GPs with special interests: Unanswered questions

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 57, Issue 544, 2007, Pages 912-917

  Gérvas, Juan ^a   Starfield, Barbara ^d   Violán, Concepción ^b   Minué, Sergio ^c  

^a Equipo CESCA   (Spain)

^b Research Institute University Primary Care IDIAP Jordi Gol   (Spain)

^c ANDALUSIAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Spain)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Family medicine; General practitioners with special interests; Specialism

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSULTATION; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PATIENT REFERRAL; RURAL AREA; SKILL; UNITED KINGDOM;

DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS;

EID: 35948951248     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3399/096016407782317865     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Stephens GG, Amundson LH, Bishop FM, et al. The intellectual basis of family medicine revisited. Fam Med 1985; 17(5): 219-230.
2. Stevens R. Issues for American internal medicine through the last century. Ann Intern Med 1986; 105(4): 592-602.
3. Heath I, Evans P, Weel C. The specialist of the discipline of general practice. Semantics and politics mustn't impede the progress of general practice. BMJ 2000; 320(7231): 326-327.
4. Stein HF. Family medicine's identity: being generalists in a specialist culture? Ann Fam Med 2006; 4(5): 455-459.
5. Department of Health. The NHS plan: a plan for investment a plan for reform. London: HMSO, 2000.
6. Department of Health/Royal College of General Practitioners. Implementing a scheme for general practitioners with special interests. London: RCGP, 2002.
7. Nocon A, Leese B. The role of UK general practitioners with special clinical interests: implications for policy and service delivery. Br J Gen Pract 2004; 54(498): 50-56.
8. Rosenberg CE. The tyranny of diagnosis: specific entities and individual experience. Milbank Q 2002; 80(2): 237-260.
9. Starfield B. New paradigms for quality in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2001; 51(465): 303-309.
10. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q 2005; 83(3): 457-502.
11. Heath I, Sweeney K. Medical generalists: connecting the map and the territory. BMJ 2005; 331(7530): 1462-1464.
12. Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST Jr, Agostini JV. Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med 2004; 351(27): 2870-2874.
13. Wright N, Smeeth L, Heath I. Moving beyond single and dual diagnosis in general practice: many patients have multiple morbidities, and their needs have to be addressed. BMJ 2003; 326(7388): 512-514.
14. Jones R, Rosen R, Tomlin Z, et al. General practitioners with special interests: evolution and evaluation. J Health Serv Res Policy 2006; 11(2): 106-109.
15. Oxley D. A rapid appraisal of clinics run by GPs and practitioners with special clinical interests. London: Kings College, University of London, 2005.
16. Crowley CJ. Are GPs who specialise in dermatology effective? High cost of general practitioners with special interests is a fallacy. BMJ 2006; 332(7532): 54.
17. Starfield B, Gérvas J. Comprehensiveness versus special interests: family medicine should encourage its clinicians to subspecialize: negative. In: Kennealy T, Buetow S (eds). Ideological debates in family medicine. New York: Nova Publishers, 2007: in press.
18. Lamberts H, Brouwer HJ, Marinus AFM, Hofmans-Okkes IM. The use of ICPC in the Transition Project. Episode-oriented epidemiology in general practice. In: Lamberts H, Wood M, Hofmans-Okkes I (eds). The International Classification of Primary Care in the European Community. Oxford: OUP, 1993.
19. Royal Collegue of General Practitioners. Profile of UK practices. Information Sheet No 2. London: Royal College of General Practitioners, 2005.
20. Fry J, Hasler J (eds). Primary health care 2000. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1986.
21. Bojke C, Gravelle H, Wilkin D. Is bigger better for primary care and trusts? BMJ 2001; 322(7286): 599-602.
22. Hombergh PVD, Engels Y, Hoogen HVD, et al. Saying 'goodbye' to single-handed practices; what do patient and staff lose or gain? Fam Pract 2005; 22: 20-27.
23. Wang Y, O'Donnell CA, Mackay DF, Watt GCM. Practice size and quality attaimnent under the GMS contract: a cross-sectional analysis. Br J Gen Pract 2006; 56(532): 830-835.
24. Rural Access Working Group. Centralisation and specialisation of hospital services: bigger is not necessarily better for rural and remote communities. London: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, 2005.
25. Spencer P. General practices and models of the referral process. London: Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, 1971.
26. Rosen B, Florin D, Hut R. An anatomy of GP referral decisions. A qualitative study of GPs' views on their role in supporting patient choice. London: King's Fund, 2007.
27. Roland M. General practitioners with special interests - not a cheap option. BMJ 2005; 331(7530): 1448-1449.
28. Morgan M, Jenkins L, Ridsdale L. Patient pressure for referral for headache: a qualitative study of GPs' referral behaviour. Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57(534): 29-35.
29. Farmer J. Connected care in a fragmented world: lessons from rural health care. Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57(536): 225-230.
30. Moffat MA, Sheikh A, Price D, et al. Can a GP be a generalist and a specialist? Stakeholders views on a respiratory general practitioner with a special interest service in the UK. BMC Health Serv Res 2006; 6: 62.
31. Engel GL. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science 1977; 196(4286): 129-136.
32. Hart JT. The inverse care law. Lancet 1971; 1(7696): 405-412.
33. Hart JT. A new kind of doctor. London: Merlin Press, 1988.
34. Delnoij D, Van Merode G, Paulus A, Groenewegen P. Does general practitioner gatekeeping curb health care expenditure? J Health Serv Res Policy 2001; 5(1): 44-45.
35. Gérvas J, Pérez Fernández M, Starfield B. Primary care, financing and gatekeeping in western Europe. Fam Pract 1994; 11(3): 307-311.
36. Gérvas J, Pérez Fernández M. Western European best practice in primary health care. Eur J Gen Pract 2006; 12(1): 30-33.
37. Milgate K, Cheng SB. Pay-for-performance: the MedPAC perspective. Health Affairs 2006; 25(2): 413-419.
38. Fleetcroft R, Cookson R. Do the incentive payments in the new NHS contract for primary care reflect likely population health gain? J Health Serv Res 2006; 11(1): 27-31.
39. Mangin D, Toop L. The Quality and Outcomes Framework: what have done to yourselves? Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 435-437.
40. Bodenheimer T. Disease management - promises and pitfalls. N Engl J Med 1999; 340(15): 1202-1205.
41. Bodenheimer T. Primary care - will it survive? N Engl J Med 2006; 355(9): 861-864.
42. Wright B, Scott I, Woloschuck W, Brenning F. Career choice of new medical students at three Canadian universities: family medicine versus specialty medicine. CMAJ 2004; 170(13): 1920-1924.
43. McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. New York: OUP, 1987.
44. WONCA Classification Committee. Functional status measurement in primary care. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1990.
45. Roland MO, Bartholomew J, Morrell DC, et al. Understanding hospital referral rates: a user's guide. BMJ 1990; 301(6743): 98-102.
46. Knottnerus JA, Joosten J, Daams J. Comparing the quality of referrals of general practitioners with high and average referral rates: an independent panel review. Br J Gen Pract 1990; 40(334): 178-181.
47. Calnan N, Hutten J, Tiliak H. The challenge of coordination: the role of primary care professionals in promoting integration across the interface. In: Saltman R, Rico A, Boerma W (eds). Primary care in the driver's seat? Organisational reform in European primary care. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2006: 85-104.