The Use and Relevance of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) in Structuring Patient Information

  • Henk Lamberts
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Medical Informatics book series (LNMED, volume 30)


Information systems and health statistics deal with data which have been ordered and received a name, so that they can be counted. What has no name, cannot be counted and consequently has no impact. ICPC, together with its manual provides the best available tool to order and to name essential elements of primary care. It offers a widely tested, comprehensive classification system which can be used in three modes:
  • as a Reason for Encounter classification

  • as a Diagnostic classification

  • as a Process classification.


Health Service Research Health Information System National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Public Health Report Health Statistical Orientation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Health Services Research 1984 Planning for the Third Decade of Health Services Research. Med. Care 1985, 23, Special Issue, 377–750.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Variations in Medical Practice. Special Issue, Health Affairs 1984, 3, 4–148.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    White, K.L.: Restructuring the International Classification of Diseases: Need for a New Paradigm. J. Fam. Pract. 1985, 21, 17–20.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Health Services Research on Primary Care. Program Note, National Center for Health Services Research and Health Care Technology Assessment. Washington, DC, US Dept. of Health and Human Services, May 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feinstein, A.R.: Clinical Epidemiology. The architecture of clinical research. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Company, 1985.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    International Classification of Diseases: Ninth Revision. Geneve, World Health Organization, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kilpatrick, S.J., Boyle, R.M., eds.: Primary Care Research. Encounter records and the denominator problem. New York, Praeger Publishers, 1984Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Green, L.A., Wood, M., Becker, L., et al.: The Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network: Purpose, Methods and Policies. J. Fam. Pract. 1984, 18, 275–280.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brook, H.R., Lohr, K.N.: Efficacy, Effectiveness, Variations and Quality. Med. Care 1985, 23, 710–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lamberts, H., Meads, S., Wood, M.: Classification of Reasons Why Persons Seek Primary Care: Pilot Study of a New System. Public Health Reports 1984, 99, 597–605.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lamberts, H., Meads, S., Wood, M.: Results of the International Field Trial with the Reason for Encounter Classification. Medicine Sociale et Preventive 1985, 30, 80–87.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ICHPPC-2 (International Classification of Health Problems in Primary Care). Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ICHPPC-2-Defined (Inclusion Criteria for the Use of the Rubrics of the International Classification of Health Problems in Primary Care). Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    An International Glossary for Primary Care. Report of the Classification Committee of the World Organisation of National Colleges, Academies and Academic Associations of General Practitioners/Family Physicians (WONCA). J. Fam. Pract. 1981, 13, 671–681.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    International Classification of Process in Primary Care (IC-Process-PC). Oxford, Oxford University Press, forthcoming 1986.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC). Manual for Use of ICPC in Relevance Studies, as Prepared by the WHO-Working Party on ICPC. Amsterdam, Department of General Practice, University of Amsterdam, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wood, M.: Family Medicine Classification Systems in Evolution. J. Fam. Pract. 1981, 12, 199–200.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Froom, J.: New Directions in Standard Terminology and Classifications for Primary Care. Public Health Reports 1984, 99, 73–77.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weed, L.: Medical Records, Medical Education and Patient Care. The Problem-oriented Record as a Basic Tool. Cleveland (Ohio), The Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1969.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meads, S.: The WHO Reason for Encounter Classification. WHO Chronicle, 1983, 37, 159–162.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A Reason for Visit Classification for Ambulatory Care. Hyattsville, MD, US Public Health Service, National Center for Health Statistics, 1979 (DHEW Publication No. 79–1352).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Patients’ Reasons for Visiting Physicians: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, United States, 1977–1978. Data from the National Health Survey. Hyattsville, MD, Series 13, No. 56, 1981 (DHHS Publication No. 82–1717).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lipkin, M., Kupka, K., eds.: Psychological Factors Affecting Health. New York, Praeger Publishers, 1982.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kupka, K.: International Classification of Diseases: Ninth Revision. WHO Chron. 1978, 32, 219–225.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Classification of Diseases, Problems and Procedures 1984. Occasional Paper 26. London, Royal College of General Practitioners, 1984.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lamberts, H.: Morbidity in General Practice. Diagnosis-related Information from the Monitoring Project. Utrecht, Huisartsenpers BV, 1984.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kasl, S.V.: How Can Epidemiology Contribute to the Planning of Health Services Research. Med. Care 1985, 23, 598–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    White, K.L.: Information for Health Care: An Epidemiological Perspective. Inquiry 1980, 17, 296–312.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    White, K.L.: Evaluation and Medicine. In: Holland, W., ed.: Evaluation in Health Care. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nelson, E., Conger, B., Douglass, R., et al.: Functional Health Status Levels of Primary Care Patients. JAMA 1983, 249, 3331–3338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henk Lamberts
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General PracticeUniversity of AmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations