Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22751251›Full record

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

Front desk talk: discourse analysis of receptionist-patient interaction.

Heather Hewitt, Lucy McCloughan, Brian McKinstry

Abstract readMulticenter Study
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 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Impact of the clinically oriented roles of a general practice receptionist: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Receptionists' role in new approaches to consultations in primary care: a focused ethnographic study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Calling the GP surgery: patient burden, patient satisfaction, and implications for training.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Patients' perspectives on providing a stool sample to their GP: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Slaying the dragon myth: an ethnographic study of receptionists in UK general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Heather HewittCentre for Population Health Sciences: General Practice Section, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh. Heather.Hewitt@ed.ac.uk
Lucy McCloughan
Brian McKinstry

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGP receptionists are the first point of contact with the NHS for most patients and have an important role in facilitating access to healthcare services. There is evidence that they are often perceived as impersonal, insensitive, or officious.

aimTo analyse the communicative styles of GP receptionists when dealing with patients. DESIGN OF STUDY: Ethnographically situated discourse analysis of audio recordings.

settingThree NHS GP surgeries in Scotland.

methodFine-grained transcription and stage-by-stage analysis of digital audio recordings of 283 encounters between receptionists and patients engaged in front desk business. Participants were 16 receptionists and 283 patients.

resultsInteraction between receptionists and patients consists mainly of verbal routines that are shaped by the administrative tasks completed through them. Receptionists adhere to these established patterns of use at all times, even when dealing with non-routine situations. Within the routine framework, receptionists communicate with patients using styles that display three dominant approaches: task centred, conventionally polite, and rapport building. Receptionists who adopt a task-centred approach use forms with minimal interpersonal content, while those who use conventionally polite forms or those associated with rapport building, give attention to establishing positive relationships with patients. There is no evidence that any stylistic approach is more efficient than another. There is, however, evidence that excessive adherence to routine verbal behaviour has an adverse impact on problem solving.

conclusionMost receptionist discourse consists of the repetition of established verbal routines. Receptionists adopt verbal styles that are predominantly task centred, conventionally polite, or rapport building. Although all three styles enable the completion of reception work with similar levels of efficiency, task-centred styles may appear over-direct. The use of a routine approach when dealing with problematic situations can inhibit and delay their resolution.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationMedical ReceptionistsProfessional-Patient RelationsAdolescentAdultAgedFamily PracticeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedScotlandState MedicineYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22751251
PMCPMC2714800

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.