Cited by 95Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePrimary Care and Health Outcomes

Still a difficult business? Negotiating alcohol-related problems in general practice consultations

Open access
Rapley, Tim, May, Carl, Frances Kaner, Eileen·2006·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

This paper describes general practitioners' (GPs) experiences of detecting and managing alcohol and alcohol-related problems in consultations. We undertook qualitative research in two phases in the North-East of England. Initially, qualitative interviews with 29 GPs explored their everyday work with patients with alcohol-related issues. We then undertook group interviews--two with GPs and one with a primary care team--where they discussed and challenged findings of the interviews. The GPs reported routinely discussing alcohol with patients with a range of alcohol-related problems. GPs believed that this work is important, but felt that until patients were willing to accept that their alcohol consumption was problematic they could achieve very little. They tentatively introduced alcohol as a potential problem, re-introduced the topic periodically, and then waited until the patient decided to change their behaviour. They were aware that they could identify and manage more patients. A lack of time and having to work with the multiple problems that patients brought to consultations were the main factors that stopped GPs managing more risky drinkers. Centrally, we compared the results of our study with [Thom, B., & Tellez, C. (1986). A difficult business-Detecting and managing alcohol-problems in general-practice. British Journal of Addiction, 81, 405-418] seminal study that was undertaken 20 years ago. We show how the intellectual, moral, emotional and practical difficulties that GPs currently face are quite similar to those faced by GPs from 20 years ago. As the definition of what could constitute abnormal alcohol consumption has expanded, so the range of consultations that they may have to negotiate these difficulties in has also expanded.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.05.025

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rapley, T., May, C., & Frances Kaner, E.
Affiliations
Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
Rapley, Tim
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-11
Volume
63
Issue
9
Pages
2418-2428
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2069858922
Cited by
95
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (RES-000-27-0084)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Keywords
alcohol-related problems, general practitioners, alcohol screening, primary care, barriers to intervention, time constraints
MeSH terms
Alcoholism, England, Family Practice, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Physician-Patient Relations, Referral and Consultation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review