The true complexities of "standard" family practice visits unmasked: an observational cross-sectional study in Regina.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Family practice Pub Date : 2024-04-19 DOI:10.1093/fampra/cmae022
Mackenzie M M Heidel, Adam Clay, Megan Dash, Danielle Cutts
{"title":"The true complexities of \"standard\" family practice visits unmasked: an observational cross-sectional study in Regina.","authors":"Mackenzie M M Heidel, Adam Clay, Megan Dash, Danielle Cutts","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmae022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nMany patients present to their family medicine clinic with more than one health concern, placing an increased demand on family physicians. Research into the average number of concerns per regular family medicine visit is limited. Recognition of the frequency that family physicians address more than one concern per visit and adapting practices accordingly is important for improving patient care.\n\n\nOBJECTIVE\nTo examine whether family physicians routinely address multiple different patient concerns during a single visit and if this is influenced by patient demographics.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThis study was conducted at a multi-physician family medicine clinic in Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Five physicians contributed their 500 most recent charts, extending retrospectively from 1 June 2023, from in-person visits by patients over 18 years of age and billed as regular appointments without billed procedures. Each chart was reviewed for the number of concerns addressed in the visit.\n\n\nRESULTS\nFifty percent of visits addressed more than 1 concern (range = 1-8). A generalized linear mixed model using Poisson distribution showed certain physicians (incident rate ratio [IRR]: 1.192, 95% CI: 1.087-1.307, P < 0.001) and adults older than 65 years compared to adults less than 40 years (IRR 1.151, 95% CI: 1.069-1.239, P < 0.001) were more likely to present with multiple concerns, but patient sex was not a significant predictor.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nFamily physicians routinely address more than one concern per visit. Standard visit length and billing practices should be adapted to reflect this complexity.","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","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/cmae022","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 Many patients present to their family medicine clinic with more than one health concern, placing an increased demand on family physicians. Research into the average number of concerns per regular family medicine visit is limited. Recognition of the frequency that family physicians address more than one concern per visit and adapting practices accordingly is important for improving patient care. OBJECTIVE To examine whether family physicians routinely address multiple different patient concerns during a single visit and if this is influenced by patient demographics. METHODS This study was conducted at a multi-physician family medicine clinic in Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Five physicians contributed their 500 most recent charts, extending retrospectively from 1 June 2023, from in-person visits by patients over 18 years of age and billed as regular appointments without billed procedures. Each chart was reviewed for the number of concerns addressed in the visit. RESULTS Fifty percent of visits addressed more than 1 concern (range = 1-8). A generalized linear mixed model using Poisson distribution showed certain physicians (incident rate ratio [IRR]: 1.192, 95% CI: 1.087-1.307, P < 0.001) and adults older than 65 years compared to adults less than 40 years (IRR 1.151, 95% CI: 1.069-1.239, P < 0.001) were more likely to present with multiple concerns, but patient sex was not a significant predictor. CONCLUSIONS Family physicians routinely address more than one concern per visit. Standard visit length and billing practices should be adapted to reflect this complexity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
揭开 "标准 "家庭诊所就诊的真实复杂性:里贾纳观察性横断面研究》(The true complexities of "standard" family practice visits unasked: an observational crosssectional study in Regina)。
背景许多患者到家庭医疗诊所就诊时都有一个以上的健康问题,这对家庭医生提出了更高的要求。有关家庭医生每次定期就诊的平均问题数量的研究十分有限。认识到家庭医生每次就诊处理一个以上问题的频率,并相应调整诊疗方法,对于改善患者护理非常重要。目的研究家庭医生在一次就诊中是否经常处理患者的多个不同问题,以及这是否受患者人口统计学的影响。五位医生提供了他们最近的 500 份病历,从 2023 年 6 月 1 日开始追溯,这些病历来自 18 岁以上患者的亲自就诊,作为常规预约开具,没有开具程序费用。结果50%的就诊涉及 1 个以上的问题(范围 = 1-8)。使用泊松分布的广义线性混合模型显示,某些医生(事故率比 [IRR]:1.192,95% CI:1.087-1.307,P <0.001)和 65 岁以上的成年人比 40 岁以下的成年人(IRR:1.151,95% CI:1.069-1.239,P <0.001)更有可能提出多个问题,但患者性别不是一个重要的预测因素。结论家庭医生每次就诊通常会解决一个以上的问题,因此应调整标准就诊时间和计费方法,以反映这种复杂性。
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 去求助
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.
期刊最新文献
Impact of implementing primary care-based medication for opioid use disorder on provider and staff perceptions. The effect and implementation of the COVID Box, a remote patient monitoring system for patients with a COVID-19 infection in primary care: a matched cohort study. Can patient education initiatives in primary care increase patient knowledge of appropriate antibiotic use and decrease expectations for unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions? Clinical effects of accreditation in general practice: a pragmatic randomized controlled study. School absence policy and healthcare use: a difference-in-difference cohort analysis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1