Anna Wilding, Charlie Moss, Luke Munford, Matthew Sutton
{"title":"Impact of Constrained Access to Primary Care on Health-Related Quality of Life.","authors":"Anna Wilding, Charlie Moss, Luke Munford, Matthew Sutton","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Timely access to healthcare has implications for health through early diagnosis and management of long-term conditions. However, when healthcare services are provided during traditional working hours, this limits workers' ability to attend appointments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used repeated cross-sectional data from full-time employees participating in the National General Practice Patient Survey in England between 2013 and 2017 (N = 1 097 156). We estimated the health-related quality of life effects (measured by EQ-5D-5L) of an individual being unable to take time away from work to attend primary care appointments. We used an instrumental variable approach to overcome endogeneity concerns around health and employment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Jobs constraining primary care access led to significantly lower EQ-5D-5L utility scores (local average treatment effect = -0.101) (95% CI -0.153 to -0.044), representing an 11.4 percentage point decrease at the mean. The effects were concentrated on physical health domains of the EQ-5D-5L rather than mental health, and the effect on pain/discomfort was the largest in magnitude. The negative effect on the EQ-5D-5L utility score was larger in magnitude for individuals with long-term conditions than those without.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Improving access to primary care by reducing constraints on access during typical working hours could improve population health. Further investigation is needed of the effects of this access barrier for individuals with long-term conditions, and the cost-effectiveness of different policy approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Timely access to healthcare has implications for health through early diagnosis and management of long-term conditions. However, when healthcare services are provided during traditional working hours, this limits workers' ability to attend appointments.
Methods: We used repeated cross-sectional data from full-time employees participating in the National General Practice Patient Survey in England between 2013 and 2017 (N = 1 097 156). We estimated the health-related quality of life effects (measured by EQ-5D-5L) of an individual being unable to take time away from work to attend primary care appointments. We used an instrumental variable approach to overcome endogeneity concerns around health and employment.
Results: Jobs constraining primary care access led to significantly lower EQ-5D-5L utility scores (local average treatment effect = -0.101) (95% CI -0.153 to -0.044), representing an 11.4 percentage point decrease at the mean. The effects were concentrated on physical health domains of the EQ-5D-5L rather than mental health, and the effect on pain/discomfort was the largest in magnitude. The negative effect on the EQ-5D-5L utility score was larger in magnitude for individuals with long-term conditions than those without.
Conclusions: Improving access to primary care by reducing constraints on access during typical working hours could improve population health. Further investigation is needed of the effects of this access barrier for individuals with long-term conditions, and the cost-effectiveness of different policy approaches.
期刊介绍:
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.