Weston Charlotte, Gilkes Alexander, Durbaba Stevo, Schofield Peter, White Patrick, Ashworth Mark
Division of Health and Social Care Research, Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, Addison House, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL, UK.
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Nov 29;17(1):166. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0563-3.
The burden of morbidity represented by patients with long term conditions (LTCs) varies substantially between general practices. This study aimed to determine the characteristics of general practices with high morbidity burden.
Retrospective cross-sectional study; general practices in England, 2014/15. Three composite morbidity measures (MMs) were constructed to quantify LTC morbidity at practice level: a count of LTCs derived from the 20 LTCs included in the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) disease registers, expressed as 'number of QOF LTCs per 100 registered patients'; the % of patients with one or more QOF LTCs; the % of patients with one or more of 15 broadly defined LTCs included in the GP Patient Survey (GPPS). Determinants of MM scores were analysed using multi-level regression models. Analysis was based on a national dataset of English general practices (n = 7779 practices); GPPS responses (n = 903,357); general practice characteristics (e.g. list size, list size per full time GP); patient demographic characteristics (age, deprivation status); secondary care utilisation (out-patient, emergency department, emergency admission rates).
Mean MM scores (95% CIs) were: 57.7 (±22.3) QOF LTCs per 100 registered patients; 22.8% (±8.2) patients with a QOF LTC; 63.5% (±11.7) patients with a GPPS LTC. The proportion of elderly patients and social deprivation scores were the strongest predictors of each MM score; scores were largely independent of practice characteristics. MM scores were positive predictors of secondary care utilization and negative predictors' access, continuity of care and overall satisfaction.
Wide variation in LTC morbidity burden was observed across English general practice. Variation was determined by demographic factors rather than practice characteristics. Higher rates of secondary care utilisation in practices with higher morbidity burden have implications for resource allocation and commissioning budgets; lower reported satisfaction in these practices suggests that practices may struggle with increased workload. There is a need for a readily available metric to define the burden of morbidity and multimorbidity in general practice.
长期病症(LTCs)患者所带来的发病负担在不同的全科医疗诊所之间存在很大差异。本研究旨在确定发病负担高的全科医疗诊所的特征。
回顾性横断面研究;2014/15年英格兰的全科医疗诊所。构建了三种综合发病指标(MMs)以在诊所层面量化LTC发病情况:从英国质量与结果框架(QOF)疾病登记册中包含的20种LTCs得出的LTCs计数,以“每100名注册患者的QOF LTCs数量”表示;患有一种或多种QOF LTCs的患者百分比;患有全科医生患者调查(GPPS)中包含的15种广义定义的LTCs中的一种或多种的患者百分比。使用多层次回归模型分析MM得分的决定因素。分析基于英国全科医疗诊所的全国数据集(n = 7779家诊所);GPPS回复(n = 903357);全科医疗诊所特征(例如,名单规模、每位全职全科医生的名单规模);患者人口统计学特征(年龄、贫困状况);二级医疗利用情况(门诊、急诊科、急诊入院率)。
平均MM得分(95%置信区间)为:每100名注册患者57.7(±22.3)种QOF LTCs;22.8%(±8.2)的患者患有QOF LTC;63.5%(±11.7)的患者患有GPPS LTC。老年患者的比例和社会剥夺得分是每个MM得分的最强预测因素;得分在很大程度上与诊所特征无关。MM得分是二级医疗利用的正向预测因素,也是获得医疗服务、医疗连续性和总体满意度的负向预测因素。
在英格兰的全科医疗中,观察到LTC发病负担存在很大差异。差异由人口统计学因素而非诊所特征决定。发病负担较高的诊所中二级医疗利用率较高,这对资源分配和委托预算有影响;这些诊所中报告的满意度较低表明诊所可能难以应对增加的工作量。需要一种易于获得的指标来定义全科医疗中的发病负担和多重发病情况。