探索新不伦瑞克省(加拿大)的初级保健模式和及时获得保健服务。

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL BMC primary care Pub Date : 2024-10-14 DOI:10.1186/s12875-024-02618-8
Claire Johnson, Dominique Bourgoin, Jérémie B Dupuis, Jenny Manuèle Félix, Véronique LeBlanc, Danielle McLennan, Luveberthe St-Louis
{"title":"探索新不伦瑞克省(加拿大)的初级保健模式和及时获得保健服务。","authors":"Claire Johnson, Dominique Bourgoin, Jérémie B Dupuis, Jenny Manuèle Félix, Véronique LeBlanc, Danielle McLennan, Luveberthe St-Louis","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02618-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This correlative study aimed to examine how the different primary care models (physicians in solo practice, physicians in collaborative practice, physicians and nurse practitioners in collaborative practice, after-hours clinics, community centers, or emergency rooms) were associated with their capability to offer timely access to their patients. The data collected from the primary care provider's perspective was to complete the New Brunswick Health Council results on patients' perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 120 primary care providers (33 physicians in solo practice, 33 physicians in collaborative practice, 27 providers in collaborative practice with nurse practitioners, 2 providers working in after-hours clinics, and 10 providers in Emergency departments) responded to an online survey about their primary care models and accessibility. We used the Statistical Package for Social Sciences software to run correlations, independent t-tests and Fisher's exact tests to compare timely access to care between variable groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A positive correlation was observed between patient load (or the number of patients under a primary care provider's practice), age and years of experience. However, the patient load did not translate to more timely access to care. However, a statistically significant difference (p = 0.032) was observed when primary care providers kept appointment slots available for daily urgent requests. When a primary care provider booked all available appointment slots, only 85% of them could offer timely appointments (in 5 days or less), compared to 97% who could deliver it when appointment slots were left open in their daily schedule. The primary care model (solo vs. collaboration), the use of health technologies and the type of provider did not significantly influence timely access to care. In contrast, the primary care providers who reported teleworking (or working remotely) were less likely to offer timely access to care.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Timely access to care is not always available to patients, even those with a primary care provider. Certain organizational practices may improve access to care and should be integrated into primary care in New Brunswick and elsewhere in Canada.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11472562/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploration of primary care models and timely access to care in New Brunswick (Canada).\",\"authors\":\"Claire Johnson, Dominique Bourgoin, Jérémie B Dupuis, Jenny Manuèle Félix, Véronique LeBlanc, Danielle McLennan, Luveberthe St-Louis\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12875-024-02618-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This correlative study aimed to examine how the different primary care models (physicians in solo practice, physicians in collaborative practice, physicians and nurse practitioners in collaborative practice, after-hours clinics, community centers, or emergency rooms) were associated with their capability to offer timely access to their patients. The data collected from the primary care provider's perspective was to complete the New Brunswick Health Council results on patients' perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 120 primary care providers (33 physicians in solo practice, 33 physicians in collaborative practice, 27 providers in collaborative practice with nurse practitioners, 2 providers working in after-hours clinics, and 10 providers in Emergency departments) responded to an online survey about their primary care models and accessibility. We used the Statistical Package for Social Sciences software to run correlations, independent t-tests and Fisher's exact tests to compare timely access to care between variable groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A positive correlation was observed between patient load (or the number of patients under a primary care provider's practice), age and years of experience. However, the patient load did not translate to more timely access to care. However, a statistically significant difference (p = 0.032) was observed when primary care providers kept appointment slots available for daily urgent requests. When a primary care provider booked all available appointment slots, only 85% of them could offer timely appointments (in 5 days or less), compared to 97% who could deliver it when appointment slots were left open in their daily schedule. The primary care model (solo vs. collaboration), the use of health technologies and the type of provider did not significantly influence timely access to care. In contrast, the primary care providers who reported teleworking (or working remotely) were less likely to offer timely access to care.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Timely access to care is not always available to patients, even those with a primary care provider. Certain organizational practices may improve access to care and should be integrated into primary care in New Brunswick and elsewhere in Canada.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC primary care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11472562/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC primary care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02618-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02618-8","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

