Labour intensity of guidelines may have a greater effect on adherence than GPs' workload

BackgroundPhysicians' heavy workload is often thought to jeopardise the quality of care and to be a barrier to improving quality. The relationship between these has, however, rarely been investigated. In this study quality of care is defined as care 'in accordance with professional guidelines'. In this study we investigated whether GPs with a higher workload adhere less to guidelines than those with a lower workload and whether guideline recommendations that require a greater time investment are less adhered to than those that can save time.MethodsData were used from the Second Dutch National survey of General Practice (DNSGP-2). This nationwide study was carried out between April 2000 and January 2002.A multilevel logistic-regression analysis was conducted of 170,677 decisions made by GPs, referring to 41 Guideline Adherence Indicators (GAIs), which were derived from 32 different guidelines. Data were used from 130 GPs, working in 83 practices with 98,577 patients. GP-characteristics as well as guideline characteristics were used as independent variables. Measures include workload (number of contacts), hours spent on continuing medical education, satisfaction with available time, practice characteristics and patient characteristics. Outcome measure is an indicator score, which is 1 when a decision is in accordance with professional guidelines or 0 when the decision deviates from guidelines.ResultsOn average, 66% of the decisions GPs made were in accordance with guidelines. No relationship was found between the objective workload of GPs and their adherence to guidelines. Subjective workload (measured on a five point scale) was negatively related to guideline adherence (OR = 0.95). After controlling for all other variables, the variation between GPs in adherence to guideline recommendations showed a range of less than 10%.84% of the variation in guideline adherence was located at the GAI-level. Which means that the differences in adherence levels between guidelines are much larger than differences between GPs. Guideline recommendations that require an extra time investment during the same consultation are significantly less adhered to: (OR = 0.46), while those that can save time have much higher adherence levels: OR = 1.55). Recommendations that reduce the likelihood of a follow-up consultation for the same problem are also more often adhered to compared to those that have no influence on this (OR = 3.13).ConclusionNo significant relationship was found between the objective workload of GPs and adherence to guidelines. However, guideline recommendations that require an extra time investment are significantly less well adhered to while those that can save time are significantly more often adhered to.

[1]  A. Hutchinson,et al.  Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[2]  Emily S. Patterson,et al.  Research Paper: Human Factors Barriers to the Effective Use of Ten HIV Clinical Reminders , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[3]  M. Cabana,et al.  Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. , 1999, JAMA.

[4]  P. Groenewegen,et al.  Determinants of the range of drugs prescribed in general practice: a cross-sectional analysis , 2007, BMC Health Services Research.

[5]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[6]  P. Groenewegen,et al.  Workload and job satisfaction among general practitioners: a review of the literature. , 1991, Social science & medicine.

[7]  J Greenhalgh,et al.  Doctors' perceptions of the links between stress and lowered clinical care. , 1997, Social science & medicine.

[8]  V. Vroom.  Work and motivation , 1964 .

[9]  J Lomas,et al.  Evaluating the Message: The Relationship Between Compliance Rate and the Subject of a Practice Guideline , 1994, Medical care.

[10]  Anke J. E. de Veer,et al.  Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: A systematic meta-review , 2008, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[11]  Hornsby Jl,et al.  Practice and career satisfaction among residency trained family physicians: a national survey. , 1982 .

[12]  R. Grol.  Successes and Failures in the Implementation of Evidence-Based Guidelines for Clinical Practice , 2001, Medical care.

[13]  M. Berg,et al.  Ethnic specific recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: a first exploratory comparison between guidelines from the USA, Canada, the UK, and the Netherlands , 2003, Quality & safety in health care.

[14]  Guo Zhaojiang,et al.  Fatigue among Clinicians and the Safety of Patients , 2008 .

[15]  E M Rogers,et al.  Lessons for guidelines from the diffusion of innovations. , 1995, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[16]  H. Selye,et al.  [Stress without distress]. , 1976, Bruxelles medical.

[17]  B. Staaij,et al.  NHG-Standaard Acute keelpijn , 2009 .

[18]  T. Walley,et al.  Why do GPs not implement evidence-based guidelines? A descriptive study. , 2001, Family practice.

[19]  J. Bensing,et al.  Monitoring health inequalities through general practice: the Second Dutch National Survey of General Practice. , 2005, European journal of public health.

[20]  J. V. Laar.  Ethnic inequalities in quality of care for children in the Netherlands , 2007 .

[21]  G G Koch,et al.  The awareness-to-adherence model of the steps to clinical guideline compliance. The case of pediatric vaccine recommendations. , 1996, Medical care.

[22]  A. Hutchinson,et al.  Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[23]  James C. Robinson,et al.  As good as it gets? Chronic care management in nine leading US physician organisations , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  J. Hornsby,et al.  Practice and career satisfaction among residency trained family physicians: a national survey. , 1982, The Journal of family practice.

[25]  H. Bromhead,et al.  Workload of general practitioners. , 1989, BMJ.

[26]  German ambulatory care physicians' perspectives on clinical guidelines – a national survey , 2006, BMC family practice.

[27]  F. Schellevis,et al.  Assessment of primary care by clinical quality indicators , 2018, Morbidity, Performance and Quality in Primary Care.

[28]  J. Bensing,et al.  The workload of general practitioners does not affect their awareness of patients' psychological problems. , 2007, Patient education and counseling.

[29]  F. G. Schellevis,et al.  Morbidity, Performance and Quality in Primary Care: A Practical Guide, v. 2 , 2006 .

[30]  S. Jex,et al.  The meaning of occupational stress items to survey respondents. , 1992, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  Hubert S. Feild,et al.  Has the Inverted-U Theory of Stress and Job Performance Had a Fair Test? , 2003 .

[32]  Anke A. J. E. De Veer,et al.  ' s response to reviews Title : Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals : a meta-review , 2008 .

[33]  F. Schellevis,et al.  Kwaliteit in beeld: medisch-technisch handelen huisartsen doorgelicht. , 2004 .