Dataset Information

Age-related differences in motives for contacting out-of-hours primary care: a cross-sectional questionnaire study in Denmark.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Demands for out-of-hours primary care (OOH-PC) services are increasing. Many citizens call because of non-urgent health problems. Nevertheless, the patients' motives for requesting medical help outside office hours remains an understudied area. This study aimed to examine motives for calling OOH-PC services in various age groups.

Design

Cross-sectional paper based questionnaire study conducted during two weeks in 2015.

Setting

The OOH-PC services in two Danish regions.

Subjects

Randomly selected patients calling the two healthcare services and accepting to participate in the study received a questionnaire on patient characteristics, health problems, and 26 pre-defined motives based on the Andersen Behavioural Model. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted for various age groups to calculate the probability of each motive to be a significant factor for the decision to call.

Results

A total of 1,871 patients were included in the study; half were parents of children aged 0-12 years. Young adults (18 to 39 years) differed significantly from other age groups as they more often stated perceived barriers and benefits such as "Own GP no time available soon enough" and "Need for quick help because of work".

Conclusion

Young adults more often perceive barriers and benefits, which may suggest af difference in expectations regarding the purpose of out-of-hours services and accessibility. Further research is needed to address this issue and further explore the potential gap between the citizens' expectations to the OOH-PC services and the prevailing health policies. Key points The out-of-hours primary healthcare services are increasingly contacted for non-urgent problems, but little is known about the citizens' motives for calling. Age is associated with differences in the perceived importance of various motives for calling out-of-hours care. Young adults are more often than other age groups motivated to call due to logistical issues, such as their job.

SUBMITTER: Moth G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7470132 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients in need of acute health care do not always contact the most suitable health care service provider. Contacting out-of-hours primary care for an urgent problem may delay care, whereas contacting emergency medical services for a non-urgent problem could ultimately affect patient safety. More insight into patient motives for contacting a specific health care provider may help optimise patient flows. This study aims to explore patient motives for contacting out-of-hours primary care and the emergency medical services in Denmark.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional observational study by sending a questionnaire to patients contacting out-of-hours primary care and emergency medical services, both of which can be directly contacted by patients, in two of five Danish regions in 2015. As we aimed to focus on the first access point, the emergency department was not included. The questionnaire included items on patient characteristics, health problem and 26 pre-defined motives. Descriptive analyses of patient characteristics and motives were conducted, stratified by the two health care service providers. Factors associated with contacting each of the two service providers were explored in a modified Poisson regression analysis, and adjusted risk ratios were calculated.ResultsThree key motives for contacting the two service providers were identified: 'unpleasant symptoms', 'perceived need for prompt action' and 'perceived most suitable health care provider'. Other important motives were 'need arose outside office hours' and 'wanted to talk to a physician' (out-of-hours primary care) and 'expected need for ambulance' and 'worried' (emergency medical services). Higher probability of contacting the emergency medical services versus out-of-hours primary care was seen for most motives relating to own assessment and expectations, previous experience and knowledge, and own needs and wishes. Lower probability was seen for most motives relating to perceived barriers and benefits.ConclusionsPatient motives for contacting the two health care service providers were partly overlapping. The study contributes with new knowledge on the complex decision-making process of patients in need of acute health care. This knowledge could help optimise existing health care services, such as patient safety and the service level, without increasing health care costs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Out-of-hours (OOH) healthcare services in Western countries are often differentiated into out-of-hours primary healthcare services (OOH-PC) and emergency medical services (EMS). Call waiting time, triage model and intended aims differ between these services. Consequently, the care pathway and outcome could vary based on the choice of entrance to the healthcare system. We aimed to investigate patient pathways and 1- and 1-30-day mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) stay and length of hospital stay for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke and sepsis in relation to the OOH service that was contacted prior to the hospital contact. METHODS:Population-based observational cohort study during 2016 including adult patients from two Danish regions with an OOH service contact on the date of hospital contact. Patients <18?years were excluded. Data was retrieved from OOH service databases and national registries, linked by a unique personal identification number. Crude and adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to assess mortality in relation to contacted OOH service with OOH-PC as the reference and cox regression analysis to assess risk of ICU stay. RESULTS:We included 6826 patients. AMI and stroke patients more often contacted EMS (52.1 and 54.1%), whereas sepsis patients predominately called OOH-PC (66.9%). Less than 10% (all diagnoses) of patients contacted both OOH-PC & EMS. Stroke patients with EMS or OOH-PC & EMS contacts had higher likelihood of 1- and 1-30-day mortality, in particular 1-day (EMS: OR?=?5.33, 95% CI: 2.82-10.08; OOH-PC & EMS: OR?=?3.09, 95% CI: 1.06-9.01). Sepsis patients with EMS or OOH-PC & EMS contacts also had higher likelihood of 1-day mortality (EMS: OR?=?2.22, 95% CI: 1.40-3.51; OOH-PC & EMS: OR?=?2.86, 95% CI: 1.56-5.23) and 1-30-day mortality. Risk of ICU stay was only significantly higher for stroke patients contacting EMS (EMS: HR?=?2.38, 95% CI: 1.51-3.75). Stroke and sepsis patients with EMS contact had longer hospital stays. CONCLUSIONS:More patients contacted OOH-PC than EMS. Sepsis and stroke patients contacting EMS solely or OOH-PC & EMS had higher likelihood of 1- and 1-30-day mortality during the subsequent hospital contact. Our results suggest that patients contacting EMS are more severely ill, however OOH-PC is still often used for time-critical conditions.

