scholarly journals The Impact of Digital-First Consultations on Workload in General Practice: Modeling Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Salisbury ◽  
Mairead Murphy ◽  
Polly Duncan
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Specialist Services ◽  
Key Variables ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND Health services in many countries are promoting digital-first models of access to general practice based on offering online, video, or telephone consultations before a face-to-face consultation. It is claimed that this will improve access for patients and moderate the workload of doctors. However, improved access could also potentially increase doctors’ workload. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to explore whether and under what circumstances digital-first access to general practice is likely to decrease or increase general practice workload. METHODS A process map to delineate primary care access pathways was developed and a model to estimate general practice workload constructed in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp). The model was populated using estimates of key variables obtained from a systematic review of published studies. A MEDLINE search was conducted for studies published in English between January 1, 2000, and September 30, 2019. Included papers provided quantitative data about online, telephone, or video consultations for unselected patients requesting a general practice in-hours consultation for any problem. We excluded studies of general practitioners consulting specialists, consultations not conducted by doctors, and consultations conducted after hours, in secondary care, in specialist services, or for a specific health care problem. Data about the following variables were extracted from the included papers to form the model inputs: the proportion of consultations managed digitally, the proportion of digital consultations completed without a subsequent consultation, the proportion of subsequent consultations conducted by telephone rather than face-to-face, consultation duration, and the proportion of digital consultations that represent new demand. The outcome was general practice workload. The model was used to test the likely impact of different digital-first scenarios, based on the best available evidence and the plausible range of estimates from the published studies. The model allows others to test the impact on workload of varying assumptions about model inputs. RESULTS Digital-first approaches are likely to increase general practice workload unless they are shorter, and a higher proportion of patients are managed without a subsequent consultation than observed in most published studies. In our base-case scenarios (based on the best available evidence), digital-first access models using online, telephone, or video consultations are likely to increase general practitioner workload by 25%, 3%, and 31%, respectively. An important determinant of workload is whether the availability of digital-first approaches changes the demand for general practice consultations, but there is little robust evidence to answer this question. CONCLUSIONS Digital-first approaches to primary care could increase general practice workload unless stringent conditions are met. Justification for these approaches should be based on evidence about the benefits in relation to the costs, rather than assumptions about reductions in workload. Given the potential increase in workload, which in due course could worsen problems of access, these initiatives should be implemented in a staged way alongside careful evaluation.

scholarly journals Advanced Access scheduling in general practice and use of primary care: a Danish population-based matched cohort study

BJGP Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen20X101091
Author(s):  
Maria Bang ◽  
Henrik Schou Pedersen ◽  
Bodil Hammer Bech ◽  
Claus Høstrup Vestergaard ◽  
Jannik Falhof ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Matched Cohort ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Matched Cohort Study ◽  
Adjusted Incidence Rate ◽  
Advanced Access ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundAdvanced access scheduling (AAS) allows patients to receive care from their GP at the time chosen by the patient. AAS has shown to increase the accessibility to general practice, but little is known about how AAS implementation affects the use of in-hours and out-of-hours (OOH) services.AimTo describe the impact of AAS on the use of in-hours and OOH services in primary care.Design & settingA population-based matched cohort study using Danish register data.MethodA total of 161 901 patients listed in 33 general practices with AAS were matched with 287 837 reference patients listed in 66 reference practices without AAS. Outcomes of interest were use of daytime face-to-face consultations, and use of OOH face-to-face and phone consultations in a 2-year period preceding and following AAS implementation.ResultsNo significant differences were seen between AAS practices and reference practices. During the year following AAS implementation, the number of daytime face-to-face consultations was 3% (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99 to 1.07) higher in the AAS practices compared with the number in the reference practices. Patients listed with an AAS practice had 2% (aIRR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.04) fewer OOH phone consultations and 6% (aIRR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.02) fewer OOH face-to-face consultations compared with patients listed with a reference practice.ConclusionThis study showed no significant differences following AAS implementation. However, a trend was seen towards slightly higher use of daytime primary care and lower use of OOH primary care.

