Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
A C Freeman Somerset and North and
East Devon Primary Care Research Network, Institute of General
Practice, School of Postgraduate Medicine and Health Sciences, Exeter
EX2 5DW
Correspondence to: A C Freeman PCRN{at}exeter.ac.uk
Objectives:
To explore the reasons why general
practitioners do not always implement best evidence.
What is already known on this topic
What this study adds
Design:
Qualitative study using Balint-style groups.
Setting:
Primary care.
Participants:
19 general practitioners.
Main outcome measures:
Identifiable themes that
indicate barriers to implementation.
Results:
Six main themes were identified that affected the implementation process: the personal and professional experiences of the general practitioners; the patient-doctor relationship; a
perceived tension between primary and secondary care; general practitioners' feelings about their patients and the evidence; and
logistical problems. Doctors are aware that their choice of words with
patients can affect patients' decisions and whether evidence is implemented.
Conclusions:
General practitioner participants seem to act as a conduit within the consultation and regard clinical evidence as a square peg to fit in the round hole of the patient's life. The
process of implementation is complex, fluid, and adaptive.
General practitioners do not always act on evidence in clinical
practice
Implementation of evidence by general practitioners is a complex and
fluid process
© BMJ 2001
Read all Rapid Responses