Upfront: Results from the 2009 bpac^nz survey

A SINCERE THANK YOU to everyone who contributed to the end of year bpac^nz survey. We had an overwhelming response - over 1500 responses to date!

You think we’ve got it about right

The majority of respondents (82%) described the current volume of material sent to them by bpac^nz as “about right”.

“There is enough time to read and digest the journal and then look forward to the next delivery.”

“I look forward to getting the bpac publications; if life is busy they feel quite frequent and I may not get to thoroughly read them, but I always keep them for reference.”

“Just right, if the volume is increased, it will decrease my likelihood of keeping up.”

15% were leaning towards “too much”

“Please don’t send things just before Christmas.”

and only 3% thought it was nearing “too little.”

“Good amount but I would still read and make use of more info.”

Just the way we are

It is good to know that 82% of respondents think that we should have no change to the current volume and frequency of material. Smaller publications, more often were favoured by 11% and larger publications less often favoured by 8%.

You trust our material

Out of a score of 1 to 5 (where 5 is very high), bpac^nz resources received an average of 4.5 for quality and 4.2 for trustworthiness.

“A very worthwhile publication that provides well written articles that keeps those in clinical practice up to date.”

“Excellent quality of service, sensible, practical, cost-effective, best bang for medical buck.”

�and find it useful

On average, Best Practice Journal was rated 4.5 out of 5 for usefulness and Best Tests 4.2 out of 5.

“It is interesting and easy to read and understand. Great colour and design, keeps the other side of the brain interested too.”

“I wish the journal had been around when I was starting out in general practice.”

GPs rated both personalised reports and clinical audits an average of 3.8 out of 5 for usefulness. Some commented on the frustration of the data not appearing to accurately reflect their clinical practice. We would like to improve on this and will be investigating ways in which we can present data even more usefully.

“The demographics of the �average GP’ don’t apply to the average GP.”

CME quizzes were rated an average of 3.9 out of 5 and patient information 4.0.

BPJ � the smart reading choice!

The overwhelming majority of respondents read bpac^nz publications to keep their medical knowledge up to date (98%) and for continuing professional development (91%).

No barriers to reading bpac publications for most

Most respondents do not have any barriers to reading bpac material. Of those who cited barriers, finding time to read the publications was the most common.

“I always find the information useful, the problem is finding the time to sit down and read it.”

“Barriers are more about my life than your content.”

Wish list

We received some great suggestions for products or services that bpac may consider providing in the future, including:

Seminars, CDs, podcasts, electronic newsletters, online peer support group, software for adverse reaction reporting, audit of professional standards, New Zealand formulary, pharmacist and nurse versions of BPJ, complementary medicine section, case scenarios, downloadable patient resources, query service for medical questions.

And thank you to the person who suggested that we should provide our readers with bookcases to store all our publications in!

The final word

We like this�

“Bpac provides an excellent service, there are limitations but you cannot be all things.”