title: How the relationships between general practitioners and intensivists can be improved: the general practitioners' point of view.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The present study assessed the opinion of general practitioners (GPs) concerning their relationships with intensivists.
  
  
  METHODS
  An anonymous questionnaire was mailed to 7,239 GPs. GPs were asked about their professional activities, postgraduate intensive care unit (ICU) training, the rate of patient admittance to ICUs, and their relationships with intensivists. Relationship assessment was performed by using a graduated visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (dissatisfaction) to 100 (satisfaction). A multivariate analysis with stepwise logistic regression was performed to isolate factors explaining dissatisfaction (VAS score, < 25th percentile).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Twenty-two percent of the GPs (1,561) responded. The median satisfaction score was 57 of 100 (interquartile (IQ), 35 to 77]. Five independent factors of dissatisfaction were identified: no information provided to GPs at patient admission (odds ratio (OR) = 2.55 (1.71 to 3.80)); poor quality of family reception in the ICU (OR = 2.06 (1.40 to 3.02)); the ICU's family contact person's identity or function or both is unclear (OR = 1.48 (1.03 to 2.12)), lack of family information (OR = 2.02 (2.48 to 2.75)), and lack of discharge report (OR = 3.39 (1.70 to 6.76)). Three independent factors prevent dissatisfaction: age of GPs <or=45 years (OR = 0.69 (0.51 to 0.94)); the GP is called at patient ICU admission (OR = 0.44 (0.31 to 0.63)); and GP involvement in treatment decisions (OR = 0.17 (0.07 to 0.40)).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Considerable improvement in GP/intensivist relationships can be achieved through increased communication measures.
authors.affiliation: Division Anesthésie Réanimation Douleur Urgences, Groupe Hospitalo-Universitaire Caremeau, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nîmes, Place du Professeur Robert Debré, 30029 Nîmes Cedex 9, France. berengere.etesse@chu-nimes.fr
authors.forename: Bérengère
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Etesse
authors.forename: Samir
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Jaber
authors.forename: Thibault
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Mura
authors.forename: Marc
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Leone
authors.forename: Jean-Michel
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Constantin
authors.forename: Pierre
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Michelet
authors.forename: Lana
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Zoric
authors.forename: Xavier
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Capdevila
authors.forename: François
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Malavielle
authors.forename: Bernard
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Allaouchiche
authors.forename: Jean-Christophe
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Orban
authors.forename: Pascale
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Fabbro-Peray
authors.forename: Jean-Yves
authors.initials: JY
authors.lastname: Lefrant
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D005260:Female; D005602:France; D058005:General Practitioners / Q000523:psychology*; D006801:Humans; D007362:Intensive Care Units; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D010147:Pain Measurement; D010348:Patient Care Team; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D000078329:Workforce