Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23070656›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2013

Retail clinic visits and receipt of primary care.

Rachel O Reid, J Scott Ashwood, Mark W Friedberg, Ellerie S Weber, Claude M Setodji, Ateev Mehrotra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Primary Care Practice Transformation and the Rise of Consumerism.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Catchments of general practice in different countries--a literature review.International journal of health geographics · 2014
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Continuity in a changing health care environment.Journal of general internal medicine · 2013
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Effect of Retail Clinic Use on Continuity of Care Among Medicare Beneficiaries.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rachel O ReidUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
J Scott Ashwood
Mark W Friedberg
Ellerie S Weber
Claude M Setodji
Ateev Mehrotra

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstitutionKL2RR024154 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2006 to 2011
$22.2M
University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteTL1RR024155 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2006 to 2011
$1.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005NCRR NIH HHS 5TL1RR024155-05NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR024154NCRR NIH HHS TL1 RR024155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn increasing number of patients are visiting retail clinics for simple acute conditions. Physicians worry that visits to retail clinics will interfere with primary care relationships. No prior study has evaluated the impact of retail clinics on receipt of primary care.

objectiveTo assess the association between retail clinic use and receipt of key primary care functions.

designWe performed a retrospective cohort analysis using commercial insurance claims from 2007 to 2009. PATIENTS: We identified patients who had a visit for a simple acute condition in 2008, the "index visit". We divided these 127,358 patients into two cohorts according to the location of that index visit: primary care provider (PCP) versus retail clinic. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated three functions of primary care: (1) where patients first sought care for subsequent simple acute conditions; (2) continuity of care using the Bice-Boxerman index; and (3) preventive care and diabetes management. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compared care received in the 365 days following the index visit to care received in the 365 days prior, using propensity score weights to account for selection bias. KEY

resultsVisiting a retail clinic instead of a PCP for the index visit was associated with a 27.7 visits per 100 patients differential reduction (p < 0 .001) in subsequent PCP visits for new simple acute conditions. Visiting a retail clinic instead of a PCP was also associated with decreased subsequent continuity of care (10.9 percentage-point differential reduction in Bice-Boxerman index, p < 0 .001). There was no differential change between the cohorts in receipt of preventive care or diabetes management.

conclusionsRetail clinics may disrupt two aspects of primary care: whether patients go to a PCP first for new conditions and continuity of care. However, they do not negatively impact preventive care or diabetes management.

Indexed as

CommerceAcute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesChildChild, PreschoolChronic DiseaseCommunity Health CentersContinuity of Patient CareDiabetes MellitusFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID23070656
PMCPMC3599015

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.