How primary and tertiary care services collaborate in urgent care delivery: an evaluation of general practice advice lines.

IF 2.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL BMC primary care Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI:10.1186/s12875-024-02649-1
Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele, Meredith Makeham, Diane Kancijanic, Nicki Newton, Kavisha Shah, Miranda Shaw, Adam Johnston, Fiona Robinson, Owen Hutchings, Sarah Norris, Jagdev Singh, Melissa Baysari, Clara K Chow, Tim Shaw, Liliana Laranjo
{"title":"How primary and tertiary care services collaborate in urgent care delivery: an evaluation of general practice advice lines.","authors":"Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele, Meredith Makeham, Diane Kancijanic, Nicki Newton, Kavisha Shah, Miranda Shaw, Adam Johnston, Fiona Robinson, Owen Hutchings, Sarah Norris, Jagdev Singh, Melissa Baysari, Clara K Chow, Tim Shaw, Liliana Laranjo","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02649-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To address the rising demand for urgent care and decrease hospital use, health systems are implementing different strategies to support urgent care patients (i.e. patients who would have typically been treated in hospital) in the community, such as general practitioner (GP) advice lines. The aims of this study were to: identify the support and resources GPs need to manage urgent care patients in the community; assess the need for GP advice lines by primary care services in Australia; and identify the facilitators and barriers to adoption, and strategies to support the sustainability of GP advice lines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with GPs, hospital-based healthcare providers, consumers, and healthcare management, recruited via existing investigator networks and snowballing approach. The interviews were conducted between February and August 2023. Major themes were identified by an iterative and inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 16 participants (median age 50, IQR 38-59). Based on the aims of the study, three themes emerged: support and resources for GPs; motivation for GP advice lines; and factors influencing the uptake and sustainability of GP advice lines. Participants reported that better communication from hospital services with GPs is critical to ensure continuity of care between tertiary and primary settings. They also noted that GP advice lines can help increase capacity to manage urgent care patients in the community by providing timely decision-support to GPs. However, a reported barrier to the uptake and ongoing use of GP advice lines was the limited hours of the service. To sustain GP advice lines, participants highlighted a need to broaden the scope of the service beyond the pandemic, conduct rigorous evaluation on health outcomes, and further digitise the service so that a tiered level of support could be provided based on risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The benefits of GP advice lines are yet to be fully realised. With increasing technology sophistication, there remain opportunities to further digitise and optimise GP advice lines, whilst ensuring better integration within and across primary and tertiary care services. This is however dependent on continued financial and policy support from the government.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"25 1","pages":"406"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11610272/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02649-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To address the rising demand for urgent care and decrease hospital use, health systems are implementing different strategies to support urgent care patients (i.e. patients who would have typically been treated in hospital) in the community, such as general practitioner (GP) advice lines. The aims of this study were to: identify the support and resources GPs need to manage urgent care patients in the community; assess the need for GP advice lines by primary care services in Australia; and identify the facilitators and barriers to adoption, and strategies to support the sustainability of GP advice lines.

Methods: Qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with GPs, hospital-based healthcare providers, consumers, and healthcare management, recruited via existing investigator networks and snowballing approach. The interviews were conducted between February and August 2023. Major themes were identified by an iterative and inductive thematic analysis.

Results: We interviewed 16 participants (median age 50, IQR 38-59). Based on the aims of the study, three themes emerged: support and resources for GPs; motivation for GP advice lines; and factors influencing the uptake and sustainability of GP advice lines. Participants reported that better communication from hospital services with GPs is critical to ensure continuity of care between tertiary and primary settings. They also noted that GP advice lines can help increase capacity to manage urgent care patients in the community by providing timely decision-support to GPs. However, a reported barrier to the uptake and ongoing use of GP advice lines was the limited hours of the service. To sustain GP advice lines, participants highlighted a need to broaden the scope of the service beyond the pandemic, conduct rigorous evaluation on health outcomes, and further digitise the service so that a tiered level of support could be provided based on risk stratification.

Conclusions: The benefits of GP advice lines are yet to be fully realised. With increasing technology sophistication, there remain opportunities to further digitise and optimise GP advice lines, whilst ensuring better integration within and across primary and tertiary care services. This is however dependent on continued financial and policy support from the government.

Abstract Image

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
初级和三级保健服务如何在紧急护理服务中合作:对全科医生建议线的评估。
背景:为了应对日益增长的紧急护理需求并减少医院使用,卫生系统正在实施不同的战略,以支持社区中的紧急护理患者(即通常在医院接受治疗的患者),例如全科医生(GP)咨询热线。本研究的目的是:确定全科医生管理社区紧急护理患者所需的支持和资源;评估澳大利亚初级保健服务对全科医生咨询热线的需求;并确定采用的促进因素和障碍,以及支持全科医生咨询热线可持续性的战略。方法:定性研究包括与全科医生、医院医疗保健提供者、消费者和医疗保健管理人员的半结构化访谈,通过现有的研究者网络和滚雪球法招募。这些采访是在2023年2月至8月期间进行的。主要主题是通过迭代和归纳主题分析确定的。结果:我们采访了16名参与者(中位年龄50岁,IQR 38-59)。根据这项研究的目的,出现了三个主题:全科医生的支持和资源;全科医生咨询热线的动机;以及影响全科医生咨询热线的吸收和可持续性的因素。与会者报告说,医院服务部门与全科医生之间更好的沟通对于确保三级和初级医疗机构之间的连续性至关重要。他们还指出,全科医生咨询热线可以通过向全科医生提供及时的决策支持,帮助提高管理社区紧急护理患者的能力。然而,据报道,接受和持续使用全科医生咨询热线的一个障碍是服务时间有限。为了维持全科医生咨询热线,与会者强调有必要将服务范围扩大到大流行病之外,对健康结果进行严格评估,并进一步将服务数字化,以便根据风险分层提供分层的支持。结论:全科医生咨询热线的好处尚未充分实现。随着技术的日益成熟,仍有机会进一步数字化和优化全科医生咨询线,同时确保初级和三级保健服务内部和之间更好的整合。然而,这取决于政府持续的财政和政策支持。
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of an in-office intervention to improve general practitioners' support for tobacco smoking cessation: results from a randomised controlled trial (TABAC-PRO). How prepared are urban primary care facilities to manage hypertension and type 2 diabetes in Dhaka, Bangladesh? A cross-sectional descriptive study of government urban dispensaries and NGO clinics. Joint consultations with general practitioners and geriatric psychiatrists for older adults with depression: a focus group study. Type 2 diabetes care: knowledge and clinical practice among medical practitioners at Medical Teaching Institute Mardan, Pakistan - a cross-sectional study. Factors associated with higher cardiovascular disease risk awareness among patients with cardiovascular risk factors in primary care.
×
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:604180095
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