Skip Navigation


Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on April 4, 2006
Family Practice 2006 23(4):461-468; doi:10.1093/fampra/cml010
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/4/461    most recent
cml010v1
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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ridd, M.
Right arrow Articles by Salisbury, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ridd, M.
Right arrow Articles by Salisbury, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2006). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

‘Two sides of the coin’—the value of personal continuity to GPs: a qualitative interview study

Matthew Ridd, Alison Shaw and Chris Salisbury

Academic Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Bristol Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL, UK

Correspondence to Matthew Ridd; Email: m.ridd{at}bristol.ac.uk

Background. Continuity is thought to be important to GPs but the values behind this are unknown.

Objectives. To explore the values that doctors working in general practice attach to continuity of patient care and to outline how these values are applied in practice.

Methods. In-depth qualitative interview with 24 GPs in England. Participants were purposefully sampled according to personal and practice characteristics. Analysis was thematic, drawing on the constant comparative method.

Results. The majority of doctors valued doctor–patient, or personal, continuity in their everyday work. It was most valued in patients with serious, complex or psychological problems. GPs believed that through their personal knowledge of the patient and the doctor–patient relationship, personal continuity enabled them to provide higher quality care. However, the benefits of personal continuity were balanced against problems, and GPs identified personal, professional and external constraints that limited its provision. GPs seemed to have resolved the tension between the benefits, limits and constraints they described by accepting an increased reliance on continuity being provided within teams.

Conclusion. Personal continuity may offer important benefits to doctors and patients, but we do not know how unique its values are. In particular, it is not clear whether the same benefits can be achieved within teams, the level at which continuity is increasingly being provided. The relative advantages and limits of the different means of delivering continuity need to be better understood, before further policy changes that affect personal continuity are introduced.

Keywords. Continuity of patient care, attitude of health professional, family practice.


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.