scholarly journals Inequalities in general practice remote consultations: A systematic review

BJGP Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. BJGPO.2021.0040
Author(s):  
Ruth Parker ◽  
Emma Figures ◽  
Charlotte Paddison ◽  
James Matheson ◽  
David Blane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Remote Consultations

BackgroundCOVID-19 has led to rapid and widespread use of remote consultations in general practice, but the health inequalities impact remains unknown.AimTo explore the impact of remote consultations in general practice compared to face-to-face consultations on utilisation and clinical outcomes across socio-economic and disadvantaged groups.Design & settingSystematic reviewMethodWe undertook an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to June 2020. We included studies which compared remote consultations to face-to-face consultations in primary care and reported outcomes by PROGRESS Plus criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Data was synthesised narratively.ResultsBased on 13 studies, exploring telephone and internet-based consultations, we found that telephone consultations were used by younger working age people, the very old and non-immigrants, with internet-based consultations more likely to be used by younger people. Women consistently used more remote forms of consulting than men. Socio-economic and ethnicity findings were mixed, with weak evidence that patients from more affluent areas were more likely to use internet-based communication. Remote consultations appeared to help patients with opioid dependence remain engaged with primary care. No studies reported on the impact on quality of care or clinical outcomes.ConclusionRemote consultations in general practice are likely to be used more by younger working people, non-immigrants, the elderly and women, with internet-based consultations more by younger, affluent and educated groups. Wide-spread use of remote consultations should be treated with caution until the inequalities impact on clinical outcomes and quality of care is known.

scholarly journals The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone triage for managing same-day consultation requests in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing general practitioner-led and nurse-led management systems with usual care (the ESTEEM trial)

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (13) ◽  
pp. 1-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
John L Campbell ◽  
Emily Fletcher ◽  
Nicky Britten ◽  
Colin Green ◽  
Tim Holt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Patient Safety ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Telephone Triage ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundTelephone triage is proposed as a method of managing increasing demand for primary care. Previous studies have involved small samples in limited settings, and focused on nurse roles. Evidence is limited regarding the impact on primary care workload, costs, and patient safety and experience when triage is used to manage patients requesting same-day consultations in general practice.ObjectivesIn comparison with usual care (UC), to assess the impact of GP-led telephone triage (GPT) and nurse-led computer-supported telephone triage (NT) on primary care workload and cost, patient experience of care, and patient safety and health status for patients requesting same-day consultations in general practice.DesignPragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, incorporating economic evaluation and qualitative process evaluation.SettingGeneral practices (n = 42) in four regions of England, UK (Devon, Bristol/Somerset, Warwickshire/Coventry, Norfolk/Suffolk).ParticipantsPatients requesting same-day consultations.InterventionsPractices were randomised to GPT, NT or UC. Data collection was not blinded; however, analysis was conducted by a statistician blinded to practice allocation.Main outcome measuresPrimary – primary care contacts [general practice, out-of-hours primary care, accident and emergency (A&E) and walk-in centre attendances] in the 28 days following the index consultation request. Secondary – resource use and costs, patient safety (deaths and emergency hospital admissions within 7 days of index request, and A&E attendance within 28 days), health status and experience of care.ResultsOf 20,990 eligible randomised patients (UCn = 7283; GPTn = 6695; NTn = 7012), primary outcome data were analysed for 16,211 patients (UCn = 5572; GPTn = 5171; NTn = 5468). Compared with UC, GPT and NT increased primary outcome contacts (over 28-day follow-up) by 33% [rate ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 1.36] and 48% (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.52), respectively. Compared with GPT, NT was associated with a marginal increase in primary outcome contacts by 4% (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08). Triage was associated with a redistribution of primary care contacts. Although GPT, compared with UC, increased the rate of overall GP contacts (face to face and telephone) over the 28 days by 38% (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.50), GP face-to-face contacts were reduced by 39% (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69). NT reduced the rate of overall GP contacts by 16% (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91) and GP face-to-face contacts by 20% (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90), whereas nurse contacts increased. The increased rate of primary care contacts in triage arms is largely attributable to increased telephone contacts. Estimated overall patient–clinician contact time on the index day increased in triage (GPT = 10.3 minutes; NT = 14.8 minutes; UC = 9.6 minutes), although patterns of clinician use varied between arms. Taking account of both the pattern and duration of primary outcome contacts, overall costs over the 28-day follow-up were similar in all three arms (approximately £75 per patient). Triage appeared safe, and no differences in patient health status were observed. NT was somewhat less acceptable to patients than GPT or UC. The process evaluation identified the complexity associated with introducing triage but found no consistency across practices about what works and what does not work when implementing it.ConclusionsIntroducing GPT or NT was associated with a redistribution of primary care workload for patients requesting same-day consultations, and at similar cost to UC. Although triage seemed to be safe, investigation of the circumstances of a larger number of deaths or admissions after triage might be warranted, and monitoring of these events is necessary as triage is implemented.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN20687662.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Primary Care Access for Patients with Hematologic Malignancies

