Objectives: Using a tested survey protocol, to obtain under comparable circumstances the opinions and subjective assessments of general practitioners regarding health care services in a contrasting rural health district, to obtain indications of those services which, by reason of the opinions of general practitioners in relation to their quantity and quality, might benefit from further enquiry or even detailed assessment and, as in the previous survey, to facilitate the close working with general practitioners without which population based needs assessment and further enquiry and research into the development of healthcare services will be handicapped.
Design: A postal questionnaire survey of all general practitioners in the health district.
Setting: North Lincolnshire health district.
Subjects: One hundred and forty eight general practitioners, of whom 104 responded, two by letter only.
Main outcome measures: Scores of quantity and of quality for 24 hospital services and 32 community services. The frequency with which services were identified as a priority for improvement, and written comments about the services surveyed.
Results: Most services were thought by general practitioners to be adequate or better in both quantity and quality, involving a surprising degree of agreement. In only six of the 56 services were these considered by more than 50% of the doctors responding to be inadequate or grossly inadequate in quantity, and in only eight services were these found by more than 15% of doctors to be poor or very poor in quality. Complaints about quantity of service were more frequent than complaints about quality of service, and community services received more complaints from general practitioners about both quality and quantity than the hospital services. The services most general practitioners wanted improved were orthopaedics, psychiatry, physiotherapy and chiropody.
Conclusions: This survey confirmed the suitability of the postal questionnaire for assessing the impressions of general practitioners about both the quantity and quality of services available in their support. Consistent agreement between general practitioners about the services surveyed parallel a comparable survey undertaken in a largely urban area, showing close similarities with the results of this survey with only relatively minor local variations. The results provide pointers for health needs assessment of key services.