Cargando…

Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data

BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented clinical benefits of longitudinal doctor–patient continuity in primary care, continuity rates have declined. Assessment by practices or health commissioners is rarely undertaken. AIM: Using the Usual Provider of Care (UPC) score this study set out to measure conti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hull, Sally A, Williams, Crystal, Schofield, Peter, Boomla, Kambiz, Ashworth, Mark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9423043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35995578
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0043
_version_ 1784777941453897728
author Hull, Sally A
Williams, Crystal
Schofield, Peter
Boomla, Kambiz
Ashworth, Mark
author_facet Hull, Sally A
Williams, Crystal
Schofield, Peter
Boomla, Kambiz
Ashworth, Mark
author_sort Hull, Sally A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented clinical benefits of longitudinal doctor–patient continuity in primary care, continuity rates have declined. Assessment by practices or health commissioners is rarely undertaken. AIM: Using the Usual Provider of Care (UPC) score this study set out to measure continuity across 126 practices in the mobile, multi-ethnic population of East London, comparing these scores with the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) responses to questions on GP continuity. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective, cross-sectional study in all 126 practices in three East London boroughs. METHOD: The study population included patients who consulted three or more times between January 2017 and December 2018. Anonymised demographic and consultation data from the electronic health record were linked to results from Question 10 (‘seeing the doctor you prefer’) of the 2019 GPPS. RESULTS: The mean UPC score for all 126 practices was 0.52 (range 0.32 to 0.93). There was a strong correlation between practice UPC scores measured in the 2 years to December 2018 and responses to the 2019 GPPS Question 10, Pearson’s r correlation coefficient, 0.62. Smaller practices had higher scores. Multilevel analysis showed higher continuity for patients ≥65 years compared with children and younger adults (β coefficient 0.082, 95% confidence interval = 0.080 to 0.084) and for females compared with males. CONCLUSION: It is possible to measure continuity across all practices in a local health economy. Regular review of practice continuity rates can be used to support efforts to increase continuity within practice teams. In turn this is likely to have a positive effect on clinical outcomes and on satisfaction for both patients and doctors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9423043
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Royal College of General Practitioners
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94230432022-09-16 Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data Hull, Sally A Williams, Crystal Schofield, Peter Boomla, Kambiz Ashworth, Mark Br J Gen Pract Research BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented clinical benefits of longitudinal doctor–patient continuity in primary care, continuity rates have declined. Assessment by practices or health commissioners is rarely undertaken. AIM: Using the Usual Provider of Care (UPC) score this study set out to measure continuity across 126 practices in the mobile, multi-ethnic population of East London, comparing these scores with the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) responses to questions on GP continuity. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective, cross-sectional study in all 126 practices in three East London boroughs. METHOD: The study population included patients who consulted three or more times between January 2017 and December 2018. Anonymised demographic and consultation data from the electronic health record were linked to results from Question 10 (‘seeing the doctor you prefer’) of the 2019 GPPS. RESULTS: The mean UPC score for all 126 practices was 0.52 (range 0.32 to 0.93). There was a strong correlation between practice UPC scores measured in the 2 years to December 2018 and responses to the 2019 GPPS Question 10, Pearson’s r correlation coefficient, 0.62. Smaller practices had higher scores. Multilevel analysis showed higher continuity for patients ≥65 years compared with children and younger adults (β coefficient 0.082, 95% confidence interval = 0.080 to 0.084) and for females compared with males. CONCLUSION: It is possible to measure continuity across all practices in a local health economy. Regular review of practice continuity rates can be used to support efforts to increase continuity within practice teams. In turn this is likely to have a positive effect on clinical outcomes and on satisfaction for both patients and doctors. Royal College of General Practitioners 2022-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9423043/ /pubmed/35995578 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0043 Text en © The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Research
Hull, Sally A
Williams, Crystal
Schofield, Peter
Boomla, Kambiz
Ashworth, Mark
Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title_full Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title_fullStr Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title_full_unstemmed Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title_short Measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
title_sort measuring continuity of care in general practice: a comparison of two methods using routinely collected data
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9423043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35995578
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0043
work_keys_str_mv AT hullsallya measuringcontinuityofcareingeneralpracticeacomparisonoftwomethodsusingroutinelycollecteddata
AT williamscrystal measuringcontinuityofcareingeneralpracticeacomparisonoftwomethodsusingroutinelycollecteddata
AT schofieldpeter measuringcontinuityofcareingeneralpracticeacomparisonoftwomethodsusingroutinelycollecteddata
AT boomlakambiz measuringcontinuityofcareingeneralpracticeacomparisonoftwomethodsusingroutinelycollecteddata
AT ashworthmark measuringcontinuityofcareingeneralpracticeacomparisonoftwomethodsusingroutinelycollecteddata