Skidmore, B. (Ben) (2015) Evaluatie van Inactieve en actieve huisartsen bij een pilotonderzoek naar de uitvoerbaarheid van een allergiedienst in de eerste lijn. thesis, Medicine.
![[img]](https://umcg.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
SkidmoreB.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) |
Abstract
Introduction Research shows that allergies form a substantial and growing global problem and increasingly burden Health Care systems. For this reason a pilot project has been started in which, by means of a six month randomized controlled trial, a group of GPs was provided with advice on patients by the allergy service (experimental group), while a second group of GPs did not receive advice from the allergy service (control group). GPs were asked to enroll patients in this pilot study. During this pilot, however, a large number of GPs did not include patients after all. The primary objective of this study was to learn why they did not include patients. After the inclusion period, the GPs, who had received advice from the allergy service, were sent a questionnaire, in which they were asked to evaluate the obtained advice. The secondary objective of this study was to investigate the evaluation by the GPs of the advice given to them. Materials and Methods To reach the primary objective qualitative research was undertaken, using semi-structured interviews to explore why GPs did not include patients in the pilot study. For the secondary study, GPs, who had received advice from the allergy service, completed questionnaires in which they evaluated the recommendations they had received from the allergy service. These data were described and analysed using SPSS. Different subgroups of GPs were also compared using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient . Results During the primary research ten GPs were interviewed in all. At this point saturation occurred regarding the acquired information. GPs mentioned several reasons for not including patients. The most frequently mentioned reasons were: lack of time (6 GPs), not realizing the importance of the study (5 GPs), and forgetting about the study (4 GPs). All GPs thought the sending of reminders important as a tool to involve doctors in the research and to prevent them from forgetting about it. In the secondary investigation 13 surveys were completed by GPs. 10 of the 13 doctors found the advice given by the allergy service helpful during the consultation and 11 found it helpful for the diagnosis. No doctors had trouble explaining the provided advice to their patients. The average grade GPs gave the advice they received was 6.7 out of 10, and there was no significant difference between the various subgroups of GPs. Only one of the 13 GPs did not see a future for the allergy service. Conclusion The primary research has yielded useful results for future research, in which GPs are asked to enroll patients. The various reasons mentioned by GPs not to enroll patients emphasize the importance of a good relationship with the GPs, as well as a simple inclusion protocol. The secondary research showed that GPs who had received advice where reasonably positive about it, and found it useful. A large majority of GPs (11 out of 13) foresaw no problems implementing the allergy service on a larger scale.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Thesis) |
|---|---|
| Supervisor name: | Dagelijks en Facultaire begeleider: and Flokstra-de Blok, Bertine and UMCG, afdeling huisartsgeneeskunde |
| Faculty: | Medical Sciences |
| Date Deposited: | 25 Jun 2020 10:57 |
| Last Modified: | 25 Jun 2020 10:57 |
| URI: | https://umcg.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/id/eprint/1795 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |