From: Stool submission by general practitioners in SW England - when, why and how? A qualitative study
Attitude/Opinion | Quotes |
---|---|
Stool microbiology useful | GP16 “I think it’s a positive thing actually.” |
GP13 “It’s useful in two situations: prolonged diarrhoea or diarrhoea followed from abroad” | |
GP2 “Yeah I do, actually think it’s important because about 1 in 10, 1 in 20 come back with something that we should know about. And the other thing is the old thing about the patients being reassured that it isn’t something that we need to treat” | |
GP9 “Helpful in certain settings. So very much on return from travel, very much if there’s systemic symptoms and if it’s prolonged over a few days, then I would find it helpful and reassuring” | |
Usually treat before result received | GP7 “Well when we send them they’re usually useful but more retrospectively useful. You usually have to make a decision whether you’re going to treat somebody or not before getting the sample back. I think they’re a good thing.” |
GP1 “Depends how they are. A campylobacter would be the main one. Someone presenting with bloody diarrhoea and pain, who we think probably isn’t an inflammatory bowel disease, you then do a stool sample and. I might wait for the samples or I might just get on and treat them” | |
Stool microbiology not useful | GP14 “Not necessarily very helpful. I might, so generally speaking I wouldn’t send a specimen. Because most tend to be self-limiting. This is I’m thinking about acute infectious diarrhoea, most tend to be self limiting and are not likely to be treated actively.” |
GP3 “For most cases, it’s of limited value because most diarrhoea illnesses are self-limiting.” |