Citation

Watterson AE, Thomas HF. Public Health 1992; 106(6): 473-480.

Affiliation

University of Southampton, Department of Adult Education, Highfield.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1992, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

1475339

Abstract

A postal questionnaire of all general practitioners (n = 68) in a District Health Authority was undertaken to identify the information and training they had received on acute pesticide poisoning. Fifty-six (82%) replies were received. The responses showed that 33 (59%) had not seen the standard Department of Health Guide to acute pesticide poisoning and only 20 (36%) of the respondents thought that their practice had a copy of this publication. None of those surveyed had ever used Health and Safety Executive Guidance Notes on pesticides. Ten practitioners (18%) reported that they had at some time diagnosed a case of acute pesticide poisoning and three (5%) had done so in the last two years. Only three respondents (5%) considered they had sufficient information to diagnose all the main pesticides listed in the Department of Health Guide but 24 (43%) considered they had sufficient information to diagnose rodenticide poisoning. Twenty-three (41%) considered they had insufficient information to diagnose any acute pesticide poisoning category. The sources of information used in cases of suspected acute pesticide poisoning were the National Poisons Information Services (e.g., Guy's Hospital) for 30 (54%); Accident and Emergency Departments for 19 (34%); and industry for nine (16%). Four (7%) considered they had sufficient training as a medical student to diagnose cases of acute pesticide poisoning and four (7%) considered they had sufficient training since graduating to diagnose such cases. Some of the problems related to the identification and diagnosis of acute pesticide poisoning are discussed and a number of specific recommendations are made to improve the information and training available to general practitioners.