Literature DB >> 10187199

Do minutes count? Consultation lengths in general practice.

R Carr-Hill1, S Jenkins-Clarke, P Dixon, M Pringle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To document the variability in consultation length and to examine the relative weight of different kinds of characteristics (of the patients, of the general practitioner (GP), or of the practice) in affecting consultation length, and, thus, to assess whether consultation length can legitimately be used as a quality marker.
DESIGN: A multilevel statistical analysis of 836 consultations across 51 GPs in ten practices. SETTING AND
SUBJECTS: Ten general practices across four regions in England with varying list sizes, number of partners and fundholding status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of time face-to-face with patients in consultation measured in minutes and fractions of minutes.
RESULTS: There is substantial inter-practice variation in consultation length, from a mean of 5.7 minutes to one of 8.5 minutes. In some practices the longest average GP consultation time is about twice that of the shortest. Trainees and new partners spend, on average, about 1 minute less than their longer-serving colleagues. Consultation lengths for individual GPs range from a mean of 4.4 minutes to 11 minutes. Late middle-aged women (55-64 years) receive the longest consultations, followed by elderly people, with children receiving the shortest consultations. The number of topics raised affects the length of the consultation by about 1 minute per additional topic. When female patients consult female GPs, approximately 1 minute is added to the average consultation. A significant fraction of the variability in consultation lengths can be explained in terms of characteristics of patients, of GPs and of practices.
CONCLUSIONS: The fact that there is little unexplained variation in GP consultation lengths that might be attributable to variations in quality (i.e. GP-related) throws doubt on the proposition that length of consultation can be used as a marker for quality of consultation in general practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10187199     DOI: 10.1177/135581969800300405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  23 in total

Review 1.  The relationship between consultation length, process and outcomes in general practice: a systematic review.

Authors:  Andrew Wilson; Susan Childs
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Barriers to nonpharmacologic treatments for stress, anxiety, and insomnia: family physicians' attitudes toward benzodiazepine prescribing.

Authors:  Sibyl Anthierens; Inge Pasteels; Hilde Habraken; Pascale Steinberg; Tom Declercq; Thierry Christiaens
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  A drop-in clinic for patients with poorly-controlled diabetes: a community pharmacy feasibility study.

Authors:  Michael J Twigg; Debi Bhattacharya; James A Desborough; David Wright
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2015-02-10

4.  Community pharmacies automation: any impact on counselling duration and job satisfaction?

Authors:  Afonso Miguel Cavaco; Anette Aaland Krookas
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2013-11-20

5.  Understanding performance and behavior of tightly coupled outpatient systems using RFID: initial experience.

Authors:  James E Stahl; Julie K Holt; Nancy J Gagliano
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 4.460

6.  Practice size: impact on consultation length, workload, and patient assessment of care.

Authors:  J L Campbell; J Ramsay; J Green
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Communication patterns of primary care physicians in the United States and the Netherlands.

Authors:  Jozien M Bensing; Debra L Roter; Robert L Hulsman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  The workload of GPs: consultations of patients with psychological and somatic problems compared.

Authors:  Else M Zantinge; Peter F M Verhaak; Jan J Kerssens; Jozien M Bensing
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  A six-item short-form survey for measuring headache impact: the HIT-6.

Authors:  M Kosinski; M S Bayliss; J B Bjorner; J E Ware; W H Garber; A Batenhorst; R Cady; C G H Dahlöf; A Dowson; S Tepper
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Patients' perceptions of entitlement to time in general practice consultations for depression: qualitative study.

Authors:  Kristian Pollock; Janet Grime
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-09-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.