Why general practitioners do not implement evidence: qualitative study
- PMID: 11701576
- PMCID: PMC59686
- DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1100
Why general practitioners do not implement evidence: qualitative study
Abstract
Objectives: To explore the reasons why general practitioners do not always implement best evidence.
Design: Qualitative study using Balint-style groups.
Setting: Primary care.
Participants: 19 general practitioners.
Main outcome measures: Identifiable themes that indicate barriers to implementation.
Results: Six main themes were identified that affected the implementation process: the personal and professional experiences of the general practitioners; the patient-doctor relationship; a perceived tension between primary and secondary care; general practitioners' feelings about their patients and the evidence; and logistical problems. Doctors are aware that their choice of words with patients can affect patients' decisions and whether evidence is implemented.
Conclusions: General practitioner participants seem to act as a conduit within the consultation and regard clinical evidence as a square peg to fit in the round hole of the patient's life. The process of implementation is complex, fluid, and adaptive.
References
-
- Haynes RB, Sackett D, Guyatt G, Cook D. Transferring evidence from research to practice: overcoming barriers to application. Evidenced-Based Medicine. 1997;2:68–69. - PubMed
-
- Budd J, Dawson S. Influencing clinical practice: implementation of research and development results. London: Management School, Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine; 1994. . (Report to North Thames Regional Health Authority.)
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources