To assess the variation within individual general practitioners facing the same problem twice in actual practice under unbiased conditions.
General practitioners were consulted during normal surgery hours by a standardised patient portraying a patient with angina pectoris.
Six weeks later the same general practitioners were consulted again by a similar standardised patient portraying a similar case.
Of 87 general practitioners invited by letter, 28 (32%) agreed to participate without hesitation ; nine others (10%) wanted more information before consenting.
From these 24 were selected and visited.
Number of actions undertaken from a guideline in both rounds of consultations.
Duration of consultations.
The mean (range, interquartile range) guideline score, total score, and duration of consultation were not significantly different between the first and second patient encounters for the group as a whole.
For individual doctors the mean (SD) difference was - 0.09 (3.36) for the guideline score, 0.30 (8.1) for the total score, and - 0.87 (9.01) for consultation time.
The study shows that assessment of performance in real practice for a group of general practitioners is consistent from the first round of consultations to the second round.
However, significant variation occurs in performance of individual physicians.
Mots-clés Pascal : Médecin généraliste, Consultation, Etude comparative, Relation médecin malade, Diagnostic, Critère performance, Enquête, Simulation, Homme, Organisation santé, Politique sanitaire, Ethique
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : General practitioner, Consultation, Comparative study, Physician patient relation, Diagnosis, Performance requirement, Survey, Simulation, Human, Public health organization, Health policy, Ethics
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 97-0264859
Code Inist : 002B30A05. Création : 11/06/1997.