Palliative care referral practices and perceptions: The divide between metropolitan and non-metropolitan general practitioners

Author:

Johnson Claire E.,Girgis Afaf,Paul Christine L.,Currow David C.

Abstract

AbstractObjective:Late or non-referral of patients to specialist palliative care (SPC) services may affect patients' and their carers' quality of care. General practitioners (GPs) are key professionals in linking people with SPC. The aim of this article is to assess GPs' perceptions and SPC referrals for their patients with advanced cancer and differences between metropolitan (M GPs) and non-metropolitan GPs (NM GPs).Method:Self-report survey mailed to a stratified random sample of 1,680 Australian GPs was used.Results:Thirty-one percent (469) of eligible GPs returned surveys. More M GPs than NM GPs reported referring >60% of their patients for SPC (p = 0.014); and that a more comprehensive range of SPC services was available. The most frequently reported referral prompts were: presence of terminal illness (M GPs, 71%, NM GPs, 66%, ns (not significant)); future need for symptom control (69% vs. 59%, ns) and uncontrolled physical symptoms (63% vs. 54%, ns). Reasons for not referring were: doctor's ability to manage symptoms (62% vs. 68%, ns) and the absence of symptoms (29% vs. 18%, p = 0.025). Higher referral was associated with: having a palliative care physician or consultative service available; agreeing that all patients with advanced cancer should be referred, and agreeing that with SPC, the needs of the family are better met.Significance of results:Referrals for SPC were primarily disease-related rather than for psychological and emotional concerns. Measures are needed to encourage referrals based upon psychosocial needs as well as for physical concerns, and to support GPs caring for people with advanced cancer in areas with fewer comprehensive SPC services.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Clinical Psychology,General Medicine,General Nursing

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3