BACKGROUND: Advanced ("open") access scheduling, which promotes patient-driven scheduling in lieu of prearranged appointments, has been proposed as a more patient-centered appointment method and has been widely adopted throughout the United Kingdom, within the US Veterans Health Administration, and among US private practices. OBJECTIVE: To describe patient and physician and/or practice outcomes resulting from implementation of advanced access scheduling in the primary care setting. DATA SOURCES: Comprehensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science) through August, 2010, supplemented by reference lists and gray literature. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were assessed in duplicate, and reviewers were blinded to author, journal, and date of publication. Controlled and uncontrolled English-language studies of advanced access implementation in primary care were eligible if they specified methods and reported outcomes data. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers collaboratively assessed risk for bias by using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Risk of Bias criteria. Data were independently extracted in duplicate. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight articles describing 24 studies met eligibility criteria. All studies had at least 1 source of potential bias. All 8 studies evaluating time to third-next-available appointment showed reductions (range of decrease, 1.1-32 days), but only 2 achieved a third-next-available appointment in less than 48 hours (25%). No-show rates improved only in practices with baseline no-show rates higher than 15%. Effects on patient satisfaction were variable. Limited data addressed clinical outcomes and loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Studies of advanced access support benefits to wait time and no-show rate. However, effects on patient satisfaction were mixed, and data about clinical outcomes and loss to follow-up were lacking.
BACKGROUND: Advanced ("open") access scheduling, which promotes patient-driven scheduling in lieu of prearranged appointments, has been proposed as a more patient-centered appointment method and has been widely adopted throughout the United Kingdom, within the US Veterans Health Administration, and among US private practices. OBJECTIVE: To describe patient and physician and/or practice outcomes resulting from implementation of advanced access scheduling in the primary care setting. DATA SOURCES: Comprehensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science) through August, 2010, supplemented by reference lists and gray literature. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were assessed in duplicate, and reviewers were blinded to author, journal, and date of publication. Controlled and uncontrolled English-language studies of advanced access implementation in primary care were eligible if they specified methods and reported outcomes data. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers collaboratively assessed risk for bias by using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Risk of Bias criteria. Data were independently extracted in duplicate. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight articles describing 24 studies met eligibility criteria. All studies had at least 1 source of potential bias. All 8 studies evaluating time to third-next-available appointment showed reductions (range of decrease, 1.1-32 days), but only 2 achieved a third-next-available appointment in less than 48 hours (25%). No-show rates improved only in practices with baseline no-show rates higher than 15%. Effects on patient satisfaction were variable. Limited data addressed clinical outcomes and loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Studies of advanced access support benefits to wait time and no-show rate. However, effects on patient satisfaction were mixed, and data about clinical outcomes and loss to follow-up were lacking.
Authors: Leif I Solberg; A Lauren Crain; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Mary C Hroscikoski; Karen I Engebretson; Patrick J O'Connor Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2006 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Leif I Solberg; Mary C Hroscikoski; A Lauren Crain; Karen I Engebretson; Patrick J O'Connor Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2007-12-15 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Michael E Green; Stewart B Harris; Susan Webster-Bogaert; Han Han; Jyoti Kotecha; Alexander Kopp; Minnie M Ho; Richard V Birtwhistle; Richard H Glazier Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2017-04-06
Authors: Baligh R Yehia; Allison L Agwu; Asher Schranz; P Todd Korthuis; Aditya H Gaur; Richard Rutstein; Victoria Sharp; Stephen A Spector; Stephen A Berry; Kelly A Gebo Journal: AIDS Patient Care STDS Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 5.078
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
Authors: Devanshi Patel; Erica L Blouch; Linda H Rodgers-Fouché; Margaret M Emmet; Kristen M Shannon Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 2.537