PubMed · 9213692
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A Landquist. 1997-06-11. [Working abroad?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9213692/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This study includes 32 doctors (31 men) who in 1990 had lost or given up the right to prescribe habit-forming drugs. 11 were hospital doctors, while 21 were either in private practice or held other posts. The records of the Norwegian Board of Health were reviewed. 18 doctors agreed to be interviewed, while 14 declined or did not reply to our enquiry. The interviews indicate that many of the doctors were sick at the time. The loss of the right to prescribe habit-forming drugs came as one of several blows at a time of crisis. It was felt as a severe reaction, leading to loss of esteem, but not as a social or professional disaster. The majority of the doctors had managed to return to normal medical practice, some after specializing. Restricting the right to prescribe can be an effective way of stopping unwanted medical practice. Early identification and treatment of doctors who misuse or have problems with prescribing drugs is important. This should be a joint responsibility for the medical profession and the local health authorities.
CONTEXT: Specific regulation of laboratories performing molecular genetic tests may be needed to ensure standards and quality assurance (QA) and safeguard patient rights to informed consent and confidentiality. However, comprehensive analysis of current practices of such laboratories, important for assessing the need for regulation and its impact on access to testing, has not been conducted. OBJECTIVE: To collect and analyze data regarding availability of clinical molecular genetic testing, including personnel standards and laboratory practices. DESIGN: A mail survey in June 1997 of molecular genetic testing laboratory directors and assignment of a QA score based on responses to genetic testing process items. SETTING: Hospital-based, independent, and research-based molecular genetic testing laboratories in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Directors of molecular genetic testing laboratories (n = 245; response rate, 74.9%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Laboratory process QA score, using the American College of Medical Genetics Laboratory Practice Committee standards. RESULTS: The 245 responding laboratories reported availability of testing for 94 disorders. Personnel qualifications varied, although all directors had doctoral degrees. The mean QAscore was 90% (range, 44%-100%) with 36 laboratories (15%) scoring lower than 70%. Higher scores were associated with test menu size of more than 4 tests (P = .01), performance of more than 30 analyses annually (P = .01), director having a PhD vs MD degree (P = .002), director board certification (P = .03), independent (P <.001) and hospital (P = .01) laboratories vs research laboratory, participation in proficiency testing (P<.001), and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment certification (P = .006). Seventy percent of laboratories provided access to genetic counseling, 69% had a confidentiality policy, and 45% required informed consent prior to testing. CONCLUSION: The finding that a number of laboratories had QA scores that may reflect suboptimal laboratory practices suggests that both personnel qualification and laboratory practice standards are most in need of improvement to ensure quality in clinical molecular genetic testing laboratories.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.