CFP
HOME HELP CONTACT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Can Fam Physician
Vol. 54, No. 2, February 2008, pp.232 - 233
Copyright © 2008 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Résumé
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grenier, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grenier, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, W.
Related Collections
Right arrow Résumés de recherche

Print Short, Web long*

Collaboration between family physicians and psychologists

What do family physicians know about psychologists’ work?

Jean Grenier, PhD
Clinical Professor in the School of Psychology and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Ottawa in Ontario; a psychologist associated with the Consortium national de formation en santé at the Montfort Hospital; and a Principal Scientist in the C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre at the Élisabeth Bruyère Research Institute in Ottawa

Marie-Hélène Chomienne, MD
Family physician and epidemiologist, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Medicine; a Scientist in the Institute of Population Health at the University of Ottawa and at the Consortium national de formation en santé; and a Principal Scientist in the C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre

Isabelle Gaboury, MSc
Currently completing a doctorate in Population Health at the University of Ottawa

Pierre Ritchie, PhD
Full Professor in the University of Ottawa’s School of Psychology; Secretary-General of the International Union of Psychology; and Executive Director of the Canadian Register for Health Service Providers in Psychology

William Hogg, MD
Director of the C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre; a Professor and Director of Research in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Ottawa; a Principal Scientist at the Institute of Population Health; and an Affiliate Scientist at the Ottawa Health Research Institute

Correspondence to: Dr Jean Grenier, Montfort Hospital, 713 Montreal St, Ottawa ON K1K 0T2; telephone 613 746-4621, extension 6005; fax 613 748-4953; e-mailjgrenier{at}uottawa.ca

The Romanow and Kirby reports on the future of health care in Canada recommended that the delivery of primary care services be re-examined1 and that mental health care be community-based and accessible.2,3 Family physicians are often the first health care providers consulted by patients with psychological problems.4 Such problems present in up to 70% of consultations.5,6 In Canada, 89% of family physicians carry out psychotherapy or counseling, and 83% offer mental health assessment and prescribe drugs for mental health difficulties.7,8 Family physicians perceive their mental health interventions to consist primarily of emotional support and counseling (listening and giving advice) rather than formal psychological treatments.6 Despite time constraints, feelings of being inadequately prepared for these activities, and a lack of formal training, family physicians play an important role in the diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions.9–13

Better use of existing regulated health professionals could relieve pressure on family physicians and help ameliorate the effects of the shortage of family physicians on health care services.8,10 The practice of family medicine is burdened with time-consuming consultations for psychological issues5 for which evidenced-based psychological interventions have been proven both effective and cost-effective.6,14–17 Most physicians do not receive formal training in medical school in providing these treatments. Psychologists, on the other hand, are professionally trained in assessing, diagnosing, and treating a range of psychological disorders and could be of use to physicians in caring for patients with these problems. Psychologists are currently underutilized in primary care.

In Canada, there is limited experience with collaboration between family physicians and psychologists, although reported experiences have been positive.10,18–22 Studies on collaboration between nurse practitioners and family physicians have emphasized that, in order to foster trust and respect, it is important for each party to be aware of the other’s competencies, skills, and scope of practice.23

Since family physicians are known to be the gatekeepers of primary care, it seems logical to explore factors that could influence their knowledge and attitudes regarding psychologists, as well as their thoughts about collaboration with them. Winefield et al stated that it was important to better understand the attitudes of primary care professionals in order to facilitate the introduction of mental health care services.24

In this study, we surveyed a subsample of eastern Ontario family physicians to explore how much they knew about the professional training and expertise of psychologists, and their beliefs about the effectiveness of psychological treatments. We also solicited their views on the integration of psychologists into primary care and examined factors affecting referral patterns.


   METHODS
TOP
 METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Footnotes
 Acknowledgment
 References
 
Surveys were sent to family physicians who practised within certain postal codes in the area of the Réseau des services de santé en français de l’Est de l’Ontario (www.rssfe.on.ca/french/t1map-f.htm). Names and addresses of these physicians were obtained from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. The survey was done in this region partly because funding was limited and partly because it was necessary to respect the francophone-oriented mandate of the Consortium national de formation en santé (www.cnfs.net). Ethics approval was obtained from the Ottawa Hospital Research Ethics Board, and informed consent was sought from participants completing the questionnaire.

