An instrument as an action against the blind spot of acute medical care in general practice - a systematic review.

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Johannes Rieken, Daniel Hötker, Christoph Strumann, Jost Steinhäuser
{"title":"An instrument as an action against the blind spot of acute medical care in general practice - a systematic review.","authors":"Johannes Rieken, Daniel Hötker, Christoph Strumann, Jost Steinhäuser","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02749-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increasing visits to out-of-hours practices and Emergency Departments (EDs) for non-life-threatening urgent cases (NLTUCs) have placed a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide. General practitioners (GPs), as the first point of contact in primary care, play a critical role in managing acute medical cases. However, limited research has focused on their contribution to acute care, and tools for assessing these cases remain non-existent.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This review aimed to identify instruments for detecting acute medical cases in GP practices, addressing the gap in tools and frameworks specific to the primary care setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, focusing on studies describing instruments for acute care assessment in primary care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,560 identified studies, one met the inclusion criteria. The included study described a coding tool designed to assess the complexity of GP consultations, using the ICPC-2 classification system. While this tool effectively captures the multifaceted nature of GP encounters, it was not specifically designed to measure urgency in acute care.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The review highlights a significant gap in tools for assessing urgency in GP practices, contrasting with established hospital triage systems. Adapting existing tools to incorporate urgency assessment could illuminate the critical impact of GPs on reducing ED burden and managing acute cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The identified tool for assessing consultation complexity could be adapted to evaluate urgency, highlighting the critical yet underrecognized role of GPs in acute care.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11889748/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02749-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Increasing visits to out-of-hours practices and Emergency Departments (EDs) for non-life-threatening urgent cases (NLTUCs) have placed a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide. General practitioners (GPs), as the first point of contact in primary care, play a critical role in managing acute medical cases. However, limited research has focused on their contribution to acute care, and tools for assessing these cases remain non-existent.

Aim: This review aimed to identify instruments for detecting acute medical cases in GP practices, addressing the gap in tools and frameworks specific to the primary care setting.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, focusing on studies describing instruments for acute care assessment in primary care.

Results: Of 1,560 identified studies, one met the inclusion criteria. The included study described a coding tool designed to assess the complexity of GP consultations, using the ICPC-2 classification system. While this tool effectively captures the multifaceted nature of GP encounters, it was not specifically designed to measure urgency in acute care.

Discussion: The review highlights a significant gap in tools for assessing urgency in GP practices, contrasting with established hospital triage systems. Adapting existing tools to incorporate urgency assessment could illuminate the critical impact of GPs on reducing ED burden and managing acute cases.

Conclusion: The identified tool for assessing consultation complexity could be adapted to evaluate urgency, highlighting the critical yet underrecognized role of GPs in acute care.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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