Talk:Primary care

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment regarding "holistic view"

The article currently states: Because of the nature of problems presented to a primary care physician, he/she has to keep a holistic view of the patient, investigating carefully if the problem presented can be managed by reassurance and symptomatic treatment or by intervention. I'm removing that statement. The job of a primary care provider is to treat or refer to a secondary care provider if he or she is unable to treat. Edwardian 08:53, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, their job is to treat or refer, but remember that sometimes reassurance and advice is treatment - possibly the most appropriate treatment, in fact, if the primary care doctor believes it is most appropriate for the patient's complaint (e.g. mild insomnia), or if the doctor concludes there is nothing medically wrong with the patient. A primary care doctor is not obligated to provide some sort of "concrete" treatment, just what they believe (in their professional judgement) is the most appropriate treatment available. I think the statement should go back, with a some minor alterations: most importantly, to make it clear that "reassurance" and "intervention" are not mutually exclusive, and can be one and the same. Also, "symptomatic treatment" will typically involve drug treatment anyway, so again, is definitely not distinct from an intervention. 78.147.28.58 (talk) 04:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diabetes

removed type 2 from after Diabetes Mellitus. Primary care docs commonly treat both type 1 and type 2 diabetics.

Propose merger with "health care"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

No consensus to merge --KarlB (talk) 15:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is poorly referenced, incomplete, and does not contain a worldwide perspective. Recommend it be merged with the "health care" article, which provides a more holistic view of health care and worldwide perspective (with references).Guptan99 (talk) 11:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't reasons to merge, in my opinion. You can find rationale to merge (or not) at Wikipedia:Merging#Rationale. "Merging should be avoided if ... 2. The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross linked) articles 3. The topics are discrete subjects and deserve their own articles even though they may be short." 2 & 3 apply here in my opinion. Jesanj (talk) 13:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK I merged the relevant text from the main "health care" article here then, even if its a duplication. Also added some more country sections for more worldwide perspective.Guptan99 (talk) 14:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Non-NHS primary carers

Some medical professionals work as self-employed individuals or companies outwith the UK's NHS, and yet have qualifications that allow them to be viewed as primary carers. They therefore use their own professional judgement and refer on to other medical professionals as appropriate. Examples include Chiropractors, Osteopaths and Physiotherapists.

The existing content appears to link primary care exclusively with the NHS.

Should we have a short paragraph on non-NHS primary carers? DS0022 (talk) 11:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think pseudoscientific alternative medicine "providers" would belong here, any more than you'd include an accupuncturist in this article. Kimen8 (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, most courses in these three professions are 3 to 5 year degree-level, externally validated by universities, and at least one awards a 'doctor' prefix. Qualified physiotherapists decide whether to work within the NHS or outside - it is open to personal choice. There are very few NHS openings for osteopaths or chiropractors, and their training courses set an early expectation of self-employment. Despite 2 Acts of Parliament legalising these 2 professions, there has never been a concerted push for more NHS uptake to broaden provision.

In practice, many doctors, nurses and other NHS professionals regularly use these three professions for their personal health - which is some sort of testimonial.

WIthin the CAM industry as a whole, there are differences of professional status. I am ignorant of acupuncture qualifications, but I feel that their qualification level may be lower.

May I ask Kimen8: are you UK based? DS0022 (talk) 15:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should also have said that all three are regulated professions, with each regulator being overseen by the super-regulator Professional Services Authority - see Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care DS0022 (talk) 15:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]