Literature DB >> 12089094

An observational study comparing quality of care in walk-in centres with general practice and NHS Direct using standardised patients.

Clare Grant1, Ruth Nicholas, Laurence Moore, Chris Salisbury.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the quality of clinical care in walk-in centres with that provided in general practice and by NHS Direct.
DESIGN: Observational study involving assessment of clinicians by standardised patients.
SETTING: 20 walk-in centres, 20 general practices, and 11 NHS Direct sites. PARTICIPANTS: 297 consultations with standardised patients, 99 in each setting, carried out by professional role players trained to play five clinical scenarios (postcoital contraception, chest pain, sinusitis, headache, and asthma). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were mean scores on consensus derived checklists of essential items for the management of the clinical scenarios. Data were also collected on access to and referral by walk-in centres, general practices, and NHS Direct.
RESULTS: Walk-in centres achieved a significantly greater mean score for all scenarios combined than general practices (difference between groups 8.2, 95% confidence interval 1.7 to 14.6) and NHS Direct (10.8, 5.5 to 16.1). There was considerable between scenario variation, with walk-in centres performing particularly well on postcoital contraception and asthma scenarios. In contrast to general practices, walk-in centres and NHS Direct referred a higher proportion of patients (26% and 82%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Walk-in centres perform adequately and safely compared with general practices and NHS Direct for the range of conditions under study, but the impact of referrals on workload of other healthcare providers requires further research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12089094      PMCID: PMC116613          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7353.1556

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  19 in total

1.  What is the role of walk-in centres in the NHS?

Authors:  Chris Salisbury; Mel Chalder; Taj Manku Scott; Catherine Pope; Laurence Moore
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-02-16

2.  Study of walk-in centres was flawed.

Authors:  S George; V Lattimer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-04-14

3.  A method for introducing standardized (simulated) patients into general practice consultations.

Authors:  J J Rethans; R Drop; F Sturmans; C van der Vleuten
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Measurement of physician performance by standardized patients. Refining techniques for undetected entry in physicians' offices.

Authors:  C A Woodward; G A McConvey; V Neufeld; G R Norman; A Walsh
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 5.  The use of standardized patients in research in general practice.

Authors:  J Beullens; J J Rethans; J Goedhuys; F Buntinx
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 2.267

6.  Developing case-specific checklists for standardized-patient-based assessments in internal medicine: A review of the literature.

Authors:  S Gorter; J J Rethans; A Scherpbier; D van der Heijde; H Houben; C van der Vleuten; S van der Linden
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 6.893

7.  The accuracy of standardized patient presentation.

Authors:  R M Tamblyn; D J Klass; G K Schnabl; M L Kopelow
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 6.251

8.  Simulated patients in general practice: a different look at the consultation.

Authors:  J J Rethans; C P van Boven
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1987-03-28

9.  The use of a simulated patient to assess clinical practice in the management of a high risk asthmatic.

Authors:  J J O'Hagan; C H Botting; L J Davies
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  1989-05-24

10.  The use of simulated patients in the assessment of actual clinical performance in general practice.

Authors:  J J O'Hagan; L J Davies; R K Pears
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  1986-12-10
View more
  17 in total

1.  Results of study on walk-in centres are only to be expected.

Authors:  Andrew J Cave
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-10-12

2.  Risk management in general practice.

Authors:  Andrew Spooner
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Personpower planning.

Authors:  David Hannay
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  War or health?--humanitarian crisis worsens in war-torn Congo.

Authors:  Sally Hargreaves; Eva Van Beek; Luc Nicolas
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 5.  Walk-in centres in primary care: a review of the international literature.

Authors:  Chris Salisbury; James Munro
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  Investigation and management of chest pain.

Authors:  Kevin F Fox
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.994

7.  The impact of co-located NHS walk-in centres on emergency departments.

Authors:  Chris Salisbury; Sandra Hollinghurst; Alan Montgomery; Matthew Cooke; James Munro; Deborah Sharp; Melanie Chalder
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 8.  Systematic review of recent innovations in service provision to improve access to primary care.

Authors:  Jenifer L Chapman; Annegret Zechel; Yvonne H Carter; Stephen Abbott
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Patient satisfaction and quality of care in walk-in clinics, family practices and emergency departments: the Ontario Walk-In Clinic Study.

Authors:  Brian Hutchison; Truls Østbye; Jan Barnsley; Moira Stewart; Maria Mathews; M Karen Campbell; Eugene Vayda; Stewart B Harris; Vicki Torrance-Rynard; Christine Tyrrell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Using standardised patients to measure physicians' practice: validation study using audio recordings.

Authors:  Jeff Luck; John W Peabody
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.