Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editor’s Briefing

Assume Nothing

Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (715): 51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp22X718265
Euan Lawson
BJGP
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading
Figure

Euan Lawson

It is all too easy, all too human, to fall prey to our biases. The research this month does an impressive job of poking us in the assumptions. It could be argued that continuity and communication are the two most important features of general practice. After all, they are the bedrock of relationship-based care.

The study by Sandvik et al on continuity in this month’s issue feels right to GPs and fits with existing evidence. In Norway, the introduction of a named GP has been associated with startling improvements in emergency admissions and mortality with reductions of 25%–30%. As GP Phil Whitaker wrote in the New Statesman: ‘If continuity were a pharmaceutical product, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) would be mandating its deployment … The Care Quality Commission should be assessing continuity as a critical aspect of its inspections. The Department of Health should be devising policies to incentivise its provision.’

There is a danger here as we feel it’s right, but we must guard against a slide into righteousness. The evidence is there, it is strong, but I also think many GPs want it to be true. I’d go as far as to suggest that GPs are prone to a continuity bias — if we can attribute a positive outcome to continuity then we will. I agree with Phil Whitaker and continuity is sorely neglected, but, as the legendary Sergeant Phil Esterhaus from the 80’s cop show Hill Street Blues used to exhort, ‘ let’s be careful out there’.

The analysis of doctor empathy on patient outcomes by Surchat et al may deflate some bubbles. Women do empathy better than men don’t they? The self-reported scores of empathy in the study confirmed that gender-based belief but, as it turned out, it wasn’t seen in most of the behaviourally-based empathy measures. The study may not have been sensitive enough to pick them up or it could just be that social stereotyping is hard to shake off and doesn’t reflect the true picture.

Locum doctor use is seldom given any attention, other than a knee-jerk pejorative reaction. There is no shortage of assumptions here. After all, surely locums are the very antithesis of continuity? Well, maybe. Grigoroglou et al ’s study found that locum use didn’t increase between 2017 and 2020 in England. We also need to be careful about stereotyping locums, and the majority were employed in long-term positions.

Enjoy the research but don’t forget to flip to the analysis articles. First up, there is Shah et al ’s article on meaning in the consultation and the third in a series. Next, a critique of the new enhanced service specification for long COVID. And, will we ever see point-of-care testing in routine general practice? St John et al have some thoughts on that. Clinically, we also cover hepatitis C — a disease that can now, remarkably, be cured. What are we waiting for? Life & Times remains its usual opinionated self and shouldn’t be missed.

Issue highlights

You may feel more secure in the assumption that emergency risk prediction tools will prevent unnecessary admissions and are a Good Thing. In fact, the evidence isn’t there and Evans et al explored how an emergency risk prediction tool worked in Wales, or more accurately didn’t work as intended. It was associated with an increase in admissions. It’s a stone-cold exemplar of the need for careful evaluation of policies, parking our assumptions, and the sheer necessity of accruing good evidence.

Figure

Footnotes

  • Further notes and commentary from the Editor on the February 2022 issue (with references and links to the articles) can be found at https://www.bjgplife.com/feb22

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2022
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 72 (715)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 72, Issue 715
February 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Assume Nothing
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Assume Nothing
Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (715): 51. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp22X718265

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Assume Nothing
Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (715): 51. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp22X718265
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Footnotes
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Shock Therapy — Disaster Remodelling in the NHS
  • The Global Primary Care Crisis
  • Listen to Your Patient
Show more Editor’s Briefing

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242