Literature DB >> 11731646

Comparison of continuity in a resident versus private practice.

P M Darden1, W Ector, C Moran, T G Quattlebaum.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is widespread agreement among pediatric educators that continuity (following a panel of patients on a first contact basis for all their health care) is an important part of the education of pediatricians.
OBJECTIVE: To measure continuity in a pediatric residency practice and to compare this continuity with 2 nearby private general pediatric group practices. We also examined measures of continuity suggested in the literature.
DESIGN: Visit data were obtained from the practice billing system for a resident continuity practice and 2 nearby private practices for the 3-year period from July 1, 1992, to June 30, 1995. Visit data used were restricted to patients seen in the office of the practices during regular office hours. Continuity was measured using 5 different indices: 1) the usual provider of care index, visits by the usual clinician/total visits, 2) continuity for patient, the average proportion of visits that an individual patient was seen by his or her own physician, 3) continuity for physician (PHY), the average proportion of visits that an individual physician saw his or her own patients, 4) Continuity of Care Index (COC), and 5) the Modified, Modified Continuity Index. During the period examined, pediatric residents were present in the continuity practice for 1 half-day each week. The resident continuity practice (RCP) had 57 residents and saw 3386 patients for 18 955 visits. Private practice 1 (PP1) had 4 pediatricians who saw 4968 patients for 33 537 visits. Private practice 2 (PP2) had 5 pediatricians who saw 11 953 patients for 75 778 visits.
RESULTS: For all visit types, continuity in the RCP was not as high as in the private practices, PHY-RCP versus PP1, PP2; 53% versus 70%, 77%. However, continuity in RCP was greater than 50% for all measures except the COC index, which precipitously decreases as the number of clinicians seen increases. Examining continuity for health maintenance visits (PHY-RCP, PP2 vs PP1; 96%, 96% vs 82%) RCP was equal to the best of the private practices. The percentage of patients not seen for a health maintenance visit during the study period was lowest in the resident practice (RCP/PP1/PP2, 15/22/30).
CONCLUSIONS: Although continuity for all visits in this RCP was less than in private practice, it was surprisingly high, considering the limited time residents spend in clinic. In a particularly important area for continuity, health maintenance visits, continuity was identical to one and superior to the other private practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11731646     DOI: 10.1542/peds.108.6.1263

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  22 in total

1.  Continuity: middle C--a very good place to start.

Authors:  Jonathan Kerr; Allyn E Walsh; Jill Konkin; David Tannenbaum; Andrew J Organek; Ean Parsons; Danielle Saucier; Elizabeth Shaw; Ivy Oandasan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Clinic Design and Continuity in Internal Medicine Resident Clinics: Findings of the Educational Innovations Project Ambulatory Collaborative.

Authors:  Maureen D Francis; Mark L Wieland; Sean Drake; Keri Lyn Gwisdalla; Katherine A Julian; Christopher Nabors; Anne Pereira; Michael Rosenblum; Amy Smith; David Sweet; Kris Thomas; Andrew Varney; Eric Warm; David Wininger; Mark L Francis
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-03

3.  Continuity Clinic Model and Diabetic Outcomes in Internal Medicine Residencies: Findings of the Educational Innovations Project Ambulatory Collaborative.

Authors:  Maureen D Francis; Katherine A Julian; David A Wininger; Sean Drake; KeriLyn Bollman; Christopher Nabors; Anne Pereira; Michael Rosenblum; Amy B Zelenski; David Sweet; Kris Thomas; Andrew Varney; Eric Warm; Mark L Francis
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2016-02

4.  Resident physician perspectives on outpatient continuity of care.

Authors:  Mark L Wieland; Thomas M Jaeger; John B Bundrick; Karen F Mauck; Jason A Post; Matthew R Thomas; Kris G Thomas
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2013-12

5.  Clinic design, key practice metrics, and resident satisfaction in internal medicine continuity clinics: findings of the educational innovations project ambulatory collaborative.

Authors:  Maureen D Francis; Kris Thomas; Michael Langan; Amy Smith; Sean Drake; Keri Lyn Gwisdalla; Ronald R Jones; Katherine A Julian; Christopher Nabors; Anne Pereira; Michael Rosenblum; Andrew Varney; Eric Warm; Melchor Ortiz
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2014-06

6.  Variation in refill protocols and procedures in a family medicine residency network.

Authors:  Janelle Guirguis-Blake; Gina A Keppel; Rex W Force; Jacintha Cauffield; Rob M Monger; Laura Mae Baldwin
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.756

7.  Two new aspects of continuity of care.

Authors:  Jonathan R Kerr; Karen Schultz; Dianne Delva
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Determinants of the number of antenatal visits in a metropolitan region.

Authors:  Katrien Beeckman; Fred Louckx; Koen Putman
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  An evaluation of internal medicine residency continuity clinic redesign to a 50/50 outpatient-inpatient model.

Authors:  Mark L Wieland; Andrew J Halvorsen; Rajeev Chaudhry; Darcy A Reed; Furman S McDonald; Kris G Thomas
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Human papillomavirus vaccine communication: perspectives of 11-12 year-old girls, mothers, and clinicians.

Authors:  Tanya L Kowalczyk Mullins; Anne M Griffioen; Susan Glynn; Gregory D Zimet; Susan L Rosenthal; J Dennis Fortenberry; Jessica A Kahn
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2013-08-03       Impact factor: 3.641

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.