Majority Of Family Doctors And Public Support Doctors' Assessment Every Few Years

MORI research finds majority of family doctors and public supportive of doctors being assessed every few years.

Doctors continue to be more trusted by the general public than people in other professions and positions of authority, according to MORI's long-standing annual measurement of trust [Note 1].

A majority of the public, however (78%), disagree that there is no need to regularly carry out checks on doctors because they trust them. This finding emerges from MORI's recent research commissioned by the Chief Medical Officer.

Further findings from this study indicate that a considerable majority of the public (84%) either say they don't know how often doctors are currently assessed, or wrongly believe that this is carried out on a regular basis of between 'once every year' and 'once every ten years' [Note 2].

Although all doctors in the NHS have an annual appraisal by their employer, doctors are currently only systematically assessed if there are concerns about their performance or complaints about them.

The majority of the public (93%) and of family doctors (71%) agree it is important that all doctors' competence is checked 'every few years'. However, the public are more likely than family doctors to say that assessment of doctors should be 'every year' (46%, compared with 16% among general practitioners). General practitioners most often favour five yearly checks (43% of general practitioners, compared with 17% of the general public) [Note 3]. Approaching one in five GPs (19%) say doctors should only be assessed if there are concerns about their ability.

The general public most often favours assessment of doctors to be undertaken by a mix of qualified medical professionals and 'expert lay' people (52%) [Note 4]. The public's second choice is for qualified doctors only to carry out the assessment (40%). Conversely, GPs most commonly favour assessment by doctors only (58%), with a further third favouring assessment by a mix of qualified doctors and expert lay people.

If they were asked, the feedback which most of the public would like to give on their doctor would be on their communication skills (53% mentioned this). When the public was shown a list of things, as many as 86% named at least one item on the list as something they would like to give feedback on about their doctor. The second most chosen item is: how up-to-date he/she is with new developments (36%), followed by: how much he or she involves patients in treatment decisions (36%), the degree to which he or she accords patients dignity and respect (35%), and his/her knowledge or technical ability (33%).

Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer for England [Note 5], said:

"These findings will help the work of my Advisory Group which is looking at medical regulation in the light of the Shipman Inquiry's fifth report. It is significant that a majority of both the public and of family doctors are supportive of the idea of doctors being assessed every few years, and that 71% of GPs favour assessment of doctors at least once every five years. Once doctors have finished their training, apart from their annual appraisal carried out by their employer, they currently have no formal assessment of their competence or their professional skills."

Note to Editors

1. MORI/BMA in February 2005 found that 91% of GB adults said they trust doctors to tell the truth. (MORI has conducted this work annually for the BMA since 1999; and conducted it for Cancer Research UK in 1997; and The Times in 1983 and 1993. Teachers came joint first with doctors in 1993). Further details and trend data are available on: www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/trends/truth.shtml and www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2005/bma.shtml
2. 35% of the public said 'don't know', and a further 49% gave estimates between the range of 'once every year' and 'once every ten years'. When adding up the bands 'once every year', 'once every two years', 'once every five years' and 'once every ten years' , the total figure is 49%, not 48%, because the total has been calculated by re-percentaging from raw numbers, not by adding up percentages (which will have been rounded up or down).
3. 24% of the general public say 'every two years' at this 'How often should they be assessed?' question. The total figure for 'once every year' and 'once every two years' for the general public is 70% when re-percentaging from raw numbers, the same figure as when adding up the percentages for the two categories. 12% of GPs say doctors should be assessed 'every two years' and a further 16% say 'every year'. The total figure for 'once every five years', 'once every two years' and 'once every year' for GPs on this 'How often should they be assessed?' question is 71% when re-percentaging from raw numbers, the same figure as when adding up the percentages for the three categories.
4. 'Expert lay' people were defined, for the general public survey, as 'Other people who are knowledgeable but who do not have formal medical qualifications'.
5. Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer for England, is Chair of the Consultation Advisory Group on Medical Regulation which is conducting a review of the issues arising from Dame Janet Smith's Fifth Report on the Shipman Inquiry, and deliberating on the future of medical regulation. This includes a review of the GMC's proposed new system of revalidation of doctors. A list of the Consultation Advisory Group members is annexed.

Technical details

MORI Social Research Institute conducted this research for CMO's Consultation Advisory Group from 25 May-25 June 2005, using qualitative and quantitative methods. Research was conducted among the general public and among doctors.

The general public qualitative research comprised: six group discussions in three GB locations, from 25 May-6 June 2005.

The general public quantitative research comprised: interviews among a representative quota sample of 2,195 UK adults aged 15+ from 16-20 June 2005. Questions were placed on MORI's GB omnibus, with an additional ad hoc survey in Northern Ireland. All data have been weighted to the known profile of the UK population. Interviews were conducted in-home, face-to-face using CAPI in Great Britain (in 197 sampling points), and on paper in N. Ireland (in 7 sampling points). Findings are accurate to within +/-2% (95 times in 100).

The qualitative research among doctors (from 7-9 June) comprised: two mini- focus groups, one in central London and one in outer London, plus two in-depth telephone interviews. One mini-group comprised a mixture of junior doctors and medical students, and the other a mixture of hospital doctors and GPs. The depth interviews were among a GP and a trainee GP.

The quantitative research among doctors was entirely among GPs. Questions were placed on a GP omnibus and 200 interviews were conducted over the internet from 23 -25 June 2005. Findings are accurate to within +/-7% (95 times in 100).