INTRODUCTION: The participation of general practitioners (GPs) in primary care research is variable and often poor. We aimed to develop a substantive and empirical theoretical framework to explain GPs' decision-making process to participate in research.
METHODS: We used the grounded theory approach to construct a substantive theory to explain the decision-making process of GPs to participate in research activities. Five in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions were conducted among 21 GPs. Purposeful sampling followed by theoretical sampling were used to attempt saturation of the core category. Data were collected using semi-structured open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked prior to analysis. Open line-by-line coding followed by focus coding were used to arrive at a substantive theory. Memoing was used to help bring concepts to higher abstract levels.
RESULTS: The GPs' decision to participate in research was attributed to their inner drive and appreciation for primary care research and their confidence in managing their social and research environments. The drive and appreciation for research motivated the GPs to undergo research training to enhance their research knowledge, skills and confidence. However, the critical step in the GPs' decision to participate in research was their ability to align their research agenda with priorities in their social environment, which included personal life goals, clinical practice and organisational culture. Perceived support for research, such as funding and technical expertise, facilitated the GPs' participation in research. In addition, prior experiences participating in research also influenced the GPs' confidence in taking part in future research.
CONCLUSIONS: The key to GPs deciding to participate in research is whether the research agenda aligns with the priorities in their social environment. Therefore, research training is important, but should be included in further measures and should comply with GPs' social environments and research support.
Matched MeSH terms: General Practitioners/psychology*
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) from the state of Penang toward the feasibility of implementing the medication reconciliation program in Malaysia.
METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study using a validated, self-completed anonymous 18-item questionnaire was undertaken over a period of 2 months in 2010. The study was conducted in the state of Penang, Malaysia. A letter consisting of survey questionnaires and prepaid return envelope were mailed to 429 GPs identified from the Private Medical Practice Control Department Registry.
RESULTS: A total of 86 responses were received with response rate of 20.1%. Majority (90.1%) of the respondents agreed that medication reconciliation can be a feasible strategy to improve medication safety, and 97.7% confirmed that having an accurate up-to-date list of the patient's previous medication will be useful in the rational prescribing process. However, about half (56.9%) of them felt that standardization of the medication reconciliation process in all clinics will be difficult to achieve. Three quarters (73.2%) of the respondents believed that the involvement of GPs alone is insufficient, and 74.5% agreed that this program should be expanded to community pharmacy setting. More than 90% of the respondents agreed upon the medication reconciliation card proposed by the researchers.
CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners in Penang are generally in favor of the implementation of medication reconciliation program in their practice. Because medication reconciliation has been shown to reduce many medicine-related problems, it is thus worth considering the feasibility of nationwide implementation of such program.
Matched MeSH terms: General Practitioners/psychology*
BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are widely prescribed especially for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs). Their irrational use can increase costs and resistance.
AIM: Assess knowledge, attitude and prescribing of antibiotics for URTIs in Selangor, Malaysia, using a cross-sectional survey among general practitioners (GPs) working in private clinics in 2011.
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-nine physicians completed the questionnaire (response rate = 34.8%). 49.6% (n = 69) agreed antibiotics are helpful in treating URTIs, with most GPs agreeing antibiotics may reduce URTI duration and complications. The majority of GPs reported they felt patients expected antibiotics, with 36.7% (n = 51) agreeing patients would change doctors if they did not prescribe antibiotics and 21.6% (n = 30) agreeing when requested they prescribe antibiotics even if they believe them to be unnecessary. When assessed against six criteria, most GPs had a moderate level of knowledge of prescribing for URTIs. However, antibiotic prescriptions could be appreciably reduced.
CONCLUSION: Further programs are needed to educate GPs and patients about antibiotics building on current initiatives.
KEYWORDS: Malaysia; antibiotics; education programs; irrational use of medicines; patients; physicians; respiratory tract infections
Matched MeSH terms: General Practitioners/psychology*