruptions, patients.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.