Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19105911›Full record

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.

John Campbell, Martin Roland, Suzanne Richards, Andy Dickens, Michael Greco, Peter Bower

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Out-of-hours care: do we?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010
    Article
  8. 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 · 2010
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Out-of-hours care: remuneration alone is no panacea.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
    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.

John CampbellPrimary Care Research Group, Peninsula Medical School, Exeter. john.campbell@pms.ac.uk
Martin Roland
Suzanne Richards
Andy Dickens
Michael Greco
Peter Bower

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

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

Patient SatisfactionAdultAfter-Hours CareCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHouse CallsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareQuality of Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsWaiting ListsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID19105911
PMCPMC2605546

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.