How do general practitioners rate their relationship with gastroenterologists?

• Published in: Digestive and liver disease Vol. 36; no. 5; pp. 315 - 321
• Main Authors: Cardin, F., Franco-Novelletto, B., Fassina, R., Sturniolo, G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier Ltd 01.05.2004
• Subjects: Attitude of Health Personnel; Communication; Continuity of Patient Care; Gastroenterology; Gastroenterology services; Humans; Interprofessional Relations; Italy; Physicians, Family - psychology; Primary/secondary care interface; Quality of Health Care; Questionnaire survey; Referral and Consultation; Surveys and Questionnaires; Italy; Questionnaire survey; Gastroenterology services; Primary/secondary care interface
• ISSN: 1590-8658; 1878-3562
• DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2004.01.015

Background. Relations between general practitioners and the hospital consultants are often considered difficult, and occasionally generate conflicts, potentially affecting the patient management and healthcare system organisation. These views, however, have partly been contradicted by structured surveys and qualitative studies. Aims. We conducted a survey on the general practitioners’ opinions regarding their relations with the gastroenterological–endoscopy services in order to explore current attitudes, any negative aspects and assess scope for improvement. Subjects and methods. Structured questionnaires were sent to 221 general practitioners in the Veneto region of Italy; the questionnaire was based on 26 questions concerning their subjective relations with the gastroenterologists, expertise in the gastroenterological problems and perceived efficiency of gastroenterological services. Results. As many as 106 doctors answered the postal questionnaire (mean: 15 per province; range 5–20). Responses to the structured questions totalled to 2339 items, out of which 1234 (53%) presented positive responses, particularly with regard to admissions’ management and the adequacy of referral reports. Many general practitioners reported of their participation in the meetings on gastroenterological problems. Homecare referrals were limited in number, even for the patients with tube feeding. Conclusions. Relations between the general practitioners in Veneto and local gastroenterological services were generally good, possibly reflecting the well-developed outreach network. This liaison could be further improved via closer interrelations based not only on the patient referrals but also on the professional and information exchange to promote successful practice.