General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care: Lessons learned from 56 case conferences

Geoffrey Mitchell, Margaret Cherry, Rosemary Kennedy, Karen Weeden, Letty Burridge, Alexandra Clavarino, Peter O'Rourke, Chris Del Mar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To describe the utility and acceptability to general practitioners and palliative care staff of case conferences in palliative care. Method: Research focussed on case conferences conducted between GPs and staff of three specialist palliative care units (in an inner urban, outer metropolitan and regional setting), at the time of referral of patients to the service. Telephone interviews were conducted with all GPs who participated in a case conference, and focus groups were conducted with palliative care staff. Results: For most GPs, case conferences by teleconference were a time effective and immediate means of information transfer. The best instances for a conference were at time of patient referral, time of discharge to the community, or where the case was complex. General practitioners appreciated access to multiple professionals simultaneously. Workload pressures were a drawback of participation for both GPs and specialists. Palliative care team members thought case conferences gave GPs an appreciation of a team approach, and reduced professional isolation. The usefulness of the case conferences depended on the willingness of the GP to participate. General practitioners would participate again provided they did not have to organise the case conference. Specialist staff were concerned by the financial cost of organising case conferences. Discussion: Case conferences provide useful information exchange between GPs and specialist staff, and are acceptable to both parties. Much depends on the individual GP's attitude toward participation, as well as the timing of the conferences in the course of the patient's illness. Organisation needs to be a task of the specialist units, who would need administrative support to organise them, as most GPs do not have the capacity to do this.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)389-392
Number of pages4
JournalAustralian Family Physician
Volume34
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 2005

Fingerprint

Palliative Care
General Practitioners
Referral and Consultation
Telecommunications
Workload
Focus Groups
Organizations
Interviews
Pressure
Costs and Cost Analysis

Cite this

Mitchell, Geoffrey ; Cherry, Margaret ; Kennedy, Rosemary ; Weeden, Karen ; Burridge, Letty ; Clavarino, Alexandra ; O'Rourke, Peter ; Del Mar, Chris. / General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care : Lessons learned from 56 case conferences. In: Australian Family Physician. 2005 ; Vol. 34, No. 5. pp. 389-392.
@article{ba7d7feb03db4a1b99609c240371db0d,
title = "General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care: Lessons learned from 56 case conferences",
abstract = "Objective: To describe the utility and acceptability to general practitioners and palliative care staff of case conferences in palliative care. Method: Research focussed on case conferences conducted between GPs and staff of three specialist palliative care units (in an inner urban, outer metropolitan and regional setting), at the time of referral of patients to the service. Telephone interviews were conducted with all GPs who participated in a case conference, and focus groups were conducted with palliative care staff. Results: For most GPs, case conferences by teleconference were a time effective and immediate means of information transfer. The best instances for a conference were at time of patient referral, time of discharge to the community, or where the case was complex. General practitioners appreciated access to multiple professionals simultaneously. Workload pressures were a drawback of participation for both GPs and specialists. Palliative care team members thought case conferences gave GPs an appreciation of a team approach, and reduced professional isolation. The usefulness of the case conferences depended on the willingness of the GP to participate. General practitioners would participate again provided they did not have to organise the case conference. Specialist staff were concerned by the financial cost of organising case conferences. Discussion: Case conferences provide useful information exchange between GPs and specialist staff, and are acceptable to both parties. Much depends on the individual GP's attitude toward participation, as well as the timing of the conferences in the course of the patient's illness. Organisation needs to be a task of the specialist units, who would need administrative support to organise them, as most GPs do not have the capacity to do this.",
author = "Geoffrey Mitchell and Margaret Cherry and Rosemary Kennedy and Karen Weeden and Letty Burridge and Alexandra Clavarino and Peter O'Rourke and {Del Mar}, Chris",
year = "2005",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "389--392",
journal = "Australian Family Physician",
issn = "0300-8495",
publisher = "Royal Australian College of General Practitioners",
number = "5",

}

Mitchell, G, Cherry, M, Kennedy, R, Weeden, K, Burridge, L, Clavarino, A, O'Rourke, P & Del Mar, C 2005, 'General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care: Lessons learned from 56 case conferences' Australian Family Physician, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 389-392.

General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care : Lessons learned from 56 case conferences. / Mitchell, Geoffrey; Cherry, Margaret; Kennedy, Rosemary; Weeden, Karen; Burridge, Letty; Clavarino, Alexandra; O'Rourke, Peter; Del Mar, Chris.

In: Australian Family Physician, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2005, p. 389-392.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in palliative care

T2 - Lessons learned from 56 case conferences

AU - Mitchell, Geoffrey

AU - Cherry, Margaret

AU - Kennedy, Rosemary

AU - Weeden, Karen

AU - Burridge, Letty

AU - Clavarino, Alexandra

AU - O'Rourke, Peter

AU - Del Mar, Chris

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Objective: To describe the utility and acceptability to general practitioners and palliative care staff of case conferences in palliative care. Method: Research focussed on case conferences conducted between GPs and staff of three specialist palliative care units (in an inner urban, outer metropolitan and regional setting), at the time of referral of patients to the service. Telephone interviews were conducted with all GPs who participated in a case conference, and focus groups were conducted with palliative care staff. Results: For most GPs, case conferences by teleconference were a time effective and immediate means of information transfer. The best instances for a conference were at time of patient referral, time of discharge to the community, or where the case was complex. General practitioners appreciated access to multiple professionals simultaneously. Workload pressures were a drawback of participation for both GPs and specialists. Palliative care team members thought case conferences gave GPs an appreciation of a team approach, and reduced professional isolation. The usefulness of the case conferences depended on the willingness of the GP to participate. General practitioners would participate again provided they did not have to organise the case conference. Specialist staff were concerned by the financial cost of organising case conferences. Discussion: Case conferences provide useful information exchange between GPs and specialist staff, and are acceptable to both parties. Much depends on the individual GP's attitude toward participation, as well as the timing of the conferences in the course of the patient's illness. Organisation needs to be a task of the specialist units, who would need administrative support to organise them, as most GPs do not have the capacity to do this.

AB - Objective: To describe the utility and acceptability to general practitioners and palliative care staff of case conferences in palliative care. Method: Research focussed on case conferences conducted between GPs and staff of three specialist palliative care units (in an inner urban, outer metropolitan and regional setting), at the time of referral of patients to the service. Telephone interviews were conducted with all GPs who participated in a case conference, and focus groups were conducted with palliative care staff. Results: For most GPs, case conferences by teleconference were a time effective and immediate means of information transfer. The best instances for a conference were at time of patient referral, time of discharge to the community, or where the case was complex. General practitioners appreciated access to multiple professionals simultaneously. Workload pressures were a drawback of participation for both GPs and specialists. Palliative care team members thought case conferences gave GPs an appreciation of a team approach, and reduced professional isolation. The usefulness of the case conferences depended on the willingness of the GP to participate. General practitioners would participate again provided they did not have to organise the case conference. Specialist staff were concerned by the financial cost of organising case conferences. Discussion: Case conferences provide useful information exchange between GPs and specialist staff, and are acceptable to both parties. Much depends on the individual GP's attitude toward participation, as well as the timing of the conferences in the course of the patient's illness. Organisation needs to be a task of the specialist units, who would need administrative support to organise them, as most GPs do not have the capacity to do this.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21744451487&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 389

EP - 392

JO - Australian Family Physician

JF - Australian Family Physician

SN - 0300-8495

IS - 5

ER -