Questionnaire
The questionnaire was written in French and could be completed in approximately 5 minutes. Questions were generated by the research team based on a literature review that revealed common themes in collaboration between psychologists and family physicians.10,18–22 and on the principal investigators’ earlier experiences with collaboration. The questionnaire was reviewed by an external consultant and pilot-tested on 6 physicians. Revisions were made in accordance with their comments before the questionnaire was mailed.

Outcome measures
Questions explored physicians’ knowledge about the training, roles, and skills of psychologists; their willingness to collaborate with psychologists; their level of comfort with treating psychological problems; and their past experiences in working with psychologists. Demographic data were also collected.

Mailings
To maximize response, a modified version of the Dillman total survey method was used.25 The questionnaire and an addressed, stamped return envelope were mailed to each potential participant. A reminder postcard was sent to all nonrespondents 2 weeks after the initial mailing. Two weeks later, a second questionnaire was sent to those who had not yet responded. If necessary, a third questionnaire was sent 2 additional weeks later. Questionnaires were mailed in May, June, and July 2005. To protect respondents’ anonymity, a code was used on mailing and return labels.

Data analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to summarize respondents’ answers.


   RESULTS
TOP
 METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 Footnotes
 Acknowledgment
 References
 
The addresses of 457 family physicians practising in francophone areas of eastern Ontario were provided by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. A total of 126 of these family physicians returned completed surveys: 76 (16.6% of those mailed) were returned after the first mailing, 21 (4.6%) after the second mailing, and 29 (6.4%) after the third mailing. Fifteen surveys were undeliverable. Among the 126 respondents, 8 declined consent to share their answers, so 118 surveys were included in the analyses (27% of delivered surveys). Table 1 summarizes respondents’ demographic and practice characteristics.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Demographic characteristics of family physicians: N=118.

 
Table 2 shows the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of participants. Nearly half of respondents were francophone (48%) or had a strong French linguistic background; about 40% were anglophones. Almost all their services were offered in French, English, or both.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Language background and use of language in practice: N = 118.

 
Family physicians’ knowledge of psychologists’ training and profession is summarized in Table 3. About 59% of respondents knew that a doctorate was required to practise as a psychologist in Ontario, while the remainder believed that lesser academic training was required. A similar number were aware that psychologists had to complete a period of supervised practice not unlike a medical residency. Almost all respondents correctly indicated that psychologist is a protected and regulated title. It was less clear to them what distinguished psychologists from psychotherapists.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3 Family physicians’ knowledge of psychologists’ training and expertise

 
The views of family physicians on the effectiveness of psychological interventions and collaboration with psychologists are shown in Table 4. Most family physicians were aware that there were evidence-based psychological interventions. Virtually all respondents agreed that psychological interventions would be useful for patients with mental and emotional disorders or personal difficulties, and 78% thought these interventions might be beneficial in the context of some physical problems. The most common reasons for referring to psychologists included the belief that psychologists’ services would be appropriate (84%) and patients’ requests for referral (62%). The most important reason for not referring to psychologists was patients’ economic constraints (95%).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4 Family physicians’ views on collaboration with psychologists

 
About 75% of family physicians believed that integrating psychologists into primary care would improve the quality of services. More than half stated that collaboration with psychologists would be a desirable addition to medical practice, and half felt that such collaboration would lead to a useful exchange of knowledge and increased patient satisfaction.

Physicians’ prior experiences with psychologists were explored by asking them to rate their agreement with statements using ordered response categories. Physicians placed the highest importance on receiving feedback from psychologists on their clinical findings and recommendations. They did not think psychologists provided adequate feedback when patients had been referred to them. There was strong agreement that psychologists offer effective treatments that some patients need, but a mixed response regarding ease of access to psychologists. Physicians also acknowledged that they had received insufficient training in psychological treatments while in medical school and residency, scoring the adequacy of their training as 2.28 (standard deviation 1) on a scale of 1 (very inadequate) to 5 (very adequate).


