Dataset Information

Consumption in out-of-hours health care: Danes double Dutch?

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To study the quantitative consumption in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care in Denmark and the Netherlands, in the context of OOH care services. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study describing contacts with OOH care services, using registration data. SETTING: OOH care services (i.e. OOH primary care, emergency department, and ambulance care) in one Danish and one Dutch region. SUBJECTS: All patients contacting the OOH care services in September and October 2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consumption as number of contacts per 1000 inhabitants in total and per age group per contact type. RESULTS: For the two-month period the Danes had 80/1000 contacts with OOH primary care compared with 50/1000 for the Dutch. The number of contacts per 1000 inhabitants per age group varied between the regions, with the largest difference in the 0-5 years age group and a considerable difference in the young-adult groups (20-35 years). The difference was largest for telephone consultations (47/1000 vs. 20/1000), particularly in the youngest age group (154/1000 vs. 39/1000). The Danes also had more home visits than the Dutch (10/1000 vs. 5/1000), while the Dutch had slightly more clinic consultations per 1000 inhabitants than the Danes (25/1000 vs. 23/1000). CONCLUSION: The Danish population has more contacts with OOH primary care, particularly telephone consultations, especially concerning young patients. Future research should focus on the relevance of contacts and identification of factors related to consumption in OOH primary care.

SUBMITTER: Huibers L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4137903 | biostudies-other | 2014 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consumption in out-of-hours health care: Danes double Dutch?

Huibers Linda L Moth Grete G Andersen Mikkel M van Grunsven Pierre P Giesen Paul P Christensen Morten Bondo MB Olesen Frede F

Scandinavian journal of primary health care 20140301 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To study the quantitative consumption in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care in Denmark and the Netherlands, in the context of OOH care services.<h4>Design</h4>A retrospective observational study describing contacts with OOH care services, using registration data.<h4>Setting</h4>OOH care services (i.e. OOH primary care, emergency department, and ambulance care) in one Danish and one Dutch region.<h4>Subjects</h4>All patients contacting the OOH care services in September and October ...[more]

PMID: 24635578

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:In Western countries, patients with acute illness or injury out-of-hours (OOH) can call either emergency medical services (EMS) for emergencies or primary care services (OOH-PC) in less urgent situations. Callers initially choose which service to contact; whether this choice reflect the intended differences in urgency and severity is unknown. Hospital diagnoses and admission rates following an OOH service contact could elucidate this. We aimed to investigate and compare the prevalence of patient contacts, subsequent hospital contacts, and the age-related pattern of hospital diagnoses following an out-of-hours contact to EMS or OOH-PC services in Denmark. METHODS:Population-based observational cohort study including patients from two Danish regions with contact to EMS or OOH-PC in 2016. Hospital contacts were defined as short (< 24 h) or admissions (≥24 h) on the date of OOH service contact. Both regions have EMS, whereas the North Denmark Region has a general practitioner cooperative (GPC) as OOH-PC service and the Capital Region of Copenhagen the Medical Helpline 1813 (MH-1813), together representing all Danish OOH service types. Calling an OOH service is mandatory prior to a hospital contact outside office hours. RESULTS:OOH-PC handled 91% (1,107,297) of all contacts (1,219,963). Subsequent hospital contacts were most frequent for EMS contacts (46-54%) followed by MH-1813 (41%) and GPC contacts (9%). EMS had more admissions (52-56%) than OOH-PC. For both EMS and OOH-PC, short hospital contacts often concerned injuries (32-63%) and non-specific diagnoses (20-45%). The proportion of circulatory disease was almost twice as large following EMS (13-17%) compared to OOH-PC (7-9%) in admitted patients, whereas respiratory diseases (11-14%), injuries (15-22%) and non-specific symptoms (22-29%) were more equally distributed. Generally, admitted patients were older. CONCLUSIONS:EMS contacts were fewer, but with a higher percentage of hospital contacts, admissions and prevalence of circulatory diseases compared to OOH-PC, perhaps indicating that patients more often contact EMS in case of severe disease. However, hospital diagnoses only elucidate severity of diseases to some extent, and other measures of severity could be considered in future studies. Moreover, the socio-demographic pattern of patients calling OOH needs exploration as this may play an important role in choice of entrance.

