scholarly journals Access to same day, next day and after-hours appointments: the views of Australian general practitioners

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark F. Harris ◽  
Patrick G. Powell Davies ◽  
Mahnaz Fanaian ◽  
Nicholas A. Zwar ◽  
Siaw-Teng Liaw
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Information Management ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Systems Of Care ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Comprehensive Approach ◽  
After Hours Care ◽  
After Hours

Objective. To evaluate factors associated with the availability of same or next day appointments and after-hours access reported by Australian general practitioners (GPs). Methods. Secondary analysis of a survey of primary care practitioners conducted by the Commonwealth Fund in 2009 in 11 countries. Analysis of factors likely to be associated with reported availability of same or next day appointments and after-hours access. Findings. Of 1016 Australian GPs, 78.8% reported that most patients in their practice had access to an appointment on the same or next day and 50% that their practice had arrangements for after-hours access. Access to same or next day care was better in practices where practitioners reported larger numbers of patients seen per GP per week and reviewed their performance against annual targets, but worse in rural areas and practices routinely reviewing outcomes data. Arrangements for after-hours care were more common among GPs who were planning to retire in the next 5 years; worked in practices with high electronic functioning information systems; and received and reviewed clinical outcome data and incentives for performance. Conclusions. Improving after-hours access requires a comprehensive approach which includes incentives, improvements to information management and organised systems of care with review of data on clinical outcomes. What is known about the topic? Access to general practice is an important priority for the health system and the subject of several reforms and initiatives over the past decade in Australia. Access to same or next day appointments and after-hours has been an increasing concern related to workforce availability, and limited access to general practice is one factor influencing the demand on hospitals, especially their emergency departments. What does this paper add? This paper reports on secondary analysis of a survey of over 1000 general practitioners in Australia. Responses to questions about access to same or next day appointments or after-hours arrangements were analysed for associations with practitioner and practice characteristics and their processes and systems of care. Access to same day appointments is particularly challenging in rural general practice but is more likely to be reported by GPs working in larger practices. Incentives, quality improvement and better information management may be important strategies to improve after-hours access. What are the implications for practitioners? Strategies to improve access to appointments and to after-hours care need to be considered as part of a comprehensive approach which includes financial incentives, strengthening information systems and quality improvement activities.

scholarly journals Quality improvement in general practice: what do GPs and practice managers think? Results from a nationally representative survey of UK GPs and practice managers

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e001309
Author(s):  
Jennifer Gosling ◽  
Nicholas Mays ◽  
Bob Erens ◽  
David Reid ◽  
Josephine Exley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Service Improvement ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Routine Work ◽  
Professional Interest ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundThis paper presents the results of the first UK-wide survey of National Health Service (NHS) general practitioners (GPs) and practice managers (PMs) designed to explore the service improvement activities being undertaken in practices, and the factors that facilitated or obstructed that work. The research was prompted by growing policy and professional interest in the quality of general practice and its improvement. The analysis compares GP and PM involvement in, and experience of, quality improvement activities.MethodsThis was a mixed-method study comprising 26 semistructured interviews, a focus group and two surveys. The qualitative data supported the design of the surveys, which were sent to all 46 238 GPs on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) database and the PM at every practice across the UK (n=9153) in July 2017.ResultsResponses from 2377 GPs and 1424 PMs were received and were broadly representative of each group. Ninety-nine per cent reported having planned or undertaken improvement activities in the previous 12 months. The most frequent related to prescribing and access. Key facilitators of improvement included ‘good clinical leadership’. The two main barriers were ‘too many demands from external stakeholders’ and a lack of protected time. Audit and significant event audit were the most common improvement tools used, but respondents were interested in training on other quality improvement tools.ConclusionGPs and PMs are interested in improving service quality. As such, the new quality improvement domain in the Quality and Outcomes Framework used in the payment of practices is likely to be relatively easily accepted by GPs in England. However, if improving quality is to become routine work for practices, it will be important for the NHS in the four UK countries to work with practices to mitigate some of the barriers that they face, in particular the lack of protected time.

scholarly journals How well did Norwegian general practice prepare to address the COVID-19 pandemic?

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e000512
Author(s):  
Ingvild Vatten Alsnes ◽  
Morten Munkvik ◽  
W Dana Flanders ◽  
Nicolas Øyane
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Home Page ◽  
Quality Improvements ◽  
Geographical Differences ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Isolation Room ◽  
Improvement Measures ◽  
The Mean

ObjectivesWe aimed to describe the quality improvement measures made by Norwegian general practice (GP) during the COVID-19 pandemic, evaluate the differences in quality improvements based on region and assess the combinations of actions taken.DesignDescriptive study.SettingParticipants were included after taking part in an online quality improvement COVID-19 course for Norwegian GPs in April 2020. The participants reported whether internal and external measures were in place: COVID-19 sign on entrance, updated home page, access to video consultations and/or electronic written consultations, home office solutions, separate working teams, preparedness for home visits, isolation rooms, knowledge on decontamination, access to sufficient supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) and COVID-19 clinics.ParticipantsOne hundred GP offices were included. The mean number of general practitioners per office was 5.63.ResultsMore than 80% of practices had the following preparedness measures: COVID-19 sign on entrance, updated home page, COVID-19 clinic in the municipality, video and written electronic consultations, knowledge on how to use PPE, and home office solutions for general practitioners. Less than 50% had both PPE and knowledge of decontamination. Lack of PPE was reported by 37%, and 34% reported neither sufficient PPE nor a dedicated COVID-19 clinic. 15% reported that they had an isolation room, but not enough PPE. There were no geographical differences.ConclusionsNorwegian GPs in this study implemented many quality improvements to adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, the largest potentials for improvement seem to be securing sufficient supply of PPE and establishing an isolation room at their practices.

Quality improvement in general practice: enabling general practitioners to judge ethical dilemmas

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Tapp ◽  
A. Edwards ◽  
G. Elwyn ◽  
S. Holm ◽  
T. Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas

scholarly journals General Practitioners’ Attitudes toward Municipal Initiatives to Improve Antibiotic Prescribing—A Mixed-Methods Study

Antibiotics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthe Sunde ◽  
Marthe Marie Nygaard ◽  
Sigurd Høye
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
National Level ◽  
Medical Officer ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
E Mail

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions directed at general practitioners (GPs) contribute to an improved antibiotic prescribing. However, it is challenging to implement and maintain such interventions at a national level. Involving the municipalities’ Chief Medical Officer (MCMO) in quality improvement activities may simplify the implementation and maintenance, but may also be perceived challenging for the GPs. In the ENORM (Educational intervention in NORwegian Municipalities for antibiotic treatment in line with guidelines) study, MCMOs acted as facilitators of an AMS intervention for GPs. We explored GPs’ views on their own antibiotic prescribing, and their views on MCMO involvement in improving antibiotic prescribing in general practice. This is a mixed-methods study combining quantitative and qualitative data from two data sources: e-mail interviews with 15 GPs prior to the ENORM intervention, and online-form answers to closed and open-ended questions from 132 GPs participating in the ENORM intervention. The interviews and open-ended responses were analyzed using systematic text condensation. Many GPs admitted to occasionally prescribing antibiotics without medical indication, mainly due to pressure from patients. Too liberal treatment guidelines were also seen as a reason for overtreatment. The MCMO was considered a suitable and acceptable facilitator of quality improvement activities in general practice, and their involvement was regarded as unproblematic (scale 0 (very problematic) to 10 (not problematic at all): mean 8.2, median 10). GPs acknowledge the need and possibility to improve their own antibiotic prescribing, and in doing so, they welcome engagement from the municipality. MCMOs should be involved in quality improvement and AMS in general practice.

