Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17132379›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2006

Implementation of Advanced Access in general practice: postal survey of practices.

Stephen Goodall, Alan Montgomery, Jon Banks, Chris Salisbury, Fiona Sampson, Mark Pickin

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Access systems in general practice: a systematic scoping review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Continuity of care: betrayed values or misplaced nostalgia.International journal of integrated care · 2012
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Impact of same-day appointments on patient satisfaction with general practice appointment systems.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2008
    Article
  16. What Do People Think Is Important about Primary Healthcare?Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2008
    Article
  17. Does Advanced Access improve access to primary health care? Questionnaire survey of patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007
    Article
  18. Impact of Advanced Access on access, workload, and continuity: controlled before-and-after and simulated-patient study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Stephen GoodallAcademic Unit of Primary Care, Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Alan Montgomery
Jon Banks
Chris Salisbury
Fiona Sampson
Mark Pickin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvanced Access has been strongly promoted as a means of improving access to general practice. Key principles include measuring demand, matching capacity to demand, managing demand in different ways and having contingency plans. Although not advocated by Advanced Access, some practices have also restricted availability of pre-booked appointments.

aimThis study compares the strategies used to improve access by practices which do or do not operate Advanced Access. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal survey of practices.

settingThree hundred and ninety-one practices in 12 primary care trusts.

methodQuestionnaires were posted to practice managers to collect data on practice characteristics, supply and demand of appointments, strategies employed to manage demand, and use of Advanced Access.

resultsTwo hundred and forty-five from 391 (63%) practices returned a questionnaire and 162/241(67%) claimed to be using Advanced Access. There were few differences between characteristics of practices operating Advanced Access or not. Both types of practice had introduced a wide range of measures to improve access. The proportion of doctors' appointments only available for booking on the same day was higher in Advanced Access practices (40 versus 16%, difference = 24%, 95% CI = 16% to 32%). Less than half the practices claiming to operate Advanced Access ((63/140; 45%) used all four of this model's key principles.

conclusionThe majority of practices in this sample claim to have introduced Advanced Access, but the degree of implementation is very variable. Advanced Access practices use more initiatives to measure and improve access than non-Advanced Access practices.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolEnglandFamily PracticeHealth Care SurveysHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID17132379
PMCPMC1934051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.