Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
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 ISI Web of Science
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 Stokes, T.
Right arrow Articles by McKinley, R. K
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stokes, T.
Right arrow Articles by McKinley, R. K
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 20, No. 6, 628-634
© Oxford University Press 2003, all rights reserved


Article

Breaking up is never easy

GPs' accounts of removing patients from their lists

Tim Stokes, Mary Dixon-Woodsa and Robert K McKinley

Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester LE5 4PW and a Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Leicester, 22–28 Princess Road West, Leicester LE1 6TP, UK

Correspondence to T Stokes; E-mail: tns2{at}le.ac.uk

Objective. The aim of this study was to understand why GPs choose to end their relationship with patients by removing them from their lists.

Methods. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 25 GPs from 22 general practices in Leicestershire. Qualitative analysis was performed using the constant comparative method. The main outcome measures were participants' accounts of removing patients from their lists.

Results. GPs use removal as a means of ending their professional relationships with problematic patients. All of the doctors indicated that they wished to retain the right to remove patients and stressed that removal is a rare event which they only use as a ‘last resort’. There are two distinct but overlapping types of patients who are most likely to become eligible for removal: ‘bad’ patients, who break the rules of the doctor–patient or practice–patient relationship, and ‘difficult’ patients, with whom the doctor–patient relationship is so strained that doctors feel they can no longer care for them. The doctors may choose to remove a patient without warning or else to write a short letter giving ‘relationship breakdown’ as the reason. They find it hard to confront the patient openly about the difficulties in the relationship.

Conclusions. The ability to remove patients is a right that GPs value. They report that it is rare for them to seek to end their relationships with patients and, when they do, it is for reasons that are important in the maintenance of professional boundaries or fulfilling professional responsibilities.

Keywords. Doctor–patient relationship, general practice.


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
E. A. Flanagan-Klygis, L. Sharp, and J. E. Frader
Dismissing the Family Who Refuses Vaccines: A Study of Pediatrician Attitudes
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, October 1, 2005; 159(10): 929 - 934.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Fam PractHome page
T. Stokes, M. Dixon-Woods, and R. K McKinley
Ending the doctor-patient relationship in general practice: a proposed model
Fam. Pract., October 1, 2004; 21(5): 507 - 514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



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.