scholarly journals Monitoring the introduction of universal influenza vaccination for the elderly people in the Netherlands

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 32-32
Author(s):  
G. A. van Essen
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Elderly People ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
The Elderly

For many years, influenza vaccination in the Netherlands has been administered by general practitioners (GPs), with whom every person is registered. Nine out of ten practices use one of six approved general practice information systems (GPIS). The exponen

Accessing Primary Health Care: A Community Survey of Issues regarding General Practice and Emergency Department Services in an Outer Metropolitan Area

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 78 ◽  
Author(s):  
AJ McGaw ◽  
P Jayasuriya ◽  
C Bulsara ◽  
S C Thompson
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
After Hours Care ◽  
Gp Services ◽  
After Hours ◽  
Appointment Availability ◽  
Gp Visits ◽  
Quota Sampling ◽  
Respiratory Conditions ◽  
Financial Issues ◽  
Specific Health

This survey aimed to identify views of residents of an outer metropolitan location towards general practice (GP) services, after-hours care and their use of emergency departments (ED). Four hundred respondents were selected randomly using quota sampling and interviewed by telephone. Respondents wanted a GP who was "easy to talk to", who listened and was interested in them, competent, straightforward and thorough. Of those who were dissatisfied, the main concerns were GPs' unwillingness to listen to the patient and rushing the consultation. GP visits occurred for specific health problems - most commonly fever, tiredness and respiratory conditions. Preventive advice regarding health and lifestyle issues was not mentioned as a reason for attending GPs. Appointment availability and financial issues impeded access to GPs. Most people who used an ED did so because of the unavailability of GP services, showing that access block starts in general practice, with the severity of their illness/injury being the second major reason.

scholarly journals ‘Motivational work’: a qualitative study of preventive health dialogues in general practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Broholm-Jørgensen ◽  
Siff Monrad Langkilde ◽  
Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen ◽  
Pia Vivian Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Support System ◽  
Preventive Intervention ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Clinical Encounter ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Municipal Health

Abstract Background The aim of this article is to explore preventive health dialogues in general practice in the context of a pilot study of a Danish primary preventive intervention ‘TOF’ (a Danish acronym for ‘Early Detection and Prevention’) carried out in 2016. The intervention consisted of 1) a stratification of patients into one of four groups, 2) a digital support system for both general practitioners and patients, 3) an individual digital health profile for each patient, and 4) targeted preventive services in either general practice or a municipal health center. Methods The empirical material in this study was obtained through 10 observations of preventive health dialogues conducted in general practices and 18 semi-structured interviews with patients and general practitioners. We used the concept of ‘motivational work’ as an analytical lens for understanding preventive health dialogues in general practice from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients. Results While the health dialogues in TOF sought to reveal patients’ motivations, understandings, and priorities related to health behavior, we find that the dialogues were treatment-oriented and structured around biomedical facts, numeric standards, and risk factor guidance. Overall, we find that numeric standards and quantification of motivation lessens the dialogue and interaction between General Practitioner and patient and that contextual factors relating to the intervention framework, such as a digital support system, the general practitioners’ perceptions of their professional position as well as the patients’ understanding of prevention —in an interplay—diminished the motivational work carried out in the health dialogues. Conclusion The findings show that the influence of different kinds of context adds to the complexity of prevention in the clinical encounter which help to explain why motivational work is difficult in general practice.

scholarly journals How to set up a postmortem facility in a farm animal practice

Livestock ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 196-201
Author(s):  
John F Mee ◽  
Rhona Ley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Farm Animal ◽  
Small Animals ◽  
Animal Medicine ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Postmortem Examinations

Postmortem examinations can be a useful diagnostic tool in farm animal medicine; however, they are often avoided in general practice because of a lack of appropriate facilities and expertise/familiarity with techniques. This article describes the setting up of a basic facility to allow general practitioners to perform postmortem examinations of calves, small ruminants and other small animals, e.g. poultry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document