Awareness of investigations and treatment of faecal incontinence among the general practitioners: a postal questionnaire survey
Awareness of investigations and treatment of faecal incontinence among the general practitioners: a postal questionnaire survey
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01292.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-03-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Burke, D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Thekkinkattil, D. K.;Lim, M.;Burke, D.
目的大便失禁是一种痛苦的疾病，可导致显着的尴尬和限制的日常活动。全科医生（GP）是这些患者的主要照顾者。有最近的发展，在手术治疗选择这种报告不足的条件。要充分利用这些变化，就必须了解这些变化。据作者所知，没有研究调查的意识和治疗方案之间的全科医生大便失禁。这是我们研究的重点。方法一份保密的问卷被张贴到全科医生在约克郡地区。该问卷的目的是评估：第一，全科医生的患病率，调查和治疗方式的粪便失禁，其次，模式的咨询和转介的患者粪便incontinence.Results一千一百问卷张贴的基本知识。返回504例，应答率为48.5%（n = 504）。全科医生评估的患病率与基于人口的调查结果相似。只有32%（n = 162）的全科医生知道至少有一个调查。同样，只有32%的全科医生知道至少一种形式的手术治疗。对联合王国提供这些设施的中心的了解有限（60%不知道）。只有四分之一的全科医生将患者转诊到外科专科。令人惊讶的是，有没有显着差异的知识水平的调查和治疗之间的GP谁看到患者大便失禁更频繁，与那些谁看到这样的患者很少（P值分别为0.298和0.432）。结论的调查方式和治疗方案的认识水平大便失禁是有限的GP之间。为了最好地利用技术资源和专门知识，需要了解现有的大便失禁诊断测试和外科治疗方案以及拥有这些设施的中心。需要进一步的研究来评估这种缺乏知识对病人护理质量的影响。转诊中心和全科医生之间更好的沟通，加上继续医学教育计划，可能是改善适当病人管理的有用工具。
Objective Faecal incontinence is a distressing condition that can result in significant embarrassment and limitation of routine activities. General practitioners (GP) are the primary carers of such patients. There are recent developments in the surgical treatment options for this under-reported condition. Awareness of these changes is required to make the best use of them. To the best knowledge of the authors, no studies have examined the awareness of investigations and treatment options for faecal incontinence amongst GPs. This is the focus of our study.Method A confidential questionnaire was posted to GPs in the Yorkshire region. The questionnaire was designed to assess: first, the basic knowledge of GPs with regard to prevalence, investigations and treatment modalities of faecal incontinence and secondly, the patterns of consultations and referrals of patients with faecal incontinence.Results One thousand and one hundred questionnaires were posted. Five hundred and four were returned giving a response rate of 48.5% (n = 504). The prevalence assessed by the GPs is similar to that by population based surveys. Only 32% (n = 162) of GPs were aware of at least one investigation. Similarly only 32% of the GP's were aware of at least one form of surgical treatment. The knowledge of UK centres where these facilities are available was limited (60% not aware). Only one quarter of the GPs referred the patients to the surgical specialties. Surprisingly, there was no significant difference in the level of knowledge of investigation and treatments between the GPs who see patients with faecal incontinence more frequently compared with those who see such patients infrequently (P-values 0.298 and 0.432 respectively).Conclusion The level of awareness of investigation modalities and treatment options for faecal incontinence is limited among GPs. Knowledge of the existence of diagnostic tests and surgical treatment options for faecal incontinence and the centres with these facilities is needed for the best utilization of the technical resources and expertise. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of this lack of knowledge on the quality of patient care. Better communication between referral centres and GPs, combined with continuing medical education programmes, may be useful tools to improve appropriate patient management.