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
Footnotes
 Acknowledgment
 References
 
These eastern Ontario family physicians were aware that there are evidence-based psychological interventions for common mental health problems.17 They acknowledged to a lesser extent the effectiveness of psychological interventions for dealing with health conditions, such as chronic pain, cardiovascular diseases, chronic fatigue, and insomnia.26–31 It is clear that physicians need to be better informed about how psychology could contribute to health promotion and management of chronic illnesses.

Most physicians thought they had received insufficient information and training in medical school and residency to treat patients with psychological problems. This is consistent with results of previous reports noting that family physicians perceive that their mental health interventions consist primarily of emotional support and counseling rather than formal psychological treatments.6

Although physicians knew that psychologists belonged to a regulated health profession, they seemed to be ill-informed about psychologists’ training. Many physicians were unclear as to the distinctions between psychologists and other of mental health workers, such as psychotherapists, who are sometimes unregulated, have varying levels of training, and are sometimes not trained in psychology at all. This confusion about the credentials and scope of practice of psychologists might pose a barrier to collaboration that does not exist for many other health professionals. Fostering interprofessional relations between psychologists and family physicians through shared training opportunities could be considered as a way to begin interdisciplinary collaboration. It might allow each to know more about the other’s expertise and understand the other’s work styles and conventions.

The main reported obstacle to referring patients to psychologists was financial. The relative scarcity of psychologists and not knowing when they were in a community also limited referrals. These results are consistent with other findings that financial and logistical factors limit referrals to psychologists.6

It is both good medical practice and professional courtesy to provide feedback on clinical impressions and recommendations when patients are referred. Physicians said lack of clinical feedback was a negative experience in dealing with psychologists. They did acknowledge, however, that there are potential benefits to collaborating with psychologists.6,10,12,13,19,21,32,33

Limitations
The results of this survey are consistent with those of previous studies. The low response rate (28%), however, limits their representativeness and generalizability. Physicians are known to have the lowest response rates to mailed surveys.34,35

Detailed demographic information regarding the mailing list was not accessible due to privacy issues, so only demographic data collected from respondents were available. Our respondents’ profile was different from that of respondents to the 2004 National Physicians Survey (NPS). Our sample was younger (72% versus 57% in the 35- to 54-year-old stratum),36 and women were more highly represented (50% versus 40%).36 As with NPS respondents, most family physicians responding to this survey worked in private practice (76% versus 77%). Of our respondents, 38% had academic responsibilities compared with 10% of those in the NPS.36 These differences in demographic characteristics might have affected our survey’s results. Given that our sample had a greater proportion of women, was younger, and had more academic affiliations than the NPS respondents, we might have expected greater knowledge of other professions and more openness to interdisciplinary collaboration. Also, our results might overestimate family physicians’ knowledge and beliefs about psychologists.

Due in part to funding constraints, this survey was written only in French and administered to physicians offering services in francophone areas of eastern Ontario. This might have deterred physicians less comfortable with French from participating, although about 40% of respondents considered English their first language, and a similar proportion used primarily English during patient care.

Physicians responding to this survey might have been biased by their language, age, sex, or academic interests, but their readiness to collaborate and their perceived need for support in the area of mental health care despite limited understanding of psychologists’ background is consistent with the findings of previous studies.10,18–22

Conclusion
This survey suggests that family physicians are receptive to collaboration with psychologists. Family physicians need to be better informed about the training and credentials of psychologists, however, and psychologists need to better communicate their professional opinions and recommendations on referred patients. This is professional courtesy, and it might foster professional collaboration and increase physicians’ understanding of the roles and contributions of psychologists. Although physicians were aware of the existence of evidence-based psychological interventions, they felt ill-prepared to treat patients with psychological problems, other than to provide them with basic counseling and support. As regulated professionals with training in assessing and diagnosing a range of psychological disorders and the ability to provide evidence-based psychological treatments, psychologists could well complement the skills of physicians in family practice and might be called upon to play a role in the health care system that emerges from primary care reform.