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:BACKGROUND:A 2014 national audit used the English General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) to compare service users' experience of out-of-hours general practitioner (GP) services, yet there is no published evidence on the validity of these GPPS items. OBJECTIVES:Establish the construct and concurrent validity of GPPS items evaluating service users' experience of GP out-of-hours care. METHODS:Cross-sectional postal survey of service users (n=1396) of six English out-of-hours providers. Participants reported on four GPPS items evaluating out-of-hours care (three items modified following cognitive interviews with service users), and 14 evaluative items from the Out-of-hours Patient Questionnaire (OPQ). Construct validity was assessed through correlations between any reliable (Cochran's ?>0.7) scales, as suggested by a principal component analysis of the modified GPPS items, with the 'entry access' (four items) and 'consultation satisfaction' (10 items) OPQ subscales. Concurrent validity was determined by investigating whether each modified GPPS item was associated with thematically related items from the OPQ using linear regressions. RESULTS:The modified GPPS item-set formed a single scale (?=0.77), which summarised the two-component structure of the OPQ moderately well; explaining 39.7% of variation in the 'entry access' scores (r=0.63) and 44.0% of variation in the 'consultation satisfaction' scores (r=0.66), demonstrating acceptable construct validity. Concurrent validity was verified as each modified GPPS item was highly associated with a distinct set of related items from the OPQ. CONCLUSIONS:Minor modifications are required for the English GPPS items evaluating out-of-hours care to improve comprehension by service users. A modified question set was demonstrated to comprise a valid measure of service users' overall satisfaction with out-of-hours care received. This demonstrates the potential for the use of as few as four items in benchmarking providers and assisting services in identifying, implementing and assessing quality improvement initiatives.

Project description:BackgroundFamily practitioners (FPs) who work in Out-Of-Hours Care (OOHC) - especially in rural areas - complain about high workload related to low urgency and potentially unnecessary patient presentations with minor ailments. The aim of this study was to describe Reasons for Encounter (RFEs) in primary OOHC taken into account the doctor's perspective in the context of high workload without knowing patients' motives for visiting an OOHC-centre.MethodsWithin this descriptive study, OOHC data from 2012 were evaluated from a German statutory health insurance company in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. 1.53 Million of the 10.5 Million inhabitants of Baden-Wuerttemberg were covered. The frequency of the ICD-10 diagnoses was determined at the three- and four-digit-level. The rate of hospitalizations was used to estimate the severity of the evaluated cases.ResultsTaken as a whole, 163,711 reasons for encounter with 1,174 ICD-10 single diagnoses were documented, of these 62.2% were on weekends. Less than 5.0% of the examined patients were hospitalized. Low back pain-dorsalgia (M54) was the most common diagnosis in OOHC, with 10,843 cases. Injuries were found twelve times in the list of the 30 most frequent diagnoses. The most frequent infectious disease was acute upper respiratory infection of multiple and unspecified sites (J06). By analysing the ICD codes to four-digits and looking at the rate of hospitalizations, it can be assumed that many RFEs were of less urgency in terms of the prompt need for medical treatment.ConclusionWhile it is acknowledged that it can be difficult to make an exact diagnosis in an OOHC setting, after analysing the ICD-10 diagnoses, the majority of reasons for encounter in OOHC were determined to be of low urgency, meaning that patients could have waited until regular consultation hours. In the OOHC setting, it is important to understand RFEs from both the patient perspective and the family practitioner perspective. Additionally, results like these can be used in staff education especially improving triage methods and medical recommendations and in developing specific guidelines for OOHC in Germany. Analysis of routine data, such as in this study, contributes to this understanding and contributes to resolving problems of coding.

Dataset Information

Consumption in out-of-hours health care: Danes double Dutch?

Publications

Consumption in out-of-hours health care: Danes double Dutch?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets