Suppr超能文献

开放预约制与可预订预约系统:对就诊于全科医生的患者的调查

Open-access versus bookable appointment systems: survey of patients attending appointments with general practitioners.

作者信息

Pascoe Shane W, Neal Richard D, Allgar Victoria L

机构信息

Meanwood Group Practice, Leeds.

出版信息

Br J Gen Pract. 2004 May;54(502):367-9.

Abstract

Access to consultations with general practitioners (GPs) is an important health policy issue. One method of providing 24-hour access is through the provision of open-access surgeries. The study aimed to compare patients' perceptions of 'bookable' and 'non-bookable' (open-access) appointments. A cross-sectional survey design was used and recruited 834 patients in a general practice. There were statistically significant differences between the bookable and the non-bookable appointments for the questions on 'choice of doctor', 'whether able to see the doctor in the time they needed to', and 'convenience of the appointment'. More patients with bookable appointments saw their doctor of choice. One-fifth of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, did not feel that they were seen within the time they needed to be. Almost three-fifths of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, reported that it was either 'easy' or 'very easy' to make the appointment. Greater convenience was reported by those with bookable appointments. These findings support the hypothesis that within a single practice, there is scope for a combined appointment system in which patients can self-select, with equal satisfaction, the type of appointment that they prefer, dependent upon their own preferences or needs at the time.

摘要

获得全科医生(GP)的会诊是一个重要的卫生政策问题。提供24小时服务的一种方法是通过开设开放式诊所。该研究旨在比较患者对“可预约”和“不可预约”(开放式)预约的看法。采用横断面调查设计,在一家普通诊所招募了834名患者。在“选择医生”、“是否能够在需要的时间见到医生”以及“预约的便利性”等问题上,可预约预约和不可预约预约之间存在统计学上的显著差异。更多可预约预约的患者见到了他们选择的医生。五分之一的患者,在两组中平均分布,觉得他们没有在需要的时间内见到医生。近五分之三的患者,在两组中平均分布,报告说预约“容易”或“非常容易”。可预约预约的患者表示便利性更高。这些发现支持了这样一种假设,即在单一诊所内,存在一种联合预约系统的空间,患者可以根据自己当时的偏好或需求,以同样的满意度自行选择他们喜欢的预约类型。

相似文献

4
Forty-eight hour access to primary care: practice factors predicting patients' perceptions.
Fam Pract. 2005 Jun;22(3):266-8. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmi006. Epub 2005 Mar 18.
6
Is fast access to general practice all that should matter? A discrete choice experiment of patients' preferences.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008 Apr;13 Suppl 2:3-10. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007087.
8
An appointment system in a teaching practice.
J R Coll Gen Pract. 1974 Sep;24(146):666-8.
9
Impact of same-day appointments on patient satisfaction with general practice appointment systems.
Br J Gen Pract. 2008 Sep;58(554):641-3. doi: 10.3399/bjgp08X330780.

引用本文的文献

1
Access systems in general practice: a systematic scoping review.
Br J Gen Pract. 2024 Sep 26;74(747):e674-e682. doi: 10.3399/BJGP.2023.0149. Print 2024 Oct.
2
Expressing uncertainty in clinical interactions between physicians and older patients: what matters?
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Mar;86(3):322-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.06.005. Epub 2011 Jul 20.
3
Advanced access scheduling outcomes: a systematic review.
Arch Intern Med. 2011 Jul 11;171(13):1150-9. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.168. Epub 2011 Apr 25.
5
Impact of same-day appointments on patient satisfaction with general practice appointment systems.
Br J Gen Pract. 2008 Sep;58(554):641-3. doi: 10.3399/bjgp08X330780.
6
Making general practice fit for the 21st century.
Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Jun;55(515):422-3.
7
Impact of advanced access.
Br J Gen Pract. 2004 Aug;54(505):622.
8
Does advanced access work for patients and practices?
Br J Gen Pract. 2004 May;54(502):330-1.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验