Examining area-level variation in service organisation and delivery across the breadth of primary healthcare. Usefulness of measures constructed from routine data

Background Australia has a universal healthcare system, yet organisation and delivery of primary healthcare (PHC) services varies across local areas. Understanding the nature and extent of this variation is essential to improve quality of care and health equity, but this has been hampered by a lack of suitable measures across the breadth of effective PHC systems. Using a suite of measures constructed at the area-level, this study explored their application in assessing area-level variation in PHC organisation and delivery. Methods Routinely collected data from New South Wales, Australia were used to construct 13 small area-level measures of PHC service organisation and delivery that best approximated access (availability, affordability, accommodation) comprehensiveness and coordination. Regression analyses and pairwise Pearson’s correlations were used to examine variation by area, and by remoteness and area disadvantage. Results PHC service delivery varied geographically at the small-area level–within cities and more remote locations. Areas in major cities were more accessible (all measures), while in remote areas, services were more comprehensive and coordinated. In disadvantaged areas of major cities, there were fewer GPs (most disadvantaged quintile 0.9[SD 0.1] vs least 1.0[SD 0.2]), services were more affordable (97.4%[1.6] bulk-billed vs 75.7[11.3]), a greater proportion were after-hours (10.3%[3.0] vs 6.2[2.9]) and for chronic disease care (28%[3.4] vs 17.6[8.0]) but fewer for preventive care (50.7%[3.8] had cervical screening vs 62.5[4.9]). Patterns were similar in regional locations, other than disadvantaged areas had less after-hours care (1.3%[0.7] vs 6.1%[3.9]). Measures were positively correlated, except GP supply and affordability in major cities (-0.41, p < .01). Implications Application of constructed measures revealed inequity in PHC service delivery amenable to policy intervention. Initiatives should consider the maldistribution of GPs not only by remoteness but also by area disadvantage. Avenues for improvement in disadvantaged areas include preventative care across all regions and after-hours care in regional locations.

The effects of primary care accessibility and continuity of care on less-urgent emergency department use

Background/Aims. Since the early 2000s, Canada’s primary care system has undergone substantial reforms, including the incorporation of interdisciplinary teams and strategies to optimise accessibility. However, the effects of primary care accessibility and continuity of care on less-urgent emergency department (ED) use are unclear. Three studies were undertaken to investigate the effects of primary care accessibility and continuity of care factors on less-urgent ED use. Methods. Study One employed a cross-sectional analysis of responses to the Canadian Survey of Experiences with Primary Health Care to predict self-reported ED visit avoidability; Study Two employed a longitudinal time-to-event analysis of responses to Ontario’s Health Care Experience Survey linked with subsequent National Ambulatory Care Reporting System data to predict medically assessed less-urgent ED use; and Study Three employed time-series analyses of presentations to two northern British Columbia EDs following changes in walk-in clinic coverage. Results. Study One (n = 2,625) found no significant associations between self-reported ED visit avoidability and all measures of primary care accessibility and continuity of care. However, rural respondents reported greater ED visit avoidability. Conversely, Study Two (n = 34,686) found that all accessibility factors were significantly associated with medically assessed less-urgent ED use, including the presence of a regular PCP, the regular source of care, and the availability of after-hours care through the PCP. However, time with the same PCP was not associated with medically assessed less-urgent ED use. Rurality was also found to moderate the effect of after-hours care accessibility, with only rural respondents reporting a beneficial effect. Finally, Study Three found that changes in walk-in clinic coverage resulted in short-term impacts on less-urgent ED use, with a walk-in clinic closure resulting in an immediate increase in less-urgent presentations and an opening resulting in an immediate decrease. Conclusions. The findings of Studies Two and Three provide evidence that primary care accessibility factors are associated with medically assessed less-urgent ED use; however, the findings of Study One suggest that these factors do not influence self-perceived ED visit avoidability. Future studies should consider this discordance when measuring the impact of primary care accessibility on less-urgent ED use.

Partnering with patients to improve access to primary care

Continuity and timely access are hallmarks of high-quality primary care and are important considerations for urgent concerns that present both during the day and after-hours. It can be especially difficult to ensure continuity of primary care after-hours in urban settings where walk-in clinics offer patients easy and convenient access. Patients of our large, multisite primary care practice in inner-city Toronto, Canada were reporting that they were not easily able to access after-hours care from their team without having to use outside services. In partnership with patients, we combined the Model for Improvement with Experience-Based Design methodology to address the issue of poor access to after-hours care. We did a root cause analysis to isolate the causes of the local problem, using a variety of capture tools designed to incorporate the patient voice. Then, patients and providers codesigned two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles aimed to increase the ease of accessing after-hours care. Key actions included a redesign of our after-hours advertisement and communication of the material in multiple formats. Following these PDSA cycles, the team saw a 26%, 23% and 17% increase in awareness of weekday evening clinics, weekend clinics and after-hours phone services, respectively, and a 16% increase in the proportion of patients reporting that it was very or somewhat easy to get care during the evening, on the weekend or on a holiday from their care team. Measures continued to improve and improvements have been sustained 3 years later. Our success highlights the effectiveness of partnering with patients to improve access to primary care.

