Patterns in GP Appointment Systems: a cluster analysis of 3480 English practices.

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
James Scuffell, Stevo Durbaba, Mark Ashworth
{"title":"Patterns in GP Appointment Systems: a cluster analysis of 3480 English practices.","authors":"James Scuffell, Stevo Durbaba, Mark Ashworth","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background In response to increasing demand for appointments, UK general practices have adopted a range of appointment systems. These systems vary widely in implementation. These changes have not yet been clearly described. Aim Characterise patterns of primary care delivery in English general practices. Design and Setting Cross-sectional study using NHS Appointments in General Practice data from 3480 English GP practices, totalling 56 million appointments between August and October 2023. Method We derived 12 measures associated with consultation modality, waiting time, clinician type and triage use. Practices with similar characteristics of those 12 variables were clustered together using an ensemble machine learning approach. Clustering was validated using December 2023 data. The characteristics of each practice grouping were described using 2021 Census and NHS workforce data. Results Two main models of care emerged. 'Routine care' practices (n=2286) tended towards face-to-face appointments, often delivered by non-GPs with longer wait times. 'Same day care' (n=1194) practices, a third of practices, were more likely to use telephone consultations, deliver care with GPs, and provide same day appointments. Compared to 'Routine care' practices, 'Same day care' practices were more likely to be in urban areas, had younger populations (mean age 40 vs 41 years) and employed fewer patient-facing staff (2.0 vs 2.5 full time equivalents per 10,000 patients registered). Conclusion This study identified two dominant models of primary care delivery in England, reflecting differing approaches to managing patient access. These differences could have an impact on continuity of care and equity of access to primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","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.2024.0556","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 In response to increasing demand for appointments, UK general practices have adopted a range of appointment systems. These systems vary widely in implementation. These changes have not yet been clearly described. Aim Characterise patterns of primary care delivery in English general practices. Design and Setting Cross-sectional study using NHS Appointments in General Practice data from 3480 English GP practices, totalling 56 million appointments between August and October 2023. Method We derived 12 measures associated with consultation modality, waiting time, clinician type and triage use. Practices with similar characteristics of those 12 variables were clustered together using an ensemble machine learning approach. Clustering was validated using December 2023 data. The characteristics of each practice grouping were described using 2021 Census and NHS workforce data. Results Two main models of care emerged. 'Routine care' practices (n=2286) tended towards face-to-face appointments, often delivered by non-GPs with longer wait times. 'Same day care' (n=1194) practices, a third of practices, were more likely to use telephone consultations, deliver care with GPs, and provide same day appointments. Compared to 'Routine care' practices, 'Same day care' practices were more likely to be in urban areas, had younger populations (mean age 40 vs 41 years) and employed fewer patient-facing staff (2.0 vs 2.5 full time equivalents per 10,000 patients registered). Conclusion This study identified two dominant models of primary care delivery in England, reflecting differing approaches to managing patient access. These differences could have an impact on continuity of care and equity of access to primary care.

全科医生预约系统模式:3480例英国实践的聚类分析。
背景:为了应对日益增长的预约需求,英国全科医生采用了一系列的预约制度。这些制度在实施上差别很大。这些变化还没有得到清楚的描述。目的描述英国全科医生初级保健服务模式。设计和设置横断面研究使用来自3480个英国全科医生诊所的NHS预约数据,在2023年8月至10月期间共预约了5600万次。方法推导出与会诊方式、候诊时间、临床医生类型和分诊使用相关的12项指标。使用集成机器学习方法将这12个变量具有相似特征的实践聚集在一起。聚类使用2023年12月的数据进行验证。使用2021年人口普查和NHS劳动力数据描述了每个实践分组的特征。结果出现了两种主要的护理模式。“常规护理”实践(n=2286)倾向于面对面预约,通常由非全科医生提供,等待时间较长。“同日护理”(n=1194)的做法,三分之一的做法,更有可能使用电话咨询,提供护理与全科医生,并提供同日预约。与“常规护理”实践相比,“同日护理”实践更有可能在城市地区进行,人口更年轻(平均年龄40岁对41岁),并且雇用的面向患者的工作人员更少(每10,000名注册患者的全职工作人员为2.0人对2.5人)。结论:本研究确定了英国初级保健服务的两种主要模式,反映了管理患者访问的不同方法。这些差异可能对保健的连续性和获得初级保健的公平性产生影响。
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