   EDITOR’S KEY POINTS
 
  • This study explores physicians’ knowledge of psychologists’ training, roles, and skills; their willingness to collaborate with psychologists; their level of comfort in treating psychological problems; and their past experiences in working with psychologists.
  • The most common reasons for physicians to refer to psychologists were the belief that psychologists’ services were appropriate and patients’ requests for referral. The most important reason for not referring patients to psychologists was that public health insurance did not cover the cost of visits to psychologists.
  • Physicians placed the highest importance on receiving feedback from psychologists on their clinical findings and recommendations and did not think that psychologists provided adequate feedback when patients had been referred to them.

 


   Acknowledgment
TOP
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Footnotes
 Acknowledgment
References
 
This study was funded by the Consortium national de formation en santé


   Footnotes
TOP
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Footnotes
Acknowledgment
 References
 
Contributors

Dr Grenier was responsible for concept and design of the study; preparation of the grant application; implementation of the survey; interpretation of the data; and drafting, revision, and completion of the article. Dr Chomienne assumed responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Ms Gaboury participated in preparation of the grant application; in analysis and interpretation of data; and in drafting, critically revising, and completing the article. Dr Ritchie contributed to preparation of the grant application, analysis and interpretation of data, and drafting and critically revising the manuscript. Dr Hogg contributed to concept and design of the study, preparation of the grant application, analysis and interpretation of data, and drafting and critically revising the manuscript.

Competing interests

None declared

*Full text is available in English at www.cfp.ca.

This article has been peer reviewed.


   References
TOP
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Footnotes
 Acknowledgment
 References
 

