OBJECTIVES: To estimate the relative importance to patients of continuity of care compared with other aspects of a primary care consultation. METHODS: We carried out a discrete choice experiment in Leicestershire and London on a stratified random sample of 646 community dwelling adults taken from general practitioner (GP) registers, plus 20 interviews with Punjabi, Urdu and Gujarati speakers. The attributes examined were: the type of professional consulted, relational continuity, informational continuity and access. RESULTS: Individuals' values changed according to their reason for making a primary care consultation. If consulting for minor familiar symptoms, individuals would be prepared to trade off one extra day's wait to see a GP rather than a nurse, 0.9 days for relational continuity, and 1.6 days for informational continuity. If consulting for a new condition they were uncertain about, they would be prepared to trade off an additional wait of 3.5 days to see a GP rather than a nurse, 2.4 days for relational continuity and 3.9 days for informational continuity. For a routine check-up, an individual would be prepared to trade off an additional wait of 3.5 days to see a GP rather than a nurse, 4.2 days for relational continuity and 7.8 days for informational continuity. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents stated their preference to wait longer to see a familar medical practitioner who was well informed about their case when they had a problem causing uncertainty or needed a routine check-up. They preferred quick access for likely minor 'low impact' symptoms. Appointment systems in general practice should be sufficiently flexible to meet these different preferences.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the relative importance to patients of continuity of care compared with other aspects of a primary care consultation. METHODS: We carried out a discrete choice experiment in Leicestershire and London on a stratified random sample of 646 community dwelling adults taken from general practitioner (GP) registers, plus 20 interviews with Punjabi, Urdu and Gujarati speakers. The attributes examined were: the type of professional consulted, relational continuity, informational continuity and access. RESULTS: Individuals' values changed according to their reason for making a primary care consultation. If consulting for minor familiar symptoms, individuals would be prepared to trade off one extra day's wait to see a GP rather than a nurse, 0.9 days for relational continuity, and 1.6 days for informational continuity. If consulting for a new condition they were uncertain about, they would be prepared to trade off an additional wait of 3.5 days to see a GP rather than a nurse, 2.4 days for relational continuity and 3.9 days for informational continuity. For a routine check-up, an individual would be prepared to trade off an additional wait of 3.5 days to see a GP rather than a nurse, 4.2 days for relational continuity and 7.8 days for informational continuity. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents stated their preference to wait longer to see a familar medical practitioner who was well informed about their case when they had a problem causing uncertainty or needed a routine check-up. They preferred quick access for likely minor 'low impact' symptoms. Appointment systems in general practice should be sufficiently flexible to meet these different preferences.
Authors: Heidi Bøgelund Frederiksen; Jakob Kragstrup; Birgitte Dehlholm-Lambertsen Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Louis S Levene; Richard Baker; Nicola Walker; Christopher Williams; Andrew Wilson; John Bankart Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: David A Katz; Kenda R Stewart; Monica Paez; Mark W Vander Weg; Kathleen M Grant; Christine Hamlin; Gary Gaeth Journal: Patient Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Ann S O'Malley; Eugene C Rich; Alyssa Maccarone; Catherine M DesRoches; Robert J Reid Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Marilyn Kendall; Bruce Mason; Natalie Momen; Stephen Barclay; Dan Munday; Roberta Lovick; Stella Macpherson; Euan Paterson; Paul Baughan; Paul Cormie; Peter Kiehlmann; Amanda Free; Scott A Murray Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: John Campbell; Patten Smith; Sonja Nissen; Peter Bower; Marc Elliott; Martin Roland Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2009-08-22 Impact factor: 2.497