Project description:BackgroundThe rise in antibiotic resistance is a global public health concern, and antibiotic overuse needs to be reduced. Earlier studies of out-of-hours care have indicated that antibiotic prescribing is less appropriate than that of in-hours care. However, no study has compared the out-of-hours treatment of infections to in-hours treatment within the same population.MethodsThis retrospective, descriptive study was based on data retrieved from the Kronoberg Infection Database in Primary Care (KIDPC), which consists of all visits to primary care with an infection diagnosis or prescription of antibiotics during 2006-2014. The purpose was to study the trends in antibiotic prescribing and to compare consultations and prescriptions between in-hours and out-of-hours.ResultsThe visit rate for all infections was 434 visits per 1000 inhabitants per year. The visit rate was stable during the study period, but the antibiotic prescribing rate decreased from 266 prescriptions per 1000 inhabitants in 2006 to 194 prescriptions in 2014 (mean annual change - 8.5 [95% CI - 11.9 to - 5.2]). For the out-of-hours visits (12% of the total visits), a similar reduction in antibiotic prescribing was seen. The decrease was most apparent among children and in respiratory tract infections. When antibiotic prescribing during out-of-hours was compared to in-hours, the unadjusted relative risk of antibiotic prescribing was 1.37 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.38), but when adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis, the relative risk of antibiotic prescribing was 1.09 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.10). The reduction after adjustment was largely explained by a higher visit rate during out-of-hours for infections requiring antibiotics (acute otitis media, pharyngotonsillitis, and lower urinary tract infection). The choices of antibiotics used for common diagnoses were similar.ConclusionsAlthough the infection visit rate was unchanged over the study period, there was a significant reduction in antibiotic prescribing, especially to children and for respiratory tract infections. The higher antibiotic prescribing rate during out-of-hours was small when adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis. No excess prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics was seen. Therefore, interventions selectively aiming at out-of-hours centres seem to be unmotivated in a low-prescribing context.

Project description:BackgroundIn out-of-hours primary care (OHS-PC), semi-automatic decision support tools are often used during telephone triage. In the Netherlands, the Netherlands Triage Standard (NTS) is used. The NTS is mainly expert-based and evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of the NTS' urgency allocation against clinically relevant outcomes for patients calling with shortness of breath (SOB) is lacking.MethodsWe included data from adults (≥18 years) who contacted two large Dutch OHS-PC centres for SOB between 1 September 2020 and 31 August 2021 and whose follow-up data about final diagnosis could be retrieved from their own general practitioner (GP). The diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI)) of the NTS' urgency levels (high (U1/U2) versus low (U3/U4/U5) and 'final' urgency levels (including overruling of the urgency by triage nurses or supervising general practitioners (GPs)) was determined with life-threatening events (LTEs) as the reference. LTEs included, amongst others, acute coronary syndrome, pulmonary embolism, acute heart failure and severe pneumonia.ResultsOut of 2012 eligible triage calls, we could include 1833 adults with SOB who called the OHS-PC, mean age 53.3 (SD 21.5) years, 55.5% female, and 16.6% showed to have had a LTE. Most often severe COVID-19 infection (6.0%), acute heart failure (2.6%), severe COPD exacerbation (2.1%) or severe pneumonia (1.9%). The NTS urgency level had a sensitivity of 0.56 (95% CI 0.50-0.61) and specificity of 0.61 (95% CI 0.58-0.63). Overruling of the NTS' urgency allocation by triage nurses and/or supervising GPs did not impact sensitivity (0.56 vs. 0.54, p = 0.458) but slightly improved specificity (0.61 vs. 0.65, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThe semi-automatic decision support tool NTS performs poorly with respect to safety (sensitivity) and efficiency (specificity) of urgency allocation in adults calling Dutch OHS-PC with SOB. There is room for improvement of telephone triage in patients calling OHS-PC with SOB.Trial registrationThe Netherlands Trial Register, number: NL9682 .