摘要

背景:这项相关研究旨在探讨不同的初级医疗模式(单独执业的医生、合作执业的医生、合作执业的医生和执业护士、下班后诊所、社区中心或急诊室)如何与其为患者提供及时就诊服务的能力相关联。从初级医疗服务提供者角度收集的数据是为了完善新不伦瑞克省卫生委员会关于患者角度的调查结果:我们对 120 名初级医疗服务提供者(33 名单独执业的医生、33 名合作执业的医生、27 名与执业护士合作执业的医疗服务提供者、2 名在下班后诊所工作的医疗服务提供者和 10 名急诊科医疗服务提供者)进行了方便抽样调查,调查内容涉及他们的初级医疗服务模式和可及性。我们使用社会科学统计软件包进行了相关性、独立 t 检验和费雪精确检验,以比较不同组别之间及时获得医疗服务的情况:结果:我们观察到病人数量(或初级保健提供者诊治的病人数量)、年龄和工作年限之间存在正相关。然而,病人数量并不意味着更及时地获得医疗服务。然而,当初级医疗服务提供者为每天的紧急请求保留预约时段时,观察到了统计学上的显著差异(p = 0.032)。当初级医疗服务提供者预约了所有可用的预约时段时,只有 85% 的医疗服务提供者可以提供及时的预约服务(5 天或更短时间内),而当他们的日常日程表中留出预约时段时,则有 97% 的医疗服务提供者可以提供及时的预约服务。全科医疗模式(单独或合作)、医疗技术的使用以及医疗服务提供者的类型对及时获得医疗服务并无显著影响。相比之下,报告远程工作(或远程办公)的初级医疗服务提供者提供及时就医的可能性较低:结论:患者并非总能及时获得医疗服务,即使是那些有初级医疗服务提供者的患者。在新不伦瑞克省和加拿大其他地区,某些组织实践可能会改善医疗服务的可及性,并应将其纳入初级医疗保健中。
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
Exploration of primary care models and timely access to care in New Brunswick (Canada).

Background: This correlative study aimed to examine how the different primary care models (physicians in solo practice, physicians in collaborative practice, physicians and nurse practitioners in collaborative practice, after-hours clinics, community centers, or emergency rooms) were associated with their capability to offer timely access to their patients. The data collected from the primary care provider's perspective was to complete the New Brunswick Health Council results on patients' perspective.

Methods: A convenience sample of 120 primary care providers (33 physicians in solo practice, 33 physicians in collaborative practice, 27 providers in collaborative practice with nurse practitioners, 2 providers working in after-hours clinics, and 10 providers in Emergency departments) responded to an online survey about their primary care models and accessibility. We used the Statistical Package for Social Sciences software to run correlations, independent t-tests and Fisher's exact tests to compare timely access to care between variable groups.

Results: A positive correlation was observed between patient load (or the number of patients under a primary care provider's practice), age and years of experience. However, the patient load did not translate to more timely access to care. However, a statistically significant difference (p = 0.032) was observed when primary care providers kept appointment slots available for daily urgent requests. When a primary care provider booked all available appointment slots, only 85% of them could offer timely appointments (in 5 days or less), compared to 97% who could deliver it when appointment slots were left open in their daily schedule. The primary care model (solo vs. collaboration), the use of health technologies and the type of provider did not significantly influence timely access to care. In contrast, the primary care providers who reported teleworking (or working remotely) were less likely to offer timely access to care.

Conclusion: Timely access to care is not always available to patients, even those with a primary care provider. Certain organizational practices may improve access to care and should be integrated into primary care in New Brunswick and elsewhere in Canada.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Post-pandemic patient safety: have the characteristics of incidents with harm changed? Comparative observational study in primary care via review of medical records with a trigger tool. Opportunities of integrated care to improve equity for adults with complex needs: a qualitative study of case management in primary care. Shared decision-making with patients with complex care needs: a scoping review. Turnover intention and continuing professional development of rural doctors from targeted admission medical education program in China: a cross-sectional study in the post-COVID-19 era. Chronic kidney disease in older adults: challenges and opportunities for the primary care provider.
×
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