Search

This study aimed to understand what barriers exist or choices are made by patients who access regular care for long-term health issues from multiple GPs. This was a qualitative interview study in Western Sydney community settings consisting of semi-structured interviews and inductive thematic analysis. Twenty participants who accessed GP care were interviewed. Sixteen had seen multiple GPs over the previous twelve months and all had seen multiple GPs over preceding years. Participants valued interpersonal continuity of care. Nevertheless, they made decisions to meet their needs by seeing multiple GPs. They considered waiting times, preference for an individual GP based on their consultation style or perception of their particular area of expertise, experiences with reception staff and the practice model of care. Participants were aware that interpersonal continuity of care was considered important by GPs and were reticent to be seen as 'doctor shoppers'. Therefore, they did not usually disclose that they saw multiple doctors and were unlikely to discuss continuity of care with a GP. Participants made considered choices about health care. Despite general practice promoting interpersonal continuity of care, it is not always achievable or desired by patients. GPs can promote care continuity through supportive practice models and dialogue about when continuity is desirable. Although interpersonal continuity of care is associated with positive health outcomes, many patients with long-term health problems see more than one GP. This study suggests patients make choices based on multiple factors, including perceived match between their health problem and GP style and expertise, and practice systems. Revealing these episodes of care to other GPs was seen as potentially stigmatising. General practitioner, practice and health system factors that affect patient decisions should be considered when promoting care continuity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports a qualitative study investigating patients' experiences of ongoing smoking or smoking cessation after hospitalisation for an acute coronary syndrome (myocardial infarction or unstable angina) and describes how study participants spoke about the role of their doctors in smoking cessation. We invited individuals who had been admitted to an Australian public hospital in 2005 with a discharge diagnosis of an acute cardiac syndrome and who were smokers at the time of their hospitalisation to participate. Participants underwent a semi-structured interview and ongoing smokers also completed a 'stages of change' questionnaire. In total, 35 participants were interviewed, including 14 who were no longer smoking at least 12 months after their admission and 21 who were. Findings gave insight into the ways that cardiac patients perceive smoking cessation advice from their doctors, the perceived stigma of smoking and how lay understandings about smoking and smoking cessation emphasise the role of choice and individual responsibility. Our findings also indicate considerable scope for GPs and other doctors to offer better smoking cessation support to patients with established cardiovascular disease, particularly after a period of hospitalisation when the majority are highly motivated to stop smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]