Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study

Aims: To explore the reluctance of, and examine the arguments given by Norwegian general practioners (GPs), regarding their unwillingness to recruit their patients for a study where sick leave would be based on randomization. Methods: A qualitative study presenting individual arguments from 50 Norwe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Scandinavian journal of public health 2011-12, Vol.39 (8), p.888-893
Hauptverfasser: MAELAND, SILJE, MAGNUSSEN, LIV H., ERIKSEN, HEGE R., MALTERUD, KIRSTI
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 893
container_issue 8
container_start_page 888
container_title Scandinavian journal of public health
container_volume 39
creator MAELAND, SILJE
MAGNUSSEN, LIV H.
ERIKSEN, HEGE R.
MALTERUD, KIRSTI
description Aims: To explore the reluctance of, and examine the arguments given by Norwegian general practioners (GPs), regarding their unwillingness to recruit their patients for a study where sick leave would be based on randomization. Methods: A qualitative study presenting individual arguments from 50 Norwegian GPs, as written responses to a web-based, open-ended questionnaire. The responses, ranging from 3-145 words, were analysed with systematic text condensation. Results: The GPs did not want to participate in a study where sick leave was decided by randomization. First, the complexity of clinical judgment was addressed. Would it be ethically acceptable to set the professional and medical assessment aside, and if so, was there any better judge than the regular GP in making this important decision? Second, the arguments dealing with sick leave as a human and legal right were addressed. Will patients feel they have a legitimate right to sick leave and will they be open for discussion with their GP? Third, the risk of jeopardizing the relationship between patient and doctor was emphasized. Would the patients be able to trust their GP if he or she offered the patient entry into a trial where sick leave would be decided by randomization? Conclusions: Randomization of sick leave in general practice in Norway was not viewed as feasible by the GPs themselves because of the importance of clinical judgment, ethical obligations, and the belief that the patients would refuse participation, and thereby, that the doctor-patient relationship would be disturbed.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/1403494811424613
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_919970632</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45150497</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_1403494811424613</sage_id><sourcerecordid>45150497</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c494t-27f6a4493403512069bd36ac2afb92748ccadba2b4f5c93aaf6fc525b1c033ac3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkctrGzEQxkVpaB7tvZcWXUJO22j0XJ1KMH1BIBBSelxmZa0rd71yJG3A_30V7KbQQ1sQjEbzm0_DfIS8BvYOwJhLkExIK1sAyaUG8YycgFbQgGXqeb3XcvNYPyanOa8ZY1ry9gU55mC1ksaekNW37zuKydOVn3zCkW4TuhJKiDXNNPlxdgWnQkukfkqxAliCn0qmYapvSG8XdzRONAf3g44eH_x7ekXvZxxDqeSDp7nMy91LcjTgmP2rQzwjXz9-uFt8bq5vPn1ZXF03rs5ZGm4GjVJaUSdXwJm2_VJodByH3nIjW-dw2SPv5aCcFYiDHpziqgfHhEAnzsjFXneb4v3sc-k2ITs_jjj5OOfOgrWGacH_g4R6DGf_JpkGpVpjK8n2pEsx5-SHbpvCBtOuA9Y9Otb96VhteXsQn_uNXz41_LKoAucHALPDcUg4uZB_c9K01oi2cs2ey7jy3TrOaaqL_tvHb_b8OpeYnvSkAsVkVfwJ5Tuzxg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>906155879</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>MAELAND, SILJE ; MAGNUSSEN, LIV H. ; ERIKSEN, HEGE R. ; MALTERUD, KIRSTI</creator><creatorcontrib>MAELAND, SILJE ; MAGNUSSEN, LIV H. ; ERIKSEN, HEGE R. ; MALTERUD, KIRSTI</creatorcontrib><description>Aims: To explore the reluctance of, and examine the arguments given by Norwegian general practioners (GPs), regarding their unwillingness to recruit their patients for a study where sick leave would be based on randomization. Methods: A qualitative study presenting individual arguments from 50 Norwegian GPs, as written responses to a web-based, open-ended questionnaire. The responses, ranging from 3-145 words, were analysed with systematic text condensation. Results: The GPs did not want to participate in a study where sick leave was decided by randomization. First, the complexity of clinical judgment was addressed. Would it be ethically acceptable to set the professional and medical assessment aside, and if so, was there any better judge than the regular GP in making this important decision? Second, the arguments dealing with sick leave as a human and legal right were addressed. Will patients feel they have a legitimate right to sick leave and will they be open for discussion with their GP? Third, the risk of jeopardizing the relationship between patient and doctor was emphasized. Would the patients be able to trust their GP if he or she offered the patient entry into a trial where sick leave would be decided by randomization? Conclusions: Randomization of sick leave in general practice in Norway was not viewed as feasible by the GPs themselves because of the importance of clinical judgment, ethical obligations, and the belief that the patients would refuse participation, and thereby, that the doctor-patient relationship would be disturbed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1403-4948</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1651-1905</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1403494811424613</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21965479</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Attitude of Health Personnel ; Attitudes ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical judgments ; Doctor-patient relationship ; Ethics ; Female ; General practice ; General practitioners ; General Practitioners - ethics ; General Practitioners - psychology ; Humans ; Judgement ; Male ; Medical ethics ; Medical personnel ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Norway ; Occupational medicine ; Original articles ; Patient Selection - ethics ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Physicians, Family - ethics ; Physicians, Family - psychology ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Qualitative analysis ; Qualitative Research ; Questionnaires ; Randomization ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - ethics ; Sick Leave ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>Scandinavian journal of public health, 2011-12, Vol.39 (8), p.888-893</ispartof><rights>2011 Nordic Societies of Public Health</rights><rights>2011 the Nordic Societies of Public Health</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c494t-27f6a4493403512069bd36ac2afb92748ccadba2b4f5c93aaf6fc525b1c033ac3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c494t-27f6a4493403512069bd36ac2afb92748ccadba2b4f5c93aaf6fc525b1c033ac3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45150497$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45150497$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,21818,27923,27924,30999,43620,43621,58016,58249</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=24789738$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21965479$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MAELAND, SILJE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAGNUSSEN, LIV H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ERIKSEN, HEGE R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALTERUD, KIRSTI</creatorcontrib><title>Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study</title><title>Scandinavian journal of public health</title><addtitle>Scand J Public Health</addtitle><description>Aims: To explore the reluctance of, and examine the arguments given by Norwegian general practioners (GPs), regarding their unwillingness to recruit their patients for a study where sick leave would be based on randomization. Methods: A qualitative study presenting individual arguments from 50 Norwegian GPs, as written responses to a web-based, open-ended questionnaire. The responses, ranging from 3-145 words, were analysed with systematic text condensation. Results: The GPs did not want to participate in a study where sick leave was decided by randomization. First, the complexity of clinical judgment was addressed. Would it be ethically acceptable to set the professional and medical assessment aside, and if so, was there any better judge than the regular GP in making this important decision? Second, the arguments dealing with sick leave as a human and legal right were addressed. Will patients feel they have a legitimate right to sick leave and will they be open for discussion with their GP? Third, the risk of jeopardizing the relationship between patient and doctor was emphasized. Would the patients be able to trust their GP if he or she offered the patient entry into a trial where sick leave would be decided by randomization? Conclusions: Randomization of sick leave in general practice in Norway was not viewed as feasible by the GPs themselves because of the importance of clinical judgment, ethical obligations, and the belief that the patients would refuse participation, and thereby, that the doctor-patient relationship would be disturbed.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Attitude of Health Personnel</subject><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical judgments</subject><subject>Doctor-patient relationship</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General practice</subject><subject>General practitioners</subject><subject>General Practitioners - ethics</subject><subject>General Practitioners - psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Judgement</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical ethics</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Norway</subject><subject>Occupational medicine</subject><subject>Original articles</subject><subject>Patient Selection - ethics</subject><subject>Physician-Patient Relations</subject><subject>Physicians, Family - ethics</subject><subject>Physicians, Family - psychology</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Qualitative Research</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Randomization</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - ethics</subject><subject>Sick Leave</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>1403-4948</issn><issn>1651-1905</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkctrGzEQxkVpaB7tvZcWXUJO22j0XJ1KMH1BIBBSelxmZa0rd71yJG3A_30V7KbQQ1sQjEbzm0_DfIS8BvYOwJhLkExIK1sAyaUG8YycgFbQgGXqeb3XcvNYPyanOa8ZY1ry9gU55mC1ksaekNW37zuKydOVn3zCkW4TuhJKiDXNNPlxdgWnQkukfkqxAliCn0qmYapvSG8XdzRONAf3g44eH_x7ekXvZxxDqeSDp7nMy91LcjTgmP2rQzwjXz9-uFt8bq5vPn1ZXF03rs5ZGm4GjVJaUSdXwJm2_VJodByH3nIjW-dw2SPv5aCcFYiDHpziqgfHhEAnzsjFXneb4v3sc-k2ITs_jjj5OOfOgrWGacH_g4R6DGf_JpkGpVpjK8n2pEsx5-SHbpvCBtOuA9Y9Otb96VhteXsQn_uNXz41_LKoAucHALPDcUg4uZB_c9K01oi2cs2ey7jy3TrOaaqL_tvHb_b8OpeYnvSkAsVkVfwJ5Tuzxg</recordid><startdate>20111201</startdate><enddate>20111201</enddate><creator>MAELAND, SILJE</creator><creator>MAGNUSSEN, LIV H.</creator><creator>ERIKSEN, HEGE R.