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4011-4011
Author(s):  
Ying Ling ◽  
Kelvin Chan ◽  
Aditi Patrikar ◽  
Ning Liu ◽  
Aisha Lofters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
The United States ◽  
Myeloid Malignancy ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Virtual Visits ◽  
Unplanned Hospitalizations ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction: Primary care physicians are essential to cancer care. They frequently identify signs and symptoms leading to a diagnosis of cancer, and provide ongoing support and management of non-cancer health conditions during cancer treatment. Both primary care and cancer care have been greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the United States, cancer-related patient encounters and cancer screening decreased over 40% and 80% respectively in January to April 2020 compared to 2019 (London et al. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2020). However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care access for cancer patients remain unclear. Methods: We undertook a population-based, retrospective cohort study using healthcare databases held at ICES in Ontario, Canada. Patients with a new lymphoid or myeloid malignancy diagnosed within the year prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, between July 1, 2019 and September 30, 2019 (COVID-19 cohort) were compared to patients diagnosed in years unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic, between July 1, 2018 - September 30, 2018 and July 1, 2017 - September 30, 2017 (pre-pandemic cohort). Both groups were followed for 12 months after initial cancer diagnosis. In the COVID-19 cohort, this allowed for at least 4 months of follow-up data occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was number of in-person and virtual visits with a primary care physician. Secondary outcomes of interest included number of in-person and virtual visits with a hematologist, number of visits to the emergency department (ED), and number of unplanned hospitalizations. Outcomes, reported as crude rates per 1000 person-months, were compared between the COVID-19 and pre-pandemic cohorts using Poisson regression modelling. Results: We identified 2882 individuals diagnosed with a new lymphoid or myeloid malignancy during the defined COVID-19 timeframe and compared them to 5997 individuals diagnosed during the defined pre-pandemic timeframe. The crude rate of in-person primary care visits per 1000 person-months significantly decreased from 574.4 [95% CI 568.5 - 580.4] in the pre-pandemic cohort to 402.5 [395.3 - 409.7] in the COVID-19 cohort (p < 0.0001). Telemedicine visits to primary care significantly increased from 5.3 [4.8 - 5.9] to 173.0 [168.4 - 177.8] (p < 0.0001). The rate of combined in-person and telemedicine visits to primary care did not change from 579.8 [573.8 - 585.8] in the pre-pandemic cohort to 575.5 [566.9 - 584.2] in the COVID-19 cohort (p = 0.43). In-person visits to hematologists decreased from 504.1 [498.5 - 509.7] to 432.8 [425.3 - 440.3] (p < 0.0001), and telemedicine visits to hematologists increased from 6.6 [6.0 - 7.3] to 75.9 [72.8 - 79.1] (p < 0.0001). The rate of combined visits to hematologists did not change from 510.7 [505.1 - 516.4] to 508.7 [500.6 - 516.8] (p = 0.68). The rate of ED visits significantly decreased from 95.1 [92.7 - 97.6] in the pre-pandemic cohort to 84.7 [81.4 - 88.0] in the COVID-19 cohort (p < 0.0001). The rate of unplanned hospitalizations did not change from 64.8 [62.8 - 66.8] to 65.7 [62.9 - 68.7] (p = 0.60). Conclusions: Primary care visits for patients with hematologic malignancies did not significantly change during the pandemic, but there was a sizeable shift from in-person to telemedicine visits. Similar findings were seen for visits to hematologists. While the rate of visits to the ED decreased, potentially due to concern of being exposed to the COVID-19 virus, the shift in ambulatory practices did not seem to impact the rate of unplanned hospitalizations. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Primary care access for mental illness in Australia: Patterns of access to general practice from 2006 to 2016

PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. e0198400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise M. Farrer ◽  
Jennie Walker ◽  
Christopher Harrison ◽  
Michelle Banfield
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access

The impact of primary care access on mortality in lung cancer patients from Bronx, New York.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18614-e18614
Author(s):  
Christopher Su ◽  
Vincent Chau ◽  
Balazs Halmos ◽  
Chirag D Shah ◽  
Rasim A. Gucalp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
New York ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Low-acuity emergency department use among patients in different primary care models in Hamilton and Ontario

2021 ◽  
pp. 084047042110120
Author(s):  
Olivia Ly ◽  
David Price ◽  
Refik Saskin ◽  
Michelle Howard
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Care Models ◽  
Ed Visits ◽  
Primary Care Practices ◽  
The Impact

Jurisdictions such as Hamilton, Ontario, where most primary care practices participate in patient enrolment models with enhanced after-hours access, may demonstrate overall improved health equity outcomes. Non-urgent Emergency Department (ED) use has been suggested as an indicator of primary care access; however, the impact of primary care access on ED use is uncertain and likely varies by patient and contextual factors. This population-based, retrospective study investigated whether or not different primary care models were associated with different rates of non-urgent ED visits in Hamilton, a city with relatively high neighbourhood marginalization, compared to the rest of Ontario from 2014/2015 to 2017/2018. In Ontario, enrolment capitation-based practices had more non-urgent ED visits than non-enrolment fee-for-service practices. In Hamilton, where most of the city’s family physicians are in enrolment capitation-based practices, differences between models were minimal. The influence of primary care reforms may differ depending on how they are distributed within regions.

scholarly journals The impact of chronic diseases and primary care access on health status among elderly populations in rural China

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yixing Yang ◽  
Tai zhang ◽  
Zhaoquan Huang ◽  
Dong Gao ◽  
Zhenyou Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Rural China ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Primary Care Access ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Descriptive System ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective This study aimed to examine the patterns of chronic conditions and the role of primary care access on health status among rural elderly.Methods 6451 elderly aged ≥ 60 years from 5540 households in 116 villages in western rural areas of China were randomly selected and assessed the their health status using the EQ-5D-3L instrument. EQ-5D descriptive system and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were descriptive analyses by patterns of chronic conditions. We identified the impact of multimorbidity and primary care access on health status using multilevel linear model.Results 55% of the pooled sample reported at least one chronic condition, and 30.2% had more than one. Hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis and chronic bronchitis were the most frequently reported conditions. After adjustment for sociodemographic status and patterns of chronic conditions, primary care access significantly associated with health status for the elderly in late life.Conclusion Primary care access and health services should take priority action for rural elderly, especially elderly with multimobidity in lower household income, living in mountainous areas where distance to township hospital is long.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document