Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19401017›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2009

Presentation and outcome of clinical poor performance in one health district over a 5-year period: 2002-2007.

Stephen J Cox, John D Holden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The approaching pilot for One Health governance index.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2023
    Article
  2. Identifying and managing concerns about GPs in England: an interview study and case-series analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Don't shoot the messenger: the problem of whistleblowing in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    Article
  5. Isolation and insight: practical pillars of revalidation?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Stephen J CoxSpinney Medical Centre, St Helens, Merseyside. stephen.cox@hsthpct.nhs.uk
John D Holden

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe detection, assessment, and management of primary care poor performance raise difficult issues for all those involved. Guidance has largely focused on managing the most serious cases where patient safety is severely compromised. The management of primary care poor performance has become an increasingly important part of primary care trust (PCT) work, but its modes of presentation and prevalence are not well known.

aimTo report the prevalence, presentation modes, and management of primary care poor performance cases presenting to one PCT over a 5-year period. DESIGN OF STUDY: A retrospective review of primary care poor performance cases in one district.

settingSt Helens PCT administered 35 practices with 130 GPs on the performers list, caring for 190 110 patients in North West England, UK.

methodCases presenting during 2002-2007 were initially reviewed by the chair of the PCT clinical executive committee. Anonymised data were then jointly reviewed by the assessor and another experienced GP advisor.

resultsThere were 102 individual presentations (20 per year or one every 2-3 weeks) where clinician performance raised significant cause for concern occurred over the 5-year period. These concerns related to 37 individual clinicians, a range of 1-14 per clinician (mean 2.7). Whistleblowing by professional colleagues on 43 occasions was the most common presentation, of which 26 were from GPs about GPs. Patient complaints (18) were the second most common presentation. Twenty-seven clinicians were GPs, of whom the General Medical Council (GMC) were notified or involved in 13 cases. Clinicians were supported locally, and remedying was exclusively locally managed in 14 cases, and shared with an external organisation (such as the GMC or deanery) in another 12.

conclusionProfessional whistleblowing and patient complaints were the most common sources of presentation. Effective PCT teams are needed to manage clinicians whose performance gives cause for concern. Sufficient resources and both formal and informal ways of reporting concerns are essential.

Indexed as

Clinical GovernanceClinical CompetenceEnglandFamily PracticeHumansPractice Patterns, Dentists'Professional MisconductQuality of Health CareTime FactorsWhistleblowing

Identifiers

PMID19401017
PMCPMC2673160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.