Mapping palliative and end of care research in Australia (2000–2018)

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to map the existent research undertaken in Australia into broad thematic areas and identify the characteristics of the studies and areas of future research in the literature.MethodsA scoping review methodology was employed to map the current areas of research undertaken in Australia since January 2000 until the end of December 2018 according to years of publications, types of studies, populations studied, research themes, and areas of focus.ResultsOur review identified 1,405 Australian palliative care research publications between January 2000 and December 2018. Nearly 40% of the studies were quantitative (39%) and a third were qualitative studies (31%). The remainder of the studies were reviews, mixed methods, quality improvement projects, and others. One-third (30%) of the research was done with carers' participants followed by nurses (22%) and doctors and physicians (18%). The most frequently reported diagnosis in the studies was cancer with 42% of the publication total. The most frequently explored theme was physical symptoms (such as pain, breathlessness, nausea, delirium, and dyspnea) with a total of 16% of all articles followed by communication (15%). There was a large gap to the next most frequently explored theme with service delivery (9%) and coordination of care (8%). Assessment of patients (7%), end-of-life decision-making (6%), and rural/regional (6%) all produced a similar number of publications. Very few studies addressed topics such as quality of life, E-Health, after-hours care, spirituality, and health economics. Moreover, there were only 15 (1%) studies focused on the last days of life.Significance of the resultsThe current review presented a comprehensive search of the literature across almost two decades in Australia in the palliative care setting. It has covered a breadth of research topics and highlighted urgent areas for further research.

GP services in Australia: presentation profiles during usual practice hours and after-hours periods

After-hours general practitioner (GP) services can reduce emergency department demand, which is currently increasing in Australia. Understanding GP after-hours care may assist in service planning. From April 2014 to March 2015, 986 GPs recorded 38275 consultations with start and finish times in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) study, a national, cross-sectional, representative study of GP activity. GP and patient characteristics and the content of encounters in usual-hours and after-hours were compared. Significantly more after-hours than usual-hours encounters were with: GPs aged 60+ years; in metropolitan practices; and practices with 10+ GPs. Patients seen after-hours were more often: male; aged 15–64 years; new to practice; and less likely to hold a Commonwealth Concession Card. They were more likely to be prescribed antibiotics and less likely to: have chronic problems managed; be referred; receive psycholeptic or psychoanaleptic prescription; and undergo a procedure. Throat symptoms, fever and injury were more common reasons for encounter, while infections and injury were more frequently managed problems after-hours. The patient mix, GP characteristics, problems managed and management actions in after-hours care differ from those in usual-hours care in Australia. This greater understanding of after-hours care is the first step to informed resource allocation to improve the delivery of after-hours primary care.

Assessing Performance in Health Care Using International Surveys: Are Patient and Clinician Perspectives Complementary or Substitutive

Background: Over the last decade, international surveys of patients and clinicians have been used to compare health care across countries. Findings from these surveys have been extensively used to create aggregate scores and rankings. Objective: To assess the concordance of survey responses provided by patients and clinicians. Methods: Analysis of 16 pairs of questions that focused on coordination, organizational factors, and patient-centered competencies from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of older adults (2014) and of primary care physicians (2015). Concordance was assessed by comparing absolute rates and relative rankings. Results: In absolute terms, patients and clinicians gave differing responses for questions about coordination of care (patients were more positive) and provision of after-hours care (patients were less positive). In relative terms, country rankings were positively correlated for 5 of 16 question pairs (Spearman ρ > .6 and P < .05). Conclusion: Patterns of concordance between patient and clinician perspectives provides information to guide the use of survey data in performance assessment. However, this study highlights the need to assess the complementarity and substitutive nature of patients’ and clinicians’ perspectives before combining them to create aggregate assessments of performance.

Understanding why older adults choose to seek non-urgent care in the emergency department: the patient’s perspective

ObjectivesOlder adults make up a significant proportion of patients seeking care in the ED, with about 25% of these visits classified as “non-urgent.” This study explored older adults’ understandings, expectations of and self-reported reasons for seeking care and treatment provided in the ED.MethodsThis qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with CTAS 4-5 patients conducted at randomly selected times and days during ED visits at three Saskatoon facilities in 2016. Thematic analysis was used to analyze interview data.Results115 patients over age 65 years (mean age 79.1 years) were interviewed. While the majority had independently or with family made the decision to attend the ED, almost one-third of patients (31.6%) reported that they had been referred to the ED by general practitioners or specialists. Few respondents indicated the visit was the result of their general practitioner not being available. Most participants cited comprehensiveness and convenience of diagnostic and treatment services in a single location as the primary motivation for seeking treatment in the ED, which was especially important to those in poor health, without family supports, or with functional limitations, personal mobility and/or transportation challenges. Other common motivations were availability of after-hours care and perceived higher quality care compared to primary care.ConclusionsAccessibility to comprehensive care, availability, quality of care and positive past experiences were key considerations for older adults seeking treatment of non-urgent concerns. Older adults will likely continue to use EDs for non-urgent medical care until trusted, “one-stop” settings that better addresses the needs of this population are more widely available.