Emergency department visits as a potential opportunity to promote primary care attachment and modify utilization patterns - results of a pilot study in Berlin, Germany.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Felix Holzinger, Lisa Kümpel, Rebecca Resendiz Cantu, Anja Alberter, Martin Möckel, Christoph Heintze
{"title":"Emergency department visits as a potential opportunity to promote primary care attachment and modify utilization patterns - results of a pilot study in Berlin, Germany.","authors":"Felix Holzinger, Lisa Kümpel, Rebecca Resendiz Cantu, Anja Alberter, Martin Möckel, Christoph Heintze","doi":"10.1186/s12873-024-01056-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Utilization by low acuity patients contributes to emergency department (ED) crowding. Both knowledge deficits about adequate care levels and access barriers in primary care are important promoters of such presentations. Concurrently, not having a general practitioner (GP) increases the likelihood of low-acuity ED utilization. This pilot study thus investigated feasibility, acceptance, and potential effects of an ED-delivered intervention for low-acuity patients with no regular primary care provider, consisting of an educational leaflet on acute care options and an optional GP appointment scheduling service.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Low-acuity ED consulters not attached to a GP were given an information leaflet about alternative care offers for acute health problems and offered optional personal appointment scheduling at a local GP practice. Patients were surveyed on demographics, medical characteristics, health care utilization, valuation of the intervention, and reasons for not being attached to a GP and visiting the ED. A follow-up survey was conducted after twelve months. Trends in health and health care utilization were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between December 2020 and April 2022, n = 160 patients were enrolled, n = 114 were followed up. The study population was characterized by young age (mean 30.6 years) and predominantly good general health. Besides good health, personal mobility was a central reason for not being attached to a GP, but general preference for specialists and bad experiences with primary care were also mentioned. Most frequently stated motives for the ED consultation were subjective distress and anxiety, a belief in the superiority of the hospital, and access problems in primary care. The interventional offers were favorably valued, 52.5% (n = 84) accepted the GP appointment scheduling service offer. At follow-up, GP utilization had significantly increased, while there were no significant changes regarding utilization of other providers, including ED. An additional practice survey showed a 63.0% take-up rate for the appointment service.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With this pilot study, we were able to show that a personalized appointment scheduling service seems to be a promising approach to promote GP attachment and increase primary care utilization in patients without a regular GP in a highly urbanized setting. Further larger-scale studies are needed to investigate potential quantitative effects on ED visits.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00023480); date 2020/11/27.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":"24 1","pages":"142"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11304799/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-024-01056-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Utilization by low acuity patients contributes to emergency department (ED) crowding. Both knowledge deficits about adequate care levels and access barriers in primary care are important promoters of such presentations. Concurrently, not having a general practitioner (GP) increases the likelihood of low-acuity ED utilization. This pilot study thus investigated feasibility, acceptance, and potential effects of an ED-delivered intervention for low-acuity patients with no regular primary care provider, consisting of an educational leaflet on acute care options and an optional GP appointment scheduling service.

Methods: Low-acuity ED consulters not attached to a GP were given an information leaflet about alternative care offers for acute health problems and offered optional personal appointment scheduling at a local GP practice. Patients were surveyed on demographics, medical characteristics, health care utilization, valuation of the intervention, and reasons for not being attached to a GP and visiting the ED. A follow-up survey was conducted after twelve months. Trends in health and health care utilization were evaluated.

Results: Between December 2020 and April 2022, n = 160 patients were enrolled, n = 114 were followed up. The study population was characterized by young age (mean 30.6 years) and predominantly good general health. Besides good health, personal mobility was a central reason for not being attached to a GP, but general preference for specialists and bad experiences with primary care were also mentioned. Most frequently stated motives for the ED consultation were subjective distress and anxiety, a belief in the superiority of the hospital, and access problems in primary care. The interventional offers were favorably valued, 52.5% (n = 84) accepted the GP appointment scheduling service offer. At follow-up, GP utilization had significantly increased, while there were no significant changes regarding utilization of other providers, including ED. An additional practice survey showed a 63.0% take-up rate for the appointment service.

Conclusions: With this pilot study, we were able to show that a personalized appointment scheduling service seems to be a promising approach to promote GP attachment and increase primary care utilization in patients without a regular GP in a highly urbanized setting. Further larger-scale studies are needed to investigate potential quantitative effects on ED visits.

Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00023480); date 2020/11/27.

急诊室就诊是促进初级保健依附和改变使用模式的潜在机会--德国柏林试点研究的结果。
背景:急诊科(ED)人满为患的原因之一是低危重病人的使用。对适当护理水平的认识不足和初级保健中的就医障碍都是导致此类就诊的重要原因。同时,没有全科医生(GP)也增加了低急诊量急诊患者使用急诊室的可能性。因此,这项试点研究调查了由急诊室为没有固定初级保健提供者的低急诊率患者提供的干预措施的可行性、接受度和潜在效果,该干预措施包括关于急诊选择的教育传单和可选的全科医生预约安排服务:方法:向没有全科医生的低急诊量急诊室就诊者发放关于急性健康问题替代治疗方案的信息传单,并为其提供可选的个人预约服务,预约地点为当地的全科医生诊所。我们对患者的人口统计学、医疗特征、医疗保健使用情况、对干预措施的评价以及不隶属于全科医生并到急诊室就诊的原因进行了调查。12 个月后进行了跟踪调查。结果:2020 年 12 月至 2022 年 4 月期间,n = 160 名患者加入了研究,n = 114 名患者接受了随访。研究对象的特点是年龄小(平均 30.6 岁),总体健康状况良好。除了健康状况良好外,个人行动不便也是不与全科医生联系的主要原因,但也有人提到了对专科医生的普遍偏好以及在初级医疗机构的不良经历。最常提到的急诊室就诊动机是主观上的痛苦和焦虑、相信医院的优越性以及初级医疗的就诊问题。干预措施受到了好评,52.5%(n = 84)的人接受了全科医生预约安排服务。在随访中,全科医生的使用率明显提高,而其他医疗机构(包括急诊室)的使用率没有明显变化。另一项实践调查显示,预约服务的使用率为 63.0%:通过这项试点研究,我们能够证明,在高度城市化的环境中,个性化的预约安排服务似乎是一种很有前景的方法,可以促进全科医生的依恋,并提高没有固定全科医生的患者对初级保健的利用率。需要进一步开展更大规模的研究,以调查对急诊室就诊率的潜在量化影响:试验注册:德国临床试验注册中心(DRKS00023480);日期:2020/11/27。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信