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This repository contains the published and unpublished research of the Faculty of Medicine by the staff members of the faculty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 Why are specialists reluctant to reply to referral letters-exploring the views of specialists in Sri Lanka(Lahore Institute of Public Health(liphealth), 2014) Ramanayake, R.P.J.C.; Perera, D.P.; de Silva, A.H.W.; Sumanasekera, R.D.N.; Fernando, K.A.T.; Jayasinghe, L.R.; Athukorala, L.A.C.L.BACKGROUND: The referral letter from General Practitioner and the reply from the Specialist is the interface between the primary and secondary/tertiary levels of care. It facilitates the referral process and is beneficial for optimizing patient care. In Sri Lanka there is no established referral/back referral system. Not receiving a response to their referrals is a common grievance made by most primary care doctors. In this scenario, the views of Specialists were explored on the importance of reply letters and measures to improve communication. METHOD: Conducted in 2013, this study consisted of in-depth interviews using a semi-structured format, with 21 purposively selected Specialists representing a range of specialties. They included clinicians and university academics from both the government and the private sector. Specialists rarely contacting a GP, such as anesthesiologists and microbiologists, were not invited to participate. Analysis was by generating a thematic framework based on the recurrent themes and issues which was then applied to the textual data. RESULTS: Most Specialists identify that it is important to reply to referrals. These reply letters provide the Primary care doctors with a further management plan, enhance continuity of care and is a source of education to the General Practitioner. Despite the above benefits, the practice of writing a reply is dependent on the following factors: time constraints, lack of clerical assistance, known General Practitioner, patient’s condition and the quality of the referral letter. As methods of improving communication between primary and secondary care it was suggested that referrals be made mandatory to be seen by a Specialist, improving informal communication between Specialists and GPs via regional clinical meetings and introducing a structured referral letter with an attached reply form. CONCLUSIONS: Specialists acknowledge the importance of reply letters in the referral process. Further steps need to be taken to improve the reply rates. This includes changes that need to occur in the referring General Practitioners, Specialists and the practicing institutions creating an environment that is conducive to the referral process.Item Training medical students in general practice : a qualitative study among general practitioner trainers in Sri Lanka(Medknow, 2015) 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: Worldwide Family Medicine has gained an important place in the undergraduate medical curriculum over the last few decades and general practices have become training centers for students. Exposure to patients early in the disease process, out patient management of common problems, follow up of chronic diseases and psychosocial aspects of health and disease are educational advantages of community based training but such training could have varying impact on patients, students and trainers. This study explored the views of General Practitioner (GP) trainers on their experience in training students. METHODOLOGY: This qualitative study was conducted among GP trainers of the faculty of medicine, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, to explore their experience on wide range of issues related to their role as GP trainers. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes expressed were identified. RESULTS: Altruistic reasons, self-satisfaction, self-esteem and opportunity to improve their knowledge were the motivations for their involvement in teaching. Teachers were confident of their clinical and teaching skills. They perceived that patients were willing participants of the process and benefited from it. There was a positive impact on consultation dynamics. Time pressure was the major problem and ideal number of trainees per session was two. They were willing to attend teacher training workshops to update their knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: GP trainers driven by altruistic reasons were willing participants of student training process. The perceived advantages of involvement of teaching for trainers and patients were an encouragement for potential trainers. University should organize training sessions for trainers which will boost their knowledge, confidence and teaching skills which will eventually benefit students.