Medicine
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/12
This repository contains the published and unpublished research of the Faculty of Medicine by the staff members of the faculty
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Training medical students in general practices: Patients' attitudes(Lesley Pocock medi+WORLD International, 2014) Ramanayake, R.P.J.C.; de Silva, A.H.W.; Perera, D.P.; Sumanasekera, R.D.N.; Athukorala, L.A.C.L.; Fernando, K.A.T.INTRODUCTION: Training medical students in the setting of family/general practice has increased considerably in the past few decades in Sri Lanka with the introduction of family medicine into the undergraduate curriculum. This study was conducted to explore patients' attitudes towards training students in fee levying general practices. METHODOLOGY: Six general practices, to represent different practices (urban, semi urban, male and female trainers) where students undergo training, were selected for the study. Randomly 50 adult patients were selected from each practice and they responded to a self administered questionnaire following a consultation where medical students had been present. RESULTS: 300 patients (57.2 % females) participated in the study. 44.1% had previously experienced students. 30.3% were able to understand English. Patients agreed to involvement of students; taking histories (95.3%), examination (88.5%), looking at reports (96.6) and presence during consultation (88.3 %). Patients' perceived no change in duration (55%) or quality (56.3%) of the consultation due to the presence of students. The majority (78%) preferred if doctor student interaction took place in their native language. 45.8% expected prior notice regarding student participation and two to three students were the preferred number. 93.6% considered their participation as a social service and only 8.8% expected a payment. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of the patients accepted the presence of students and were willing to participate in this education process without any reservation. Their wishes should be respected. The outcome of this study is an encouragement to educationists and GP teachers.Item Referral letter with an attached structured reply form: Is it a solution for not getting replies(Mumbai : Medknow, 2013) Ramanayake, R.P.J.C.; Perera, D.P.; de Silva, A.H.W.; Sumanasekera, R.D.N.; Jayasinghe, L.R.; Fernando, K.A.T.; Athukorala, L.A.C.L.Background: Communication between primary care doctors and specialists/hospital doctors is vital for smooth functioning of a health care system. In many instances referral and reply letters are the sole means of communication between general practitioners and hospital doctors/specialists. Despite the obvious benefits to patient care, answers to referral letters are the exception worldwide. In Sri Lanka hand written conventional letters are used to refer patients and replies are scarce. Materials and Methods: This interventional study was designed to assess if attaching a structured reply form with the referral letter would increase the rate of replies/back-referrals. It was conducted at the Family Medicine Clinic of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya. A structured referral letter (form) was designed based on guide lines and literature and it was used for referral of patients for a period of six months. Similarly a structured reply form was also designed and both the referral letter and the reply letter were printed on A4 papers side by side and these were used for the next six months for referrals. Both letters had headings and space underneath to write details pertaining to the patient. A register was maintained to document the number of referrals and replies received during both phases. Patents were asked to return the reply letters if specialists/hospital doctors obliged to reply. Results: Total of 90 patients were referred using the structured referral form during 1st phase. 80 letters (with reply form attached) were issued during the next six months. Patients were referred to eight different specialties. Not a single reply during the 1 st phase and there were six 6 (7.5%) replies during the 2 nd phase. Discussion: This was an attempt to improve communication between specialists/hospital doctors and primary care doctors. Even though there was some improvement it was not satisfactory. A multicenter island wide study should be conducted to assess the acceptability of the format to primary care doctors and specialists and its impact on reply rate