Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Salahub).
ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Austin, Bai, Kiran, Paterson, Tadrous, Ivers, Lapointe-Shaw).
Ann Fam Med. 2024 Nov-Dec;22(6):483-491. doi: 10.1370/afm.3181.
Primary care access is a key health system metric, but little research has compared models to provide primary care access when one's regular physician is not available. We compared health system use after a visit with a patient's own family physician group (ie, within-group physician who was not the patient's primary physician) vs a visit with a walk-in clinic physician who was not part of the patient's family physician group.
We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada, including all individuals formally enrolled with a family physician, from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020. We compared those visiting within-group physicians to those visiting walk-in clinic physicians using propensity score matching to account for differences in patient characteristics. The primary outcome was any emergency department visit within 7 days of the initial visit.
Matched patients who visited a within-group physician (N = 506,033) were 10% less likely to visit an emergency department in the 7 days after the initial visit compared to patients who saw a walk-in clinic physician (N = 506,033; 20,117 [4.0%] vs 22,320 [4.4%]; risk difference [RD] 0.4%; 95% CI 0.4-0.5; relative risk [RR] 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92). Restricting to visits occurring on weekends, the observed association was stronger (7,964 [3.7%] vs 10,055 [4.7%]; RD 1.0%; 95% CI 0.9-1.1; RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.82). Those accessing after-hours within-group physician visits were more likely to have ≥1 additional virtual or in-person within-group physician visit within 7 days (virtual RR 1.86, in-person RR 1.87).
Compared to visiting a walk-in clinic physician, seeing a within-group physician after hours might decrease downstream emergency department visits. This finding could be explained by better continuity of care and can inform primary care service models and the policies that support them.
初级保健的可及性是卫生系统的一个关键指标,但很少有研究比较模型,以在患者的常规医生无法提供服务时提供初级保健的可及性。我们比较了在与患者自己的医生群体(即在组医生,即不是患者的主要医生)就诊后和在与不属于患者的医生群体的门诊医生就诊后的卫生系统使用情况。
我们使用来自加拿大安大略省的行政数据进行了一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,包括所有正式登记有家庭医生的个体,时间为 2019 年 4 月 1 日至 2020 年 3 月 31 日。我们使用倾向评分匹配来比较与在组医生就诊的患者和与在门诊医生就诊的患者,以考虑患者特征的差异。主要结果是在初次就诊后的 7 天内任何急诊就诊。
与在组医生就诊的匹配患者(N=506033)在初次就诊后 7 天内就诊急诊的可能性比与门诊医生就诊的患者低 10%(N=506033;20117[4.0%]与 22320[4.4%];风险差异[RD]0.4%;95%CI0.4-0.5;相对风险[RR]0.90;95%CI0.89-0.92)。将研究范围限制在周末就诊时,观察到的关联更强(7964[3.7%]与 10055[4.7%];RD1.0%;95%CI0.9-1.1;RR0.79;95%CI0.77-0.82)。那些在非工作时间接受在组医生就诊的患者在 7 天内更有可能有≥1 次额外的虚拟或现场在组医生就诊(虚拟 RR1.86,现场 RR1.87)。
与就诊于门诊医生相比,在非工作时间就诊于在组医生可能会减少后续的急诊就诊。这一发现可以通过更好的连续性护理来解释,并为初级保健服务模式及其支持政策提供信息。