Cargando…

Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units

OBJECTIVES: This report describes the patients who used additional out-of-hours (OOH) appointments offered through a UK scheme intended to increase patient access to primary care by extending OOH provision. DESIGN: Cohort study and survey data. SETTING: OOH appointments offered in four units in one...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kelly, Shona, J., Piercy, Hilary, Ibbotson, Rachel, Fowler Davis, Sally V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6009516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29886444
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020308
_version_ 1783333403617132544
author Kelly, Shona, J.
Piercy, Hilary
Ibbotson, Rachel
Fowler Davis, Sally V.
author_facet Kelly, Shona, J.
Piercy, Hilary
Ibbotson, Rachel
Fowler Davis, Sally V.
author_sort Kelly, Shona, J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This report describes the patients who used additional out-of-hours (OOH) appointments offered through a UK scheme intended to increase patient access to primary care by extending OOH provision. DESIGN: Cohort study and survey data. SETTING: OOH appointments offered in four units in one region in England (October 2015 to November 2016). METHODS: Unidentifiable data on all patients were abstracted from a bespoke appointment system and the responses to a patient opinion questionnaire about this service. Descriptive analysis of the appointment data was conducted. Multivariate analysis of the opinion survey data examined the characteristics of the patients who would have gone to the emergency department (ED) had the OOH appointments not been available. RESULTS: There were 24 448 appointments for 19 701 different patients resulting in 29 629 service outcomes. Women dominated the uptake and patients from the poorest fifth of the population used nearly 40% of appointments. The patient survey found OOH appointments were extremely popular—93% selecting ‘extremely likely’ or ‘likely’ to recommend the service. Multivariate analysis of patient opinion survey data on whether ED would have been an alternative to the OOH service found that men, young children, people of Asian heritage and the most deprived were more likely to have gone to ED without this service. CONCLUSIONS: The users of the OOH service were substantially different from in-hours service users with a large proportion of children under age 5, and the poor, which support the idea that there may be unmet need as the poor have the least flexible working conditions. These results demonstrate the need for equality impact assessment in planning service improvements associated with policy implementation. It suggests that OOH need to take account of patients expectations about convenience of appointments and how patients use services for urgent care needs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6009516
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60095162018-06-25 Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units Kelly, Shona, J. Piercy, Hilary Ibbotson, Rachel Fowler Davis, Sally V. BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: This report describes the patients who used additional out-of-hours (OOH) appointments offered through a UK scheme intended to increase patient access to primary care by extending OOH provision. DESIGN: Cohort study and survey data. SETTING: OOH appointments offered in four units in one region in England (October 2015 to November 2016). METHODS: Unidentifiable data on all patients were abstracted from a bespoke appointment system and the responses to a patient opinion questionnaire about this service. Descriptive analysis of the appointment data was conducted. Multivariate analysis of the opinion survey data examined the characteristics of the patients who would have gone to the emergency department (ED) had the OOH appointments not been available. RESULTS: There were 24 448 appointments for 19 701 different patients resulting in 29 629 service outcomes. Women dominated the uptake and patients from the poorest fifth of the population used nearly 40% of appointments. The patient survey found OOH appointments were extremely popular—93% selecting ‘extremely likely’ or ‘likely’ to recommend the service. Multivariate analysis of patient opinion survey data on whether ED would have been an alternative to the OOH service found that men, young children, people of Asian heritage and the most deprived were more likely to have gone to ED without this service. CONCLUSIONS: The users of the OOH service were substantially different from in-hours service users with a large proportion of children under age 5, and the poor, which support the idea that there may be unmet need as the poor have the least flexible working conditions. These results demonstrate the need for equality impact assessment in planning service improvements associated with policy implementation. It suggests that OOH need to take account of patients expectations about convenience of appointments and how patients use services for urgent care needs. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6009516/ /pubmed/29886444 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020308 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Kelly, Shona, J.
Piercy, Hilary
Ibbotson, Rachel
Fowler Davis, Sally V.
Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title_full Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title_fullStr Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title_full_unstemmed Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title_short Who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? Analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
title_sort who attends out-of-hours general practice appointments? analysis of a patient cohort accessing new out-of-hours units
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6009516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29886444
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020308
work_keys_str_mv AT kellyshonaj whoattendsoutofhoursgeneralpracticeappointmentsanalysisofapatientcohortaccessingnewoutofhoursunits
AT piercyhilary whoattendsoutofhoursgeneralpracticeappointmentsanalysisofapatientcohortaccessingnewoutofhoursunits
AT ibbotsonrachel whoattendsoutofhoursgeneralpracticeappointmentsanalysisofapatientcohortaccessingnewoutofhoursunits
AT fowlerdavissallyv whoattendsoutofhoursgeneralpracticeappointmentsanalysisofapatientcohortaccessingnewoutofhoursunits