Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33054822›Full record

Observational studyBMC health services research2020

Out-of-hours workload among Norwegian general practitioners - an observational study.

Ingrid Keilegavlen Rebnord, Tone Morken, Kjell Maartmann-Moe, Steinar Hunskaar

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Why do patients attend out-of-hours GP services in Ireland?Irish journal of medical science · 2025
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparing GPs according to their model of practice: are multiprofessional group practices associated with more favourable working conditions?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Ingrid Keilegavlen RebnordNational Centre for Emergency Primary Health Care, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Aarstadveien 17, NO-5009, Bergen, Norway. inre@norceresearch.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1975-7404
Tone MorkenNational Centre for Emergency Primary Health Care, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Aarstadveien 17, NO-5009, Bergen, Norway.
Kjell Maartmann-MoeThe Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway.
Steinar HunskaarNational Centre for Emergency Primary Health Care, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Aarstadveien 17, NO-5009, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRepeated studies of working hours among Norwegian regular general practitioners (RGPs) have shown that the average total number of weekly working hours has remained unchanged since 1994 and up until 2014. For both male and female RGPs, the mean total weekly working hours amounted to almost 50 h in 2014. In recent years, Norwegian RGPs have become increasingly dissatisfied. They experience significantly increased workload without compensation in the form of more doctors or better payment. A study from the Norwegian Directorate of Health in 2018 (the RGP study) showed that Norwegian RGPs worked 55.6 h weekly (median 52.5). 25% of the respondents worked more than 62.2 h weekly. Based on data from the RGP study we investigated Norwegian RGP's out-of-hours (OOH) work, how the working time was distributed, and to what extent the OOH work affected the regular working hours.

methodsIn early 2018, an electronic survey was sent to all 4640 RGPs in Norway. Each RGP reported how many minutes that were spent that particular day on various tasks during seven consecutive days. Working time also included additional tasks in the municipality, other professional medical work and OOH primary health care. Differences were analysed by independent t-tests, and regression analyses.

resultsOne thousand eighty hundred seventy-six RGPs (40.4%) responded, 640 (34.1%) had registered OOH work. Male RGPs worked on average 1.5 h more doing regular work than did females (p = 0.001) and on average 2.3 h more OOH work than females (p = 0.079). RGPs with no OOH work registered a mean of 1.0 h more clinical work than RGPs working OOH (p = 0.043). There was a large variation in OOH working hours. A linear regression analysis showed that male RGPs and RGPs in rural areas had the heaviest OOH workload.

conclusionsOne in three Norwegian RGPs undertook OOH work during the registration week in the RGP study. OOH work was done in addition to a sizeable regular workload as an RGP. We found small gender differences. OOH work was not compensated with reduced regular RGP work.

Indexed as

AdultAfter-Hours CareFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorwaySurveys and QuestionnairesWorkloadFamily medicineGeneral practiceObservational studyOut-of-hours medical carePrimary careSurveyWorkload

Identifiers

PMID33054822
PMCPMC7557051

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.