{"title":"GP access for inclusion health groups: perspectives and recommendations.","authors":"Aaminah Verity, Victoria Tzortziou Brown","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>General practice has seen the widespread adoption of remote consulting and triage systems. There is a lack of evidence exploring how inclusion health populations have been impacted by this transformation.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to explore the post-pandemic GP access for inclusion health populations, through the lens of those with lived experience, and identify practical recommendations for improving access for this population.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>A mixed-methods study exploring the direct experience of people from inclusion health groups trying to access GP care in 13 practices in east London.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A mystery shopper exercise involving 39 in-person practice visits and 13 phone calls were undertaken. The findings were reflected on by a multidisciplinary stakeholder group, which identified recommendations for improvements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 31% of the mystery shopper visits (<i>n</i> = 8) resulted in registration and the offer of an appointment to see a GP for an urgent problem. None of the mystery shoppers was able to book an appointment over the phone but <i>n</i> = 10/13 felt that they would be able to register and make an appointment if they followed the receptionist's instructions. Most mystery shoppers felt respected, listened to, and understood the information provided to them. Just under half of the practices (46%, <i>n</i> = 6) received positive comments on how accessible and supportive their spaces felt. Practice- and system-level recommendations were identified by the stakeholder group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ongoing GP access issues persist for inclusion health populations. We identified practice- and system-level recommendations for improving access for this vulnerable population.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11523521/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: General practice has seen the widespread adoption of remote consulting and triage systems. There is a lack of evidence exploring how inclusion health populations have been impacted by this transformation.
Aim: This study aimed to explore the post-pandemic GP access for inclusion health populations, through the lens of those with lived experience, and identify practical recommendations for improving access for this population.
Design & setting: A mixed-methods study exploring the direct experience of people from inclusion health groups trying to access GP care in 13 practices in east London.
Method: A mystery shopper exercise involving 39 in-person practice visits and 13 phone calls were undertaken. The findings were reflected on by a multidisciplinary stakeholder group, which identified recommendations for improvements.
Results: Only 31% of the mystery shopper visits (n = 8) resulted in registration and the offer of an appointment to see a GP for an urgent problem. None of the mystery shoppers was able to book an appointment over the phone but n = 10/13 felt that they would be able to register and make an appointment if they followed the receptionist's instructions. Most mystery shoppers felt respected, listened to, and understood the information provided to them. Just under half of the practices (46%, n = 6) received positive comments on how accessible and supportive their spaces felt. Practice- and system-level recommendations were identified by the stakeholder group.
Conclusion: Ongoing GP access issues persist for inclusion health populations. We identified practice- and system-level recommendations for improving access for this vulnerable population.