Determining Patient Panel Size in Primary Care: A Meta-Narrative Review.

IF 2.5 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Journal of Primary Care and Community Health Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/21501319251321294
Abd Moain Abu Dabrh, Wigdan H Farah, Heidi M McLeod, Parisa Biazar, Arya B Mohabbat, Bala Munipalli, Rachel Garofalo, Robert J Stroebel, Nilay Shah, Kurt B Angstman, Richard J Presutti, Bryan Farford, Jennifer L Horn, Summer V Allen, Adam I Perlman, Ana Lucia Chong Lau, Larry J Prokop, M Hassan Murad
{"title":"Determining Patient Panel Size in Primary Care: A Meta-Narrative Review.","authors":"Abd Moain Abu Dabrh, Wigdan H Farah, Heidi M McLeod, Parisa Biazar, Arya B Mohabbat, Bala Munipalli, Rachel Garofalo, Robert J Stroebel, Nilay Shah, Kurt B Angstman, Richard J Presutti, Bryan Farford, Jennifer L Horn, Summer V Allen, Adam I Perlman, Ana Lucia Chong Lau, Larry J Prokop, M Hassan Murad","doi":"10.1177/21501319251321294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The optimal patient panel size (PPS) in primary care and the factors determining it remain unclear. We conducted a meta-narrative review of the literature to evaluate factors influencing PPS and assess its association with patient outcomes. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed from inception through December 2023, focusing on original studies reporting factors used to determine PPS and related outcomes (eg, clinical outcomes, process measures, and resource utilization). A total of 48 studies were included, identifying 7 key factors influencing PPS. Smaller panels were associated with improved patient satisfaction, continuity of care, and health promotion, while clinical outcomes, utilization, and costs showed minimal impact by PPS. Panel size was primarily associated with patient age, sex, comorbidities, and practice type and structure. Community-based centers typically managed smaller panels, often staffed by female clinicians and serving socioeconomically disadvantaged populations with greater health needs than hospital-based practices. Female clinicians were also independently associated with managing smaller panels, higher quality care indicators, fewer emergency department visits, and improved patient satisfaction. Determining the ideal PPS is a multifaceted process influenced by practice setting, patient demographics, and clinician characteristics. While practice-related factors showed limited association with PPS, patient-reported outcomes were more closely linked to it. Primary care practices should tailor panel sizes to their patient populations, emphasizing a patient-centered approach and ensuring adequate infrastructure support to optimize care delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":"16 ","pages":"21501319251321294"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843711/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319251321294","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The optimal patient panel size (PPS) in primary care and the factors determining it remain unclear. We conducted a meta-narrative review of the literature to evaluate factors influencing PPS and assess its association with patient outcomes. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed from inception through December 2023, focusing on original studies reporting factors used to determine PPS and related outcomes (eg, clinical outcomes, process measures, and resource utilization). A total of 48 studies were included, identifying 7 key factors influencing PPS. Smaller panels were associated with improved patient satisfaction, continuity of care, and health promotion, while clinical outcomes, utilization, and costs showed minimal impact by PPS. Panel size was primarily associated with patient age, sex, comorbidities, and practice type and structure. Community-based centers typically managed smaller panels, often staffed by female clinicians and serving socioeconomically disadvantaged populations with greater health needs than hospital-based practices. Female clinicians were also independently associated with managing smaller panels, higher quality care indicators, fewer emergency department visits, and improved patient satisfaction. Determining the ideal PPS is a multifaceted process influenced by practice setting, patient demographics, and clinician characteristics. While practice-related factors showed limited association with PPS, patient-reported outcomes were more closely linked to it. Primary care practices should tailor panel sizes to their patient populations, emphasizing a patient-centered approach and ensuring adequate infrastructure support to optimize care delivery.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
确定初级保健患者小组规模:一项元叙述综述。
初级保健的最佳患者小组大小(PPS)及其决定因素尚不清楚。我们对文献进行了元叙述回顾,以评估影响PPS的因素,并评估其与患者预后的关系。从开始到2023年12月,对电子数据库进行了全面的搜索,重点是报告用于确定PPS和相关结果的因素的原始研究(例如,临床结果、过程测量和资源利用)。共纳入48项研究,确定了影响PPS的7个关键因素。较小的小组与提高患者满意度、护理连续性和健康促进相关,而PPS对临床结果、利用率和成本的影响最小。小组大小主要与患者年龄、性别、合并症、实践类型和结构相关。以社区为基础的中心通常管理较小的小组,通常由女性临床医生担任工作人员,为社会经济上处于不利地位的人群提供服务,这些人群比以医院为基础的做法有更多的健康需求。女性临床医生还独立地与管理更小的小组、更高质量的护理指标、更少的急诊科就诊和更高的患者满意度相关。确定理想的PPS是一个多方面的过程,受实践环境、患者人口统计学和临床医生特征的影响。虽然与实践相关的因素显示与PPS的关联有限,但患者报告的结果与PPS的关系更为密切。初级保健实践应根据患者群体调整小组规模,强调以患者为中心的方法,并确保充分的基础设施支持,以优化护理提供。
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
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
183
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Merging Law and Medicine: Patient Attitudes About and Experiences with Social Needs Screening and Medical-Legal Partnerships in Primary Care. Understanding Experiences of First Contact Physiotherapy in General Practice: A Realist Qualitative Study. Providers' Beliefs and Values: Understanding Their Approach to Gender-Affirming Care. A Social Network Lens to Community Health Worker Influence and Impact. Integrated Care for People Living With Rare Disease: A Scoping Review on Primary Care Models in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Countries.
×
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