ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2009
Users' reports and evaluations of out-of-hours health care and the UK national quality requirements: a cross sectional study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of an "emergency access button" in Danish out-of-hours primary care: a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.BMC health services research · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Establishing the validity of English GP Patient Survey items evaluating out-of-hours care.BMJ quality & safety · 2016Article
- Instruments to assess patient satisfaction after teleconsultation and triage: a systematic review.Patient preference and adherence · 2014Article
- Patient satisfaction with out-of-hours GP cooperatives: a longitudinal study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2012Article
- Exploring patients' self-reported experiences of out-of-hours primary care and their suggestions for improvement: a qualitative study.Family practice · 2011Article
- Out-of-hours care: do we?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010Article
- Streamline triage and manage user expectations: lessons from a qualitative study of GP out-of-hours services.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010Article
- Understanding why some ethnic minority patients evaluate medical care more negatively than white patients: a cross sectional analysis of a routine patient survey in English general practices.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2009Article
- Out-of-hours care: remuneration alone is no panacea.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNational standards for delivery of out-of-hours services have been refined. Health service users' preferences, reports, and evaluations of care are of importance in a service that aims to be responsive to their needs.
aimTo investigate NHS service users' reports and evaluations of out-of-hours care in the light of UK national service quality requirements.
designCross sectional survey.
settingThree areas (Devon, Cornwall, Sheffield) of England, UK.
methodParticipants were 1249 recent users of UK out-of-hours medical services. Main outcome measures were: users' reports and evaluations of out-of-hours services in respect of the time waiting for their telephone call to the service to be answered; the length of time from the end of the initial call to the start of definitive clinical assessment ('call back time'); the time waiting for a home visit; and the waiting time at a treatment centre.
resultsUK national quality requirements were reported as being met by two-thirds of responders. Even when responders reported that they had received the most rapid response option for home visiting (waiting time of 'up to an hour'), only one-third of users reported this as 'excellent'. Adverse evaluations of care were consistently related to delays encountered in receiving care and (for two out of four measures) sex of patient. For 50% of users to evaluate their care as 'excellent', this would require calls to be answered within 30 seconds, call-back within 20 minutes, time spent waiting for home visits of significantly less than 1 hour, and treatment centre waiting times of less than 20 minutes.
conclusionUsers have high expectations of UK out-of-hours healthcare services. Service provision that meets nationally designated targets is currently judged as being of 'good' quality by service users. Attaining 'excellent' levels of service provision would prove challenging, and potentially costly. Delivering services that result in high levels of user satisfaction with care needs to take account of users' expectations as well as their experience of care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.