  1. Romanow RJ. Building on values: the future of health care in Canada. Saskatoon, SK: Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada; 2002. Available from: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/pdf/romanow/pdfs/HCC_Final_Report.pdf. Accessed 2007 November 29.
  2. Romanow Commission. Costs and cost-offsets of psychological interventions: data in support of their integration into universal access health care system. Vancouver, BC: Romanow Commission; 2002. p. 1-11. Available from: www.cpa.ca/CPAPADVOCACYPROJECT/PDFs/BC-RomanowBrief.pdf. Accessed 2007 November 29.
  3. Kirby MJ. The health of Canadians: the federal role Volume 6, Recommendations for reform. Ottawa, ON: Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology; 2006. Available from: www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/soci-e/rep-e/repoct02vol6-e.htm. Accessed 2007 November 29.
  4. Boerma WG, Verhaak PF. The general practitioner as the first contacted health professional by patients with psychosocial problems: a European study. Psychol Med 1999;29:689-96.[Medline]
  5. Shiber A, Maoz B, Antonovsky A, Antonovsky H. Detection of emotional problems in the primary care clinic. Fam Pract 1990;7:195-200.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Craven MA, Cohen M, Campbell D, Williams J, Kates N. Mental health practices of Ontario family physicians: a study using qualitative methodology. Can J Psychiatry 1997;42:943-9.[Medline]
  7. College of Family Physicians of Canada. Updated data release of the 2001 National Family Physician Workforce Survey. Mississauga, ON: College of Family Physicians of Canada; 2001. Available from: www.cfpc.ca/English/cfpc/research/janus%20project/nfpws/results/default.asp?s=1.Accessed. 2008 January 23.
  8. Watson DE, Heppner P, Roos NP, Reid RJ, Katz A. Population-based use of mental health services and patterns of delivery among family physicians, 1992 to 2001. Can J Psychiatry 2005;50:398-406.[Medline]
  9. Lesage AD, Goering P, Lin E. Family physicians and the mental health system. Report from the Mental Health Supplement to the Ontario Health Survey. Can Fam Physician 1997;43:251-6.[Medline]
  10. Witko KD, Bernes KB, Nixon G. Care for psychological problems. Collaborative approach in primary care. Can Fam Physician 2005;51:799-801.[Free Full Text]
  11. Kates N, Craven M. Shared mental health care. Update from the Collaborative Working Group of the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Canadian Psychiatric Association. Can Fam Physician 2002;48:936.[Free Full Text]
  12. Kates N, Crustolo AM, Farrar S, Nikolaou L. Counsellors in primary care: benefits and lessons learned. Can J Psychiatry 2002;47:857-62.[Medline]
  13. Kates N. Shared mental health care. The way ahead. Can Fam Physician 2002;48:853-61.[Free Full Text]
  14. Murray GC, Sharp KM, Quigley A, McKenzie K. An evaluation of a primary care psychological therapies clinic. Scott Med J 2000;45:174-6.[Medline]
  15. Katon W, Robinson P, Von Korff M, Lin E, Bush T, Ludman E, et al. A multi-faceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1996;53:924-32.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Hunsley J. The cost effectiveness of psychological interventions. Report prepared for the Canadian Psychological Association. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Psychological Association; 2002. Available from: http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/advocacy/Cost-Effectiveness.pdf. Accessed 2007 December 11.
  17. Hunsley J. Cost-effectiveness and medical cost-offset considerations in psychological service provision. Can Psychol 2003;44:61-73.
  18. Pace TM, Chaney JM, Mullins LL, Olson RA. Psychological consultation with primary-care physicians: obstacles and opportunities in the medical setting. Prof Psychol Res Pract 1995;26:123-31.
  19. Bray JH, Rogers JC. Linking psychologists and family physicians for collaborative practice. Prof Psychol Res Pract 1995;26:132-8.
  20. Meyer JD, Fink CM, Carey PF. Medical views of psychological consultation. Prof Psychol Res Pract 1988;19:356-8.
  21. Kainz K. Barriers and enhancements to physician-psychologist collaboration. Prof Psychol Res Pract 2002;33:169-75.
  22. Holloway RL, David AK. The complexion of collaboration: an overview of the psychologist-physician relationship. Clin Case Studies 2005;4:115-25.
  23. Kasperski MJ. Implementation strategies: collaboration in primary care— family doctors and nurse practitioners delivering shared care. Toronto, ON: Ontario College of Family Physicians; 2000. Available from: www.ocfp.on.ca. Accessed 2007 December 11.
  24. Winefield H, Marley J, Taplin J, Beilby J, Turnbull D, Wilson I, et al. Primary health care response to onsite psychologist support. Aust e-J Adv Ment Health 2003;2(1):1-7.
  25. Dillman D. Mail and Internet surveys: the tailored design method. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1999.
  26. Chambless DL, Ollendick TH. Empirically supported psychological interventions: controversies and evidence. Ann Rev Psychol 2001;52:685-716.[Medline]
  27. Nathan PE, Gorman JM, editors. A guide to treatments that work. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.
  28. Roth AD, Fonagy P. What works for whom? New York, NY: Guilford Press; 1996.
  29. Whiting P, Bagnall AM, Sowden AJ, Cornell JE, Mulrow CD, Ramirez G. Interventions for the treatment and management of chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA 2001;286:1360-8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Nezu AM, Nezu CM, Lombardo ER. Cognitive-behavior therapy for medically unexplained symptoms: a critical review of the treatment literature. Behav Ther 2001;32:537-83.
  31. Hampson SE, Skinner TC, Hart J, Storey L, Gage H, Foxcroft D, et al. Behavioral interventions for adolescents with type 1 diabetes: how effective are they? Diabetes Care 2000;23:1416-22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Haley WE, McDaniel SH, Bray JH, Frank RG, Heldring M, Johnson SB, et al. Psychological practice in primary care settings: practical tips for clinicians. Prof Psychol Res Pract 1998;29:237-44.
  33. Kates N, Crustolo AM, Farrar S, Nikolaou L, Ackerman S, Brown S. Mental health care and nutrition. Integrating specialist services into primary care. Can Fam Physician 2002;48:1898-903.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:1129-36.[Medline]
  35. Kisely S, Duerden D, Shaddick S, Jayabarathan A. Collaboration between primary care and psychiatric services. Can Fam Physician 2006;52:876-77.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. College of Family Physicians of Canada, Canadian Medical Association, and Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. 2004 National Physician Survey (NPS): Ontario demographics. Mississauga, ON: College of Family Physicians of Canada; 2005. Available from: http://www.nationalphysicianssurvey.ca/nps/results/FP-q.fpsp.natprov-e.asp#k. Accessed 2008 January 3.




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Résumé
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grenier, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grenier, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, W.
Related Collections
Right arrow Résumés de recherche

HOME HELP CONTACT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES SEARCH