TY - JOUR
T1 - Access to primary care and the route of emergency admission to hospital
T2 - Retrospective analysis of national hospital administrative data
AU - Cowling, Thomas E.
AU - Harris, Matthew
AU - Watt, Hilary
AU - Soljak, Michael
AU - Richards, Emma
AU - Gunning, Elinor
AU - Bottle, Alex
AU - Macinko, James
AU - Majeed, Azeem
N1 - Funding Information:
National Institute for Health Research (grant number: DRF-2013-06-142).
PY - 2016/6
Y1 - 2016/6
N2 - Background The UK government is pursuing policies to improve primary care access, as many patients visit accident and emergency (A and E) departments after being unable to get suitable general practice appointments. Direct admission to hospital via a general practitioner (GP) averts A and E use, and may reduce total hospital costs. It could also enhance the continuity of information between GPS and hospital doctors, possibly improving healthcare outcomes. Objective To determine whether primary care access is associated with the route of emergency admission-via a GP versus via an A and E department. Methods Retrospective analysis of national administrative data from English hospitals for 2011-2012. Adults admitted in an emergency (unscheduled) for ≥1 night via a GP or an A and E department formed the study population. The measure of primary care access-the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt-was derived from a large, nationally representative patient survey. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate associations, adjusting for patient and admission characteristics. Results The analysis included 2 322 112 emergency admissions (81.9% via an A and E department). With a 5 unit increase in the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt, the adjusted odds of GP admission (vs A and E admission) was estimated to increase by 15% (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17). The probability of GP admission if ≥95% of appointment attempts were successful in each general practice was estimated to be 19.6%. This probability reduced to 13.6% when <80% of appointment attempts were successful. This equates to 139 673 fewer GP admissions (456 232 vs 316 559) assuming no change in the total number of admissions. Associations were consistent in direction across geographical regions of England. Conclusions Among hospital inpatients admitted as an emergency, patients registered to more accessible general practices were more likely to have been admitted via a GP (vs an A and E department). This furthers evidence suggesting that access to general practice is related to use of emergency hospital services in England. The relative merits of the two admission routes remain unclear.
AB - Background The UK government is pursuing policies to improve primary care access, as many patients visit accident and emergency (A and E) departments after being unable to get suitable general practice appointments. Direct admission to hospital via a general practitioner (GP) averts A and E use, and may reduce total hospital costs. It could also enhance the continuity of information between GPS and hospital doctors, possibly improving healthcare outcomes. Objective To determine whether primary care access is associated with the route of emergency admission-via a GP versus via an A and E department. Methods Retrospective analysis of national administrative data from English hospitals for 2011-2012. Adults admitted in an emergency (unscheduled) for ≥1 night via a GP or an A and E department formed the study population. The measure of primary care access-the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt-was derived from a large, nationally representative patient survey. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate associations, adjusting for patient and admission characteristics. Results The analysis included 2 322 112 emergency admissions (81.9% via an A and E department). With a 5 unit increase in the percentage of patients able to get a general practice appointment on their last attempt, the adjusted odds of GP admission (vs A and E admission) was estimated to increase by 15% (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17). The probability of GP admission if ≥95% of appointment attempts were successful in each general practice was estimated to be 19.6%. This probability reduced to 13.6% when <80% of appointment attempts were successful. This equates to 139 673 fewer GP admissions (456 232 vs 316 559) assuming no change in the total number of admissions. Associations were consistent in direction across geographical regions of England. Conclusions Among hospital inpatients admitted as an emergency, patients registered to more accessible general practices were more likely to have been admitted via a GP (vs an A and E department). This furthers evidence suggesting that access to general practice is related to use of emergency hospital services in England. The relative merits of the two admission routes remain unclear.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84969622649&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84969622649&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004338
DO - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004338
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84969622649
SN - 2044-5415
VL - 25
SP - 432
EP - 440
JO - BMJ Quality and Safety
JF - BMJ Quality and Safety
IS - 6
ER -