Referral to rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury: practitioners and the process of decision-making

The study aimed to examine the factors influencing referral to rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury (TBI) by using social problems theory as a conceptual model to focus on practitioners and the process of decision-making in two Australian hospitals. The research design involved semi-structured interviews with 18 practitioners and observations of 10 team meetings, and was part of a larger study on factors influencing referral to rehabilitation in the same settings. Analysis revealed that referral decisions were influenced primarily by practitioners' selection and their interpretation of clinical and non-clinical patient factors. Further, practitioners generally considered patient factors concurrently during an ongoing process of decision-making, with the combinations and interactions of these factors forming the basis for interpretations of problems and referral justifications. Key patient factors considered in referral decisions included functional and tracheostomy status, time since injury, age, family, place of residence and Indigenous status. However, rate and extent of progress, recovery potential, safety and burden of care, potential for independence and capacity to cope were five interpretative themes, which emerged as the justifications for referral decisions. The subsequent negotiation of referral based on patient factors was in turn shaped by the involvement of practitioners. While multi-disciplinary processes of decision-making were the norm, allied health professionals occupied a central role in referral to rehabilitation, and involvement of medical, nursing and allied health practitioners varied. Finally, the organizational pressures and resource constraints, combined with practitioners' assimilation of the broader efficiency agenda were central factors shaping referral. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Factors influencing the number needed to excise: excision rates of pigmented lesions by general practitioners

Objective: To identify doctor and patient characteristics associated with excision of benign versus malignant pigmented skin lesions. Design, setting and participants: Retrospective audit of data on 4741 pigmented skin lesions excised from November 1998 to February 2000 by 468 general practitioners (39% response rate) from 223 practices in Perth, WA. (The data used were from the baseline period of a randomised controlled trial of a diagnostic aid for pigmented skin lesions.) Main outcome measure: The number needed to treat (NNT), defined as the number of pigmented lesions needed to be excised to identify one melanoma, in relation to demographic characteristics of GPs and patients. Results: Relatively more benign lesions were excised per melanoma (NNT = 83) in the youngest patients (aged 10-19 years) compared with the oldest (aged greater than or equal to 70) (NNT = 11) (P [trend]

Community perceptions of suspicious pigmented skin lesions: are they accurate when compared to general practitioners?

Community responses (n = 925, response rate = 71%) of a series of eight photographs of pigmented skin lesions were compared against those of general practitioners (n = 114, response rate = 77%), considered to be the most relevant gold standard. The eight photographs included three melanomas, two potentially malignant lesions and three benign pigmented lesions. Over the pool of lesions examined, the average probability that community members thought a lesion was likely to be skin cancer (0.68 [99% CI = 0.66-0.69]) was higher (p < 0.0001) than that of the comparison general practitioners 0.58 [99% CI = 0.55-0.62]. This reflects a general (but not consistent) inflated propensity to over-diagnose among community members. The average probability that respondents indicated they would seek medical advice for a lesion was 0.71 [99% CI = 0.70-0.73]. As expected, this was strongly associated with their perceptions of the skin lesion. These results suggest that the community can play a valuable role in assessing the need for medical evaluation of pigmented skin lesions. (c) 2004 International Society for Preventive Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

General practitioners with special interests: risk of a good thing becoming bad?

There is a long tradition of some general practitioners developing areas of special interest within their mainstream generalist practice. General practice is now becoming increasingly fragmented, with core components being delivered as separate and standalone services (eg, travel medicine, skin cancer, women's health). Although this fragmentation seems to meet a need for some patients and doctors, potential problems need careful consideration and response. These include loss of generalist skills among GPs, fewer practitioners working in less well-remunerated areas, such as nursing home visits, and issues related to standards of care and training.

Deregulation, competition policy and intra-professional contests in medical education

This paper investigates how government policy directions embracing deregulation and market liberalism, together with significant pre-existing tensions within the Australian medical profession, produced ground breaking change in the funding and delivery of medical education for general practitioners. From an initial view between and within the medical profession, and government, about the goal of improving the standards of general practice education and training, segments of the general practice community, particularly those located in rural and remote settings, displayed increasingly vocal concerns about the approach and solutions proffered by the predominantly urban-influenced Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP). The extent of dissatisfaction culminated in the establishment of the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) in 1997 and the development of an alternative curriculum for general practice. This paper focuses on two decades of changes in general practice training and how competition policy acted as a justificatory mechanism for putting general practice education out to competitive tender against a background of significant intra-professional conflict. The government's interest in increasing efficiency and deregulating the 'closed shop' practices of professions, as expressed through national competition policy, ultimately exposed the existing antagonisms within the profession to public view and allowed the government some influence on the sacred cow of professional training. Government policy has acted as a mechanism of resolution for long standing grievances of the rural GPs and propelled professional training towards an open competition model. The findings have implications for future research looking at the unanticipated outcomes of competition and internal markets.