Document Detail

An evaluation of the A4 folder system in general practice.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  480299     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
All 63 general practices known to have introduced the A4 folder system were asked to complete questionnaires comparing A4 records with the traditional medical records envelope system. Of the 77 per cent who replied, an overwhelming majority favoured the A4 system and felt that it helped them to obtain higher standards of care for patients.
A Elliott; N Valdez; C Dempsey; P Cooper
Related Documents :
22556479 - The scope and nature of ayurveda.
19403789 - Understanding oriental medicine using a systems approach.
19192329 - A qualitative analysis of an electronic health record (ehr) implementation in an academ...
11586779 - Regulating managers. rules of engagement.
9132199 - Workload management in a&e: counting the uncountable and predicting the unpredictable.
10185929 - Developing an information management plan.
22326609 - Welfare issues in the reproductive management of small ruminants.
22419419 - Comprehension of the unique characteristics of traditional chinese medicine.
15038689 - Quality and disease management.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners     Volume:  29     ISSN:  0035-8797     ISO Abbreviation:  J R Coll Gen Pract     Publication Date:  1979 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  1979-11-29     Completed Date:  1979-11-29     Revised Date:  2012-05-09    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7503107     Medline TA:  J R Coll Gen Pract     Country:  ENGLAND    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  85-9     Citation Subset:  IM    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Family Practice*
Great Britain
Medical Records*

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  The doctor/patient relationship and its effect upon outcome.
Next Document:  Some difficulties in comparing morbidity between countries.