What is the relationship between the volume and type of appointments in general practice and patient experience? An observational study of general practice in England.

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Patrick Burch, William Whittaker, Yiu-Shing Lau
{"title":"What is the relationship between the volume and type of appointments in general practice and patient experience? An observational study of general practice in England.","authors":"Patrick Burch, William Whittaker, Yiu-Shing Lau","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Patient satisfaction is a significant dimension of quality in general practice and has notably declined post-COVID. Understanding the dynamics between practice activities, practice characteristics and patient experience is vital for improving care quality. Aim This study investigates the relationship between the volume, modality (telephone or face-to-face) and practitioner type of general practice appointments and patient experience. Design and Setting An observational study of general practices in England. Method Data from the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) were merged with NHS Digital's practice level appointment data, covering August 2022 to March 2023. We estimate ordinary least squares regressions of patient satisfaction with access, general satisfaction, preference for a specific GP, and support for managing long-term conditions (dependent variables) against appointment volume, modality (telephone or face-to-face), and practitioner type. Results Analysis of 5,278 practices showed that a higher volume of appointments, especially face-to-face with GPs, was significantly (p<0.001) associated with increased patient satisfaction. Practices having a greater proportion of same-day appointments was significantly correlated with lower patient satisfaction. Conclusion Patient satisfaction and ability to have health needs met is associated with face-to-face access to GPs as well as the total volume of appointments available. The results suggest that patients' perceptions of access involve more than immediate availability of appointments or that patients may struggle to get appointments at practices offering more same day appointments. Initiatives to improve access to and satisfaction with general practice should prioritise expanding face-to-face GP appointments.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0276","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Patient satisfaction is a significant dimension of quality in general practice and has notably declined post-COVID. Understanding the dynamics between practice activities, practice characteristics and patient experience is vital for improving care quality. Aim This study investigates the relationship between the volume, modality (telephone or face-to-face) and practitioner type of general practice appointments and patient experience. Design and Setting An observational study of general practices in England. Method Data from the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) were merged with NHS Digital's practice level appointment data, covering August 2022 to March 2023. We estimate ordinary least squares regressions of patient satisfaction with access, general satisfaction, preference for a specific GP, and support for managing long-term conditions (dependent variables) against appointment volume, modality (telephone or face-to-face), and practitioner type. Results Analysis of 5,278 practices showed that a higher volume of appointments, especially face-to-face with GPs, was significantly (p<0.001) associated with increased patient satisfaction. Practices having a greater proportion of same-day appointments was significantly correlated with lower patient satisfaction. Conclusion Patient satisfaction and ability to have health needs met is associated with face-to-face access to GPs as well as the total volume of appointments available. The results suggest that patients' perceptions of access involve more than immediate availability of appointments or that patients may struggle to get appointments at practices offering more same day appointments. Initiatives to improve access to and satisfaction with general practice should prioritise expanding face-to-face GP appointments.

全科预约的数量和类型与患者体验之间有什么关系?对英格兰全科医生的观察研究。
背景 患者满意度是衡量全科医疗质量的一个重要方面,而在 COVID 之后,患者满意度明显下降。了解实践活动、实践特点和患者体验之间的动态关系对于提高医疗质量至关重要。研究目的 本研究调查了全科预约的数量、方式(电话或面对面)和从业人员类型与患者体验之间的关系。设计和设置 对英格兰的普通诊所进行观察研究。方法 将 "全科患者调查"(GPPS)的数据与英国国家医疗服务系统数字公司(NHS Digital)的诊所预约数据合并,涵盖 2022 年 8 月至 2023 年 3 月。我们将患者对就诊的满意度、总体满意度、对特定全科医生的偏好以及对管理长期病症的支持(因变量)与预约量、方式(电话或面对面)和医生类型进行了普通最小二乘法回归估计。结果 对 5 278 家医疗机构的分析表明,较高的预约量,尤其是与全科医生面对面的预约量,对患者的满意度有显著影响(P<0.05)。
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
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
×
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