Discurs de la rectora de la Universitat de Girona, Dra. Anna M. Geli, en l'acte d'investidura com doctors honoris causa de Raimon Panikkar i Carmina Virgili

En el discurs d'investidura dels doctors honoris casusa, Raimon Panikkar i Carmina Virgili, la rectora de la Universitat de Girona comenta que aquest tipus d'actes fonamenten la vigència de la institució universitària i del que representa. Reflexiona sobre l'assumpció d'experiència i saviesa, per part de la universitat, dels nous doctors a través de la seva voluntat crítica i del seu esforç per transmetre el coneixement

Doctors´ remuneration schemes and hospital competition in two-sided markets with common network externalities

This paper uses a two-sided market model of hospital competition to study the implications of di§erent remunerations schemes on the physiciansí side. The two-sided market approach is characterized by the concept of common network externality (CNE) introduced by Bardey et al. (2010). This type of externality occurs when occurs when both sides value, possibly with di§erent intensities, the same network externality. We explicitly introduce e§ort exerted by doctors. By increasing the number of medical acts (which involves a costly e§ort) the doctor can increase the quality of service o§ered to patients (over and above the level implied by the CNE). We Örst consider pure salary, capitation or fee-for-service schemes. Then, we study schemes that mix fee-for-service with either salary or capitation payments. We show that salary schemes (either pure or in combination with fee-for-service) are more patient friendly than (pure or mixed) capitations schemes. This comparison is exactly reversed on the providersíside. Quite surprisingly, patients always loose when a fee-for-service scheme is introduced (pure of mixed). This is true even though the fee-for-service is the only way to induce the providers to exert e§ort and it holds whatever the patientsívaluation of this e§ort. In other words, the increase in quality brought about by the fee-for-service is more than compensated by the increase in fees faced by patients.

CDL : revista del Col·legi Oficial de Doctors i Llicenciats en Filosofia i Lletres i en Ciències de les Illes Balears

DL : PM-1341-1995

Doctors Honoris Causa

En la sisena sessió d’investidura de la seva història, el 14 de desembre de 2010, la Universitat de Girona va incorporar al seu Claustre, com a doctors honoris causa, als senyors Ferran Mir i Joan Roca. Han passat a formar part, doncs, d’una llista de notables entre els quals cal destacar filòsofs com Jerome Bruner i Raimon Pannikar, que va cedir la seva biblioteca personal a la UdG i que malauradament va traspassar aquest mes d’agost; historiadors com el pare Miquel Batllori, Eric Hobsbawn i Robert Brian Tate, mort també recentment i el llegat del qual està dipositat a la nostra Universitat; representants del món de la ciència, com la geòloga Carmina Virgili, l’especialista en biomedicina Joan Rodés, el químic Joan Bertran i l’ictiòleg Fred M. Utter; de les ciències socials, com l’economista Jaume Gil Aluja i com l’advocat Miquel Roca, pare de la Constitució; o cantants il·lustres, com és el cas del tenor Jaume Aragall. Després de la cerimònia d’investidura, Engega ha cregut oportú oferir als lectors una aproximació personal a la figura de Ferran Mir i Joan Roca, a partir d’unes entrevistes que ens permeten accedir als continguts del seu pensament, en el camp de la comptabilitat i la gastronomia, respectivament, i a diferents aspectes de la seva activitat professional

Discurs de la rectora de la Universitat de Girona, Dra. Anna M. Geli, en l'acte d'investidura com doctors honoris causa de Ferran Mir Estruch i Joan Roca i Fontané

En el seu discurs, la rectora, fa un repàs dels dotze doctors honoris causa que la UdG ha nomenat i fa especial menció als recents nomenats. A Ferran Mir Estruch, destacant la seva llarga trajectòria acadèmica, caracteritzada pel rigor de les seves actuacions, tant en el camp de la docència com de la recerca, i la fidelitat de la seva tasca docent, de guiatge i de col·laboració amb els estudis empresarials de la UdG. I a Joan Roca i Fontané a qui aquest doctorat honoris causa és també un tribut a la creativitat, a la sensibilitat, a la imaginació, a l’aposta lúdica per una 'joie de vivre' compartides amb els seus germans entorn d’un cerimonial, d’un ritus laic que, sense deixar de ser restauradors, els converteix també en investigadors i artistes

What do patients want to know about their medicines, and what do doctors want to tell them?: a comparative study

A two phase study is reported. In the first phase, we asked a number of doctors to rate a list of information categories (identified by Berry, Gillie and Banbury 1995) in terms of how important they felt it was for the items to be included in an explanation to a patient about a drug prescription. In the second phase, we presented a large sample of people with a scenario about visiting their doctor and being prescribed medication, together with an explanation about the prescription which was said to be provided by the doctor. Four different explanations were compared, which were either based on what people in our earlier study wanted to know about drug prescriptions or on what the doctors thought it was important lo tell them. We also manipulated whether or not the explanations conveyed negative information (e.g. about the possible side effects of the medication). The results showed that people 'preferred' the explanations based on what the participants in the earlier study wanted to know about their medicines, rather than those based on what the doctors thought they should be told. They also 'preferred' the explanations that did not convey negative information, rather than those that did convey some negative information. In addition, the inclusion of negative information affected ratings of likely compliance with the prescribed medication.

Comparing nurses’ and doctors’ views of nurse prescribing: a questionnaire survey

Nurses have successfully adopted the role of prescriber in numerous health care settings in the UK. Existing research has not addressed how Nurse Independent and Nurse Supplementary Prescribers compare with doctors in terms of the perceived advantages and disadvantages of nurse prescribing, nor has the perceived importance of nurses providing patients with an explanation about their medicines been established. The current study utilized a random sample of 31 qualified Nurse Independent and Nurse Supplementary Prescribers and 30 general practitioners who self-completed a written questionnaire in an independent groups design. The study establishes nurses’ and doctors’ perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of independent and supplementary nurse prescribing and provides some indication of the importance that nurses and doctors place on nurses providing an explanation about medicines, and the categories of information perceived to be important.

Interpretation of recommended risk terms: differences between doctors and lay people

Objectives: To examine doctors' (Experiment 1) and doctors' and lay people's (Experiment 2) interpretations of two sets of recommended verbal labels for conveying information about side effects incidence rates. Method: Both studies used a controlled empirical methodology in which participants were presented with a hypothetical, but realistic, scenario involving a prescribed medication that was said to be associated with either mild or severe side effects. The probability of each side effect was described using one of the five descriptors advocated by the European Union (Experiment 1) or one of the six descriptors advocated in Calman's risk scale (Experiment 2), and study participants were required to estimate (numerically) the probability of each side effect occurring. Key findings: Experiment 1 showed that the doctors significantly overestimated the risk of side effects occurring when interpreting the five EU descriptors, compared with the assigned probability ranges. Experiment 2 showed that both groups significantly overestimated risk when given the six Calman descriptors, although the degree of overestimation was not as great for the doctors as for the lay people. Conclusion: On the basis of our findings, we argue that we are still a long way from achieving a standardised language of risk for use by both professionals and the general public, although there might be more potential for use of standardised terms among professionals. In the meantime, the EU and other regulatory bodies and health professionals should be very cautious about advocating the use of particular verbal labels for describing medication side effects.