Dataset Information

Exploring demographic and lifestyle associations with patient experience following telephone triage by a primary care doctor or nurse: secondary analyses from a cluster randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The ESTEEM trial was a cluster randomised controlled trial that compared two telephone triage management systems (general practitioner (GP) or a nurse supported by computer decision support software) with usual care, in response to a request for same-day consultation in general practice.

Aim

To investigate associations between trial patients' demographic, health, and lifestyle characteristics, and their reported experiences of care.

Setting

Recruitment of 20 990 patients occurred between May 2011 and December 2012 in 42 GP practices in England (13 GP triage, 15 nurse triage, 14 usual care).

Method

Patients reported their experiences via a postal questionnaire issued 4 weeks after their initial request for a same-day consultation. Overall satisfaction, ease of accessing medical help/advice, and convenience of care were analysed using linear hierarchical modelling.

Results

Questionnaires were returned by 12 132 patients (58%). Older patients reported increased overall satisfaction compared with patients aged 25-59 years, but patients aged 16-24 years reported lower satisfaction. Compared with white patients, patients from ethnic minorities reported lower satisfaction in all three arms, although to a lesser degree in the GP triage arm. Patients from ethnic minorities reported higher satisfaction in the GP triage than in usual care, whereas white patients reported higher satisfaction with usual care. Patients unable to take time away from work or who could only do so with difficulty reported lower satisfaction across all three trial arms.

Conclusions

Patient characteristics, such as age, ethnicity and ability to attend their practice during work hours, were associated with their experiences of care following a same-day consultation request in general practice. Telephone triage did not increase satisfaction among patients who were unable to attend their practice during working hours.

Trial registration number

ISCRTN20687662.

SUBMITTER: Warren FC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4552919 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare doctors' and nurses' communication with patients in primary care telephone triage consultations.DesignQualitative comparative study of content and form of questions in 51 telephone triage encounters between practitioners (general practitioners (GPs)=29; nurses=22) and patients requesting a same-day appointment in primary care. Audio-recordings of nurse-led calls were synchronised with video recordings of nurse's use of computer decision support software (CDSS) during triage.Setting2 GP practices in Devon and Warwickshire, UK.Participants4 GPs and 29 patients; and 4 nurses and 22 patients requesting a same-day face-to-face appointment with a GP.Main outcome measureForm and content of practitioner-initiated questions and patient responses during clinical assessment.ResultsA total of 484 question-response sequences were coded (160 GP; 324 N). Despite average call lengths being similar (GP=4 min, 37 s, (SD=1 min, 26 s); N=4 min, 39 s, (SD=2 min, 22 s)), GPs and nurses differed in the average number (GP=5.51, (SD=4.66); N=14.72, (SD=6.42)), content and form of questions asked. A higher frequency of questioning in nurse-led triage was found to be due to nurses' use of CDSS to guide telephone triage. 89% of nurse questions were oriented to asking patients about their reported symptoms or to wider-information gathering, compared to 54% of GP questions. 43% of GP questions involved eliciting patient concerns or expectations, and obtaining details of medical history, compared to 11% of nurse questions. Nurses using CDSS frequently delivered questions designed as declarative statements requesting confirmation and which typically preferred a 'no problem' response. In contrast, GPs asked a higher proportion of interrogative questions designed to request information.ConclusionsNurses and GPs emphasise different aspects of the clinical assessment process during telephone triage. These different styles of triage have implications for the type of information available following nurse-led or doctor-led triage, and for how patients experience triage.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the appropriateness of cases presenting to the emergency department (ED) following ambulance-based secondary telephone triage. DESIGN:A pragmatic retrospective cohort analysis of all the planned and unplanned ED presentations within 48 hours of a secondary telephone triage. SETTING:The secondary telephone triage service, called the Referral Service, and the hospitals were located in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia and operated 24 hours a day, servicing 4.25 million people. The Referral Service provides an in-depth secondary triage of cases classified as low acuity when calling the Australian emergency telephone number. POPULATION:Cases triaged by the Referral Service between September 2009 and June 2012 were linked to ED and hospital admission records (N=44,523). Planned ED presentations were cases referred to the ED following the secondary triage, unplanned ED presentations were cases that presented despite being referred to alternative care pathways. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Appropriateness was measured using an ED suitability definition and hospital admission rates. These were compared with mean population data which consisted of all of the ED presentations for the state (termed the 'average Victorian ED presentation'). RESULTS:Planned ED presentations were more likely to be ED suitable than unplanned ED presentations (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.5 to 1.7; p<0.001) and the average Victorian ED presentation (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.4; p=0.046). They were also more likely to be admitted to the hospital than the unplanned ED presentation (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 1.6; p<0.001) and the average Victorian ED presentation (OR 2.3, 95% CI 2.24 to 2.33; p<0.001). Just under 15% of cases diverted away from the emergency care pathways presented in the ED (unplanned ED attendances), and 9.5% of all the alternative care pathway cases were classified as ED suitable and 6.5% were admitted to hospital. CONCLUSIONS:Secondary telephone triage was able to appropriately identify many ED suitable cases, and while most cases referred to alternative care pathways did not present in the ED. Further research is required to establish that these were not inappropriately triaged away from the emergency care pathways.

Project description:IntroductionCanadian patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) typically undergo a triage process where they are assessed by a specially trained nurse and assigned a Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) score, indicating their level of acuity and urgency of assessment. We sought to assess the ability of patients to self-triage themselves through use of one of two of our proprietary self-triage tools, and how this would compare with the standard nurse-driven triage process.MethodsWe enrolled a convenience sample of ambulatory ED patients aged 17 years or older who presented with chief complaints of chest pain, abdominal pain, breathing problems, or musculoskeletal pain. Participants completed one, or both, of an algorithm generated self-triage (AGST) survey, or visual acuity scale (VAS) based self-triage tool which subsequently generated a CTAS score. Our primary outcome was to assess the accuracy of these tools to the CTAS score generated through the nurse-driven triage process.ResultsA total of 223 patients were included in our analysis. Of these, 32 (14.3%) presented with chest pain, 25 (11.2%) with shortness of breath, 75 (33.6%) with abdominal pain, and 91 (40.8%) with musculoskeletal pain. Of the total number of patients, 142 (47.2%) completed the AGST tool, 159 (52.8%) completed the VAS tool and 78 (25.9%) completed both tools. When compared to the nurse-driven triage standard, both the AGST and VAS tools had poor levels of agreement for each of the four presenting complaints.ConclusionsSelf-triage through use of an AGST or VAS tool is inaccurate compared to the established standard of nurse-driven triage. Although existing literature exists which suggests that self-triage tools developed for specific subsets of complaints may be feasible, our results would suggest that adopting the self-triage approach on a broader scale for all-comers to the ED does not appear to be a viable option to enhance the current triage process. Further study is required to show if self-triage can be used in the ED to optimize the triage process.