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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Scandinavian journal of public health 2011-12, Vol.39 (8), p.888-893 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 & 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&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 & 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 |