Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28327082›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2017

Out of hours care in Germany - High utilization by adult patients with minor ailments?

R Leutgeb, P Engeser, S Berger, J Szecsenyi, G Laux

Erratum issuedAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Young adults' healthcare utilisation and healthcare needs: Perceptions and experiences of healthcare providers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

R LeutgebUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arcades, Western Tower, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. ruediger.leutgeb@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
P EngeserUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arcades, Western Tower, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
S BergerUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arcades, Western Tower, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
J SzecsenyiUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arcades, Western Tower, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
G LauxUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arcades, Western Tower, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily practitioners (FPs) who work in Out-Of-Hours Care (OOHC) - especially in rural areas - complain about high workload related to low urgency and potentially unnecessary patient presentations with minor ailments. The aim of this study was to describe Reasons for Encounter (RFEs) in primary OOHC taken into account the doctor's perspective in the context of high workload without knowing patients' motives for visiting an OOHC-centre.

methodsWithin this descriptive study, OOHC data from 2012 were evaluated from a German statutory health insurance company in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. 1.53 Million of the 10.5 Million inhabitants of Baden-Wuerttemberg were covered. The frequency of the ICD-10 diagnoses was determined at the three- and four-digit-level. The rate of hospitalizations was used to estimate the severity of the evaluated cases.

resultsTaken as a whole, 163,711 reasons for encounter with 1,174 ICD-10 single diagnoses were documented, of these 62.2% were on weekends. Less than 5.0% of the examined patients were hospitalized. Low back pain-dorsalgia (M54) was the most common diagnosis in OOHC, with 10,843 cases. Injuries were found twelve times in the list of the 30 most frequent diagnoses. The most frequent infectious disease was acute upper respiratory infection of multiple and unspecified sites (J06). By analysing the ICD codes to four-digits and looking at the rate of hospitalizations, it can be assumed that many RFEs were of less urgency in terms of the prompt need for medical treatment.

conclusionWhile it is acknowledged that it can be difficult to make an exact diagnosis in an OOHC setting, after analysing the ICD-10 diagnoses, the majority of reasons for encounter in OOHC were determined to be of low urgency, meaning that patients could have waited until regular consultation hours. In the OOHC setting, it is important to understand RFEs from both the patient perspective and the family practitioner perspective. Additionally, results like these can be used in staff education especially improving triage methods and medical recommendations and in developing specific guidelines for OOHC in Germany. Analysis of routine data, such as in this study, contributes to this understanding and contributes to resolving problems of coding.

Indexed as

Process Assessment, Health CareRegistriesAdolescentAdultAfter-Hours CareAgedAged, 80 and overDelivery of Health CareFemaleGermanyHumansInsurance, HealthMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesLow urgencyMinor ailmentsOut-of-Hours Care (OOHC)Patient perspectiveReason for Encounter (RFE)

Identifiers

PMID28327082
PMCPMC5361861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.