Enlighten
Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow
home > services > Enlighten

Controversy in primary care: does continuity in general practice really matter?

Guthrie, B., and Wyke, S. (2000) Controversy in primary care: does continuity in general practice really matter? British Medical Journal, 321 (7263). pp. 734-736. ISSN 0959-8138

Full text not currently available from Enlighten.

Publisher's URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127861/

Abstract

Continuity is an official core value of general practice in the United Kingdom,1 but there are at least two potentially conflicting definitions of it. Both definitions are powerfully expressed in a recent report from the BMA, entitled Shaping Tomorrow.2 For general practitioners, continuity of care has traditionally meant that a patient visits the same doctor.3,4 What matters is personal continuity, in which an ongoing doctor-patient relationship ensures that care takes account of the patient's personal and social context. By contrast, recent statements from the NHS Executive emphasise the importance of consistency and coordination of care.5 From this perspective, continuity can be enhanced by appropriate organisation, guidelines, and electronic medical records, irrespective of which doctor is seen

Item Type:Article
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Wyke, Prof Sally
Authors: Guthrie, B., and Wyke, S.
College/School:College of Social Sciences
College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > Institute of Health and Wellbeing > Social Scientists working in Health and Wellbeing
Journal Name:British Medical Journal
Publisher:B M J Group
ISSN:0959-8138

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record