初级保健就诊时间与门诊利用率、连续性和护理流程的关系。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Family practice Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI:10.1093/fampra/cmad116
David T Liss, Andrew J Cooper, Manisha Cherupally, Tiffany Brown, Marilyn G Pearson
{"title":"初级保健就诊时间与门诊利用率、连续性和护理流程的关系。","authors":"David T Liss, Andrew J Cooper, Manisha Cherupally, Tiffany Brown, Marilyn G Pearson","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmad116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about how variation in the scheduled length of primary care visits can impact patients' patterns of health care utilization.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate how the scheduled length of in-person visits with primary care physicians (PCPs) was associated with PCP and patient characteristics, outpatient utilization, and preventive care receipt.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study examined data from a large American academic health system. PCP visit length template was defined as either 15- and 30-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 15/30), or 20- and 40-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 20/40).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 222 included PCPs, 85 (38.3%) used the 15/30 template and 137 (61.7%) used the 20/40 template. The 15/30 group had higher proportions of male (49.4%, vs. 35.8% in the 20/40 group) and family medicine (37.6% vs. 21.2%) physicians. In adjusted patient-level analysis (N = 238,806), having a 15/30 PCP was associated with 9% more primary care visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.14), and 8% fewer specialty care visits (IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). PCP visit length template was not associated with significant differences in obstetrics/gynaecology visits, continuity of care, or preventive care receipt. In interaction analyses, having a 15/30 PCP was associated with additional primary care visits among non-Hispanic White patients (IRR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) but not among non-Hispanic Black patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCPs' choices about the scheduled length of in-person visits may impact their patients' specialty care use, and have varying impacts across different racial/ethnic groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":" ","pages":"1002-1009"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of primary care visit length with outpatient utilization, continuity, and care processes.\",\"authors\":\"David T Liss, Andrew J Cooper, Manisha Cherupally, Tiffany Brown, Marilyn G Pearson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/fampra/cmad116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about how variation in the scheduled length of primary care visits can impact patients' patterns of health care utilization.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate how the scheduled length of in-person visits with primary care physicians (PCPs) was associated with PCP and patient characteristics, outpatient utilization, and preventive care receipt.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study examined data from a large American academic health system. PCP visit length template was defined as either 15- and 30-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 15/30), or 20- and 40-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 20/40).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 222 included PCPs, 85 (38.3%) used the 15/30 template and 137 (61.7%) used the 20/40 template. The 15/30 group had higher proportions of male (49.4%, vs. 35.8% in the 20/40 group) and family medicine (37.6% vs. 21.2%) physicians. In adjusted patient-level analysis (N = 238,806), having a 15/30 PCP was associated with 9% more primary care visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.14), and 8% fewer specialty care visits (IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). PCP visit length template was not associated with significant differences in obstetrics/gynaecology visits, continuity of care, or preventive care receipt. In interaction analyses, having a 15/30 PCP was associated with additional primary care visits among non-Hispanic White patients (IRR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) but not among non-Hispanic Black patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCPs' choices about the scheduled length of in-person visits may impact their patients' specialty care use, and have varying impacts across different racial/ethnic groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1002-1009\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-02\",\"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/cmad116\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmad116","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

摘要

背景:人们对初级保健就诊时间的变化如何影响患者的医疗保健使用模式知之甚少:目的:评估初级保健医生(PCP)的预约面诊时间与初级保健医生和患者特征、门诊利用率和预防保健接受情况之间的关系:这项回顾性队列研究检查了美国一家大型学术医疗系统的数据。初级保健医生的就诊时长模板被定义为15分钟和30分钟的预约就诊(即15/30),或20分钟和40分钟的预约就诊(即20/40):在 222 名被纳入的初级保健医生中,85 名(38.3%)使用了 15/30 模板,137 名(61.7%)使用了 20/40 模板。15/30 组中男性(49.4%,而 20/40 组为 35.8%)和家庭医生(37.6%,而 20/40 组为 21.2%)的比例较高。在调整后的患者水平分析中(N = 238,806 人),15/30 位初级保健医生与初级保健就诊次数增加 9% 相关(发病率比 [IRR], 1.09; 95% 置信区间 [CI], 1.03-1.14),与专科就诊次数减少 8% 相关(IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98)。初级保健医生就诊时长模板与产科/妇科就诊、护理连续性或接受预防性护理方面的显著差异无关。在交互分析中,拥有 15/30 名初级保健医生与非西班牙裔白人患者的额外初级保健就诊有关(IRR,1.10;95% CI,1.04-1.16),但与非西班牙裔黑人患者无关:结论:初级保健医生对预约面诊时间的选择可能会影响患者对专科护理的使用,而且对不同种族/族裔群体的影响各不相同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Association of primary care visit length with outpatient utilization, continuity, and care processes.

Background: Little is known about how variation in the scheduled length of primary care visits can impact patients' patterns of health care utilization.

Objective: To evaluate how the scheduled length of in-person visits with primary care physicians (PCPs) was associated with PCP and patient characteristics, outpatient utilization, and preventive care receipt.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study examined data from a large American academic health system. PCP visit length template was defined as either 15- and 30-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 15/30), or 20- and 40-min scheduled appointments (i.e. 20/40).

Results: Of 222 included PCPs, 85 (38.3%) used the 15/30 template and 137 (61.7%) used the 20/40 template. The 15/30 group had higher proportions of male (49.4%, vs. 35.8% in the 20/40 group) and family medicine (37.6% vs. 21.2%) physicians. In adjusted patient-level analysis (N = 238,806), having a 15/30 PCP was associated with 9% more primary care visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.14), and 8% fewer specialty care visits (IRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). PCP visit length template was not associated with significant differences in obstetrics/gynaecology visits, continuity of care, or preventive care receipt. In interaction analyses, having a 15/30 PCP was associated with additional primary care visits among non-Hispanic White patients (IRR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) but not among non-Hispanic Black patients.

Conclusion: PCPs' choices about the scheduled length of in-person visits may impact their patients' specialty care use, and have varying impacts across different racial/ethnic groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Perspectives of general practitioners and practice nurses on nurse-led patient consultations and dose changes of permanent medications-results of a focus group study. 'It's what we should be doing anyway': using financial incentives to promote relational continuity in Australian General Practice-a nested case study analysis. The relationship between self-care preparedness and quality of life in a 3-year-follow-up: a study in primary health care. "I consider myself to be a leader": a qualitative exploration of early career women family physicians' intentions to assume a leadership role. Using an SMS to improve bowel cancer screening: the acceptability and feasibility of a multifaceted intervention.
×
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