</creator><creator>MALTERUD, KIRSTI</creator><general>SAGE</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111201</creationdate><title>Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study</title><author>MAELAND, SILJE ; MAGNUSSEN, LIV H. ; ERIKSEN, HEGE R. ; MALTERUD, KIRSTI</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c494t-27f6a4493403512069bd36ac2afb92748ccadba2b4f5c93aaf6fc525b1c033ac3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Attitude of Health Personnel</topic><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical judgments</topic><topic>Doctor-patient relationship</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General practice</topic><topic>General practitioners</topic><topic>General Practitioners - ethics</topic><topic>General Practitioners - psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Judgement</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical ethics</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Norway</topic><topic>Occupational medicine</topic><topic>Original articles</topic><topic>Patient Selection - ethics</topic><topic>Physician-Patient Relations</topic><topic>Physicians, Family - ethics</topic><topic>Physicians, Family - psychology</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Qualitative Research</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Randomization</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - ethics</topic><topic>Sick Leave</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MAELAND, SILJE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAGNUSSEN, LIV H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ERIKSEN, HEGE R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALTERUD, KIRSTI</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Scandinavian journal of public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MAELAND, SILJE</au><au>MAGNUSSEN, LIV H.</au><au>ERIKSEN, HEGE R.</au><au>MALTERUD, KIRSTI</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study</atitle><jtitle>Scandinavian journal of public health</jtitle><addtitle>Scand J Public Health</addtitle><date>2011-12-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>888</spage><epage>893</epage><pages>888-893</pages><issn>1403-4948</issn><eissn>1651-1905</eissn><abstract>Aims: To explore the reluctance of, and examine the arguments given by Norwegian general practioners (GPs), regarding their unwillingness to recruit their patients for a study where sick leave would be based on randomization. Methods: A qualitative study presenting individual arguments from 50 Norwegian GPs, as written responses to a web-based, open-ended questionnaire. The responses, ranging from 3-145 words, were analysed with systematic text condensation. Results: The GPs did not want to participate in a study where sick leave was decided by randomization. First, the complexity of clinical judgment was addressed. Would it be ethically acceptable to set the professional and medical assessment aside, and if so, was there any better judge than the regular GP in making this important decision? Second, the arguments dealing with sick leave as a human and legal right were addressed. Will patients feel they have a legitimate right to sick leave and will they be open for discussion with their GP? Third, the risk of jeopardizing the relationship between patient and doctor was emphasized. Would the patients be able to trust their GP if he or she offered the patient entry into a trial where sick leave would be decided by randomization? Conclusions: Randomization of sick leave in general practice in Norway was not viewed as feasible by the GPs themselves because of the importance of clinical judgment, ethical obligations, and the belief that the patients would refuse participation, and thereby, that the doctor-patient relationship would be disturbed.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE</pub><pmid>21965479</pmid><doi>10.1177/1403494811424613</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1403-4948
ispartof Scandinavian journal of public health, 2011-12, Vol.39 (8), p.888-893
issn 1403-4948
1651-1905
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_919970632
source MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; SAGE Complete A-Z List; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adult
Aged
Attitude of Health Personnel
Attitudes
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical judgments
Doctor-patient relationship
Ethics
Female
General practice
General practitioners
General Practitioners - ethics
General Practitioners - psychology
Humans
Judgement
Male
Medical ethics
Medical personnel
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous
Norway
Occupational medicine
Original articles
Patient Selection - ethics
Physician-Patient Relations
Physicians, Family - ethics
Physicians, Family - psychology
Public health. Hygiene
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
Qualitative analysis
Qualitative Research
Questionnaires
Randomization
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - ethics
Sick Leave
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Why are general practitioners reluctant to enrol patients into a RCT on sick leave? A qualitative study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T12%3A28%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20are%20general%20practitioners%20reluctant%20to%20enrol%20patients%20into%20a%20RCT%20on%20sick%20leave?%20A%20qualitative%20study&rft.jtitle=Scandinavian%20journal%20of%20public%20health&rft.au=MAELAND,%20SILJE&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=888&rft.epage=893&rft.pages=888-893&rft.issn=1403-4948&rft.eissn=1651-1905&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1403494811424613&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45150497%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=906155879&rft_id=info:pmid/21965479&rft_jstor_id=45150497&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1403494811424613&rfr_iscdi=true