Inter-practice variability in registrar experiences of continuity of care: a cross-sectional analysis from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training study.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Adele Kincses, Alison Fielding, Amanda Tapley, Andrew Davey, Anna Ralston, Dominica Moad, Elizabeth Holliday, Jason Dizon, Mieke van Driel, Parker Magin
{"title":"Inter-practice variability in registrar experiences of continuity of care: a cross-sectional analysis from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training study.","authors":"Adele Kincses, Alison Fielding, Amanda Tapley, Andrew Davey, Anna Ralston, Dominica Moad, Elizabeth Holliday, Jason Dizon, Mieke van Driel, Parker Magin","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmaf096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Continuity of care is a defining feature of general practice, with strong evidence for improved patient outcomes. Variability in practices' rates of continuity could markedly influence general practitioner (GP) registrars' learning experience. Previous research found \"upstream\" (registrar previously seen patient) continuity of 43% and \"downstream\" (follow-up appointment arranged between registrar and patient) continuity of 49% in Australian GP registrars.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess inter-practice variability in registrar experience of continuity of care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional analysis (2010-23) from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training study of GP registrars' in-consultation clinical experiences. Outcome factors were \"upstream\" and \"downstream\" continuity. Inter-practice variability was assessed using median odds ratios (MORs). Outcome variance attributable to practice was estimated within the Bayesian modeling framework using a mixed-effects logistic regression with cross-classified random effects for registrar and practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 4643 registrars (response rate 93.3%) across 978 practices. 42.5% (289 426) of registrar consults involved \"upstream\" continuity and 45.5% (313 295) of registrar consults involved \"downstream\" continuity. The MOR values were 1.47 [credible interval [CrI] (1.44, 1.50)] and 1.40 [CrI (1.38, 1.43)], for \"upstream\" and \"downstream\" continuity, respectively, in a model with random effects for practice and registrar; and 1.35 [CrI (1.32, 1.37)] and 1.38 [CrI (1.36, 1.41)], respectively, in the model adjusted for time/registrar/patient/consultation/consultation outcome/practice variables.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Considerable variability exists in continuity of care measures between GP training practices. This has implications for registrars' learning opportunities, particularly in chronic disease management-essential in the context of an aging population. Strategies to improve registrars' continuity of care in practices with lower rates of continuity should be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaf096","RegionNum":4,"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: Continuity of care is a defining feature of general practice, with strong evidence for improved patient outcomes. Variability in practices' rates of continuity could markedly influence general practitioner (GP) registrars' learning experience. Previous research found "upstream" (registrar previously seen patient) continuity of 43% and "downstream" (follow-up appointment arranged between registrar and patient) continuity of 49% in Australian GP registrars.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess inter-practice variability in registrar experience of continuity of care.

Methods: Cross-sectional analysis (2010-23) from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training study of GP registrars' in-consultation clinical experiences. Outcome factors were "upstream" and "downstream" continuity. Inter-practice variability was assessed using median odds ratios (MORs). Outcome variance attributable to practice was estimated within the Bayesian modeling framework using a mixed-effects logistic regression with cross-classified random effects for registrar and practice.

Results: The analysis included 4643 registrars (response rate 93.3%) across 978 practices. 42.5% (289 426) of registrar consults involved "upstream" continuity and 45.5% (313 295) of registrar consults involved "downstream" continuity. The MOR values were 1.47 [credible interval [CrI] (1.44, 1.50)] and 1.40 [CrI (1.38, 1.43)], for "upstream" and "downstream" continuity, respectively, in a model with random effects for practice and registrar; and 1.35 [CrI (1.32, 1.37)] and 1.38 [CrI (1.36, 1.41)], respectively, in the model adjusted for time/registrar/patient/consultation/consultation outcome/practice variables.

Conclusions: Considerable variability exists in continuity of care measures between GP training practices. This has implications for registrars' learning opportunities, particularly in chronic disease management-essential in the context of an aging population. Strategies to improve registrars' continuity of care in practices with lower rates of continuity should be considered.

注册医师护理连续性经验的实践间差异:来自注册医师临床培训遭遇研究的横断面分析。
背景:护理的连续性是全科医疗的一个决定性特征,有强有力的证据表明可以改善患者的预后。实践连续性率的可变性可能显著影响全科医生(GP)注册者的学习经验。先前的研究发现,“上游”(注册医生之前见过病人)的连续性为43%,“下游”(注册医生和病人之间安排的随访预约)的连续性为49%。目的:本研究旨在评估注册医师护理连续性经验的实践差异。方法:采用横断面分析(2010-23年)对全科医生注册医师的会诊临床经验进行研究。结果因素为“上游”和“下游”连续性。采用中位数优势比(MORs)评估实践间的可变性。在贝叶斯模型框架内,使用混合效应逻辑回归对注册者和实践的交叉分类随机效应估计归因于实践的结果方差。结果:分析包括978个实践中的4643个注册商(回复率93.3%)。42.5%(289 426)的注册商咨询涉及“上游”的连续性,45.5%(313 295)的注册商咨询涉及“下游”的连续性。在具有实践和注册商随机效应的模型中,“上游”和“下游”连续性的MOR值分别为1.47[可信区间[CrI](1.44, 1.50)]和1.40 [CrI (1.38, 1.43)];在时间/注册人员/患者/咨询/咨询结果/实践变量调整后的模型中,分别为1.35 [CrI(1.32, 1.37)]和1.38 [CrI(1.36, 1.41)]。结论:全科医生培训实践中护理措施的连续性存在相当大的差异。这对登记员的学习机会有影响,特别是在慢性疾病管理方面,这在人口老龄化的背景下至关重要。应考虑在连续性率较低的情况下提高注册服务机构护理连续性的战略。
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
Family practice
Family practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Practice is an international journal aimed at practitioners, teachers, and researchers in the fields of family medicine, general practice, and primary care in both developed and developing countries. Family Practice offers its readership an international view of the problems and preoccupations in the field, while providing a medium of instruction and exploration. The journal''s range and content covers such areas as health care delivery, epidemiology, public health, and clinical case studies. The journal aims to be interdisciplinary and contributions from other disciplines of medicine and social science are always welcomed.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书