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}
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.
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.