[Potentially avoidable visits to the physician's office: an exploratory observational study].

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Max Geraedts, Christian Song Pham
{"title":"[Potentially avoidable visits to the physician's office: an exploratory observational study].","authors":"Max Geraedts, Christian Song Pham","doi":"10.1055/a-2592-5957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In order to harmonize supply and demand in the outpatient sector, current figures are needed on the number of visits to physicians' offices and their rationale. Since the introduction of partially flat-rate remuneration in the outpatient sector in 2008, only uncertain estimates are possible on the basis of billing data.On the basis of direct observation in physicians' offices, the number and reasons for visits to the physician's office are to be recorded and their potential avoidability estimated.In 11 GP practices (4 practices), general specialist practices (6 practices) and specialized specialist practices (1 practice), all visits to the physician's office in a given week were documented with regard to the reason for and type of contact as well as the age and gender of the patients. To this number, the practices added the patients' utilization of the services in the entire quarter and previous quarter as well as the total number of all cases seen in the practice per quarter. Frequencies and differences in relation to practice types, age groups and gender were analyzed descriptively and using Chi<sup>2</sup> tests.A total of 3266 practice contacts (57% by women, 43% by men) were recorded. There were 2.9 visits to GPs and 1.9 visits to specialists per patient per quarter. In the case of GPs, 40% of patients aged<60 years visited the practice because of an acute illness, while the leading reason for patients aged 60+was to collect a referral or prescription (50%). The most prominent reason for visits to a specialist was the monitoring of chronic illnesses for younger patients (36%) and older patients (51%). Explicit contact with a GP was made by 58% of those under 60 and 32% of those over 59, while 70 and 73%, respectively of such patients saw a specialist. Extrapolated, every citizen had 16.9 contacts with a physician's office per year.The explorative study provides indications of the extent of avoidable contacts with physicians' offices, in that half of the contacts with over 59-year-olds were only to collect prescriptions, findings etc. and 41% of contacts with specialists were routine check-ups, the necessary frequency of which is unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2592-5957","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In order to harmonize supply and demand in the outpatient sector, current figures are needed on the number of visits to physicians' offices and their rationale. Since the introduction of partially flat-rate remuneration in the outpatient sector in 2008, only uncertain estimates are possible on the basis of billing data.On the basis of direct observation in physicians' offices, the number and reasons for visits to the physician's office are to be recorded and their potential avoidability estimated.In 11 GP practices (4 practices), general specialist practices (6 practices) and specialized specialist practices (1 practice), all visits to the physician's office in a given week were documented with regard to the reason for and type of contact as well as the age and gender of the patients. To this number, the practices added the patients' utilization of the services in the entire quarter and previous quarter as well as the total number of all cases seen in the practice per quarter. Frequencies and differences in relation to practice types, age groups and gender were analyzed descriptively and using Chi2 tests.A total of 3266 practice contacts (57% by women, 43% by men) were recorded. There were 2.9 visits to GPs and 1.9 visits to specialists per patient per quarter. In the case of GPs, 40% of patients aged<60 years visited the practice because of an acute illness, while the leading reason for patients aged 60+was to collect a referral or prescription (50%). The most prominent reason for visits to a specialist was the monitoring of chronic illnesses for younger patients (36%) and older patients (51%). Explicit contact with a GP was made by 58% of those under 60 and 32% of those over 59, while 70 and 73%, respectively of such patients saw a specialist. Extrapolated, every citizen had 16.9 contacts with a physician's office per year.The explorative study provides indications of the extent of avoidable contacts with physicians' offices, in that half of the contacts with over 59-year-olds were only to collect prescriptions, findings etc. and 41% of contacts with specialists were routine check-ups, the necessary frequency of which is unclear.

[潜在可避免的医生办公室访问:一项探索性观察研究]。
为了协调门诊部门的供应和需求,目前需要关于到医生办公室就诊的人数及其理由的数字。自2008年在门诊部门引入部分固定费率薪酬以来,根据账单数据只能进行不确定的估计。在医生办公室直接观察的基础上,记录到医生办公室就诊的次数和原因,并估计其潜在的可避免性。在11个全科医生诊所(4个诊所)、普通专科医生诊所(6个诊所)和专科医生诊所(1个诊所)中,在给定的一周内,所有到医生办公室就诊的人都记录了就诊的原因和类型,以及患者的年龄和性别。在这个数字上,实践增加了患者在整个季度和上一季度对服务的利用,以及每个季度在实践中看到的所有病例的总数。使用Chi2测试,描述性地分析了与实践类型、年龄组和性别相关的频率和差异。总共记录了3266次实践接触(57%为女性,43%为男性)。每个病人每季度看2.9次全科医生,1.9次专科医生。在全科医生的案例中,40%的病人变老了
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
Gesundheitswesen
Gesundheitswesen PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
308
期刊介绍: The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.
×
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