Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34903520›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2022

Unintended consequences of online consultations: a qualitative study in UK primary care.

Andrew Turner, Rebecca Morris, Dylan Rakhra, Fiona Stevenson, Lorraine McDonagh, Fiona Hamilton, Helen Atherton, Michelle Farr, Sarah Blake, Jon Banks and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Sociodemographic disparities in primary care management of back pain in children and young people: a population-based cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  15. Access to general practice appointments and sustainable change: a focused ethnographic case study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

15 authors.

Andrew TurnerNational Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol.
Rebecca MorrisNIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Dylan RakhraDepartment of Philosophy/School of Oral and Dental Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Fiona StevensonResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London.
Lorraine McDonaghResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London.
Fiona HamiltonResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London.
Helen AthertonUnit of Academic Primary Care, University of Warwick, Coventry.
Michelle FarrNational Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol.
Sarah BlakeUniversity of Bristol, Bristol.
Jon BanksNational Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol.
Gemma LasseterNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Science, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Sue ZieblandNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Emma HydeSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Leeds.
John PowellNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Jeremy HorwoodNIHR ARC West, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol; Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol, Bristol Medical School, Bristol.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth services are increasingly using digital tools to deliver care, and online consultations are being widely adopted in primary care settings. The intended consequences of online consultations are to increase patient access to care and increase the efficiency of care.

aimTo identify and understand the unintended consequences of online consultations in primary care. DESIGN AND

settingQualitative interview study in eight general practices using online consultation tools in South West and North West England between February 2019 and January 2020.

methodThematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 19 patients and 18 general practice staff.

resultsConsequences of online consultations were identified that restricted patient access to care by making it difficult for some patients to communicate effectively with a GP and disadvantaging digitally-excluded patients. This stemmed from patient uncertainty about how their queries were dealt with, and whether practices used online consultations as their preferred method for patients to contact the practice. Consequences were identified that limited increases in practice efficiency by creating additional work, isolation, and dissatisfaction for some staff.

conclusionUnintended consequences often present operational challenges that are foreseeable and partly preventable. However, these challenges must be recognised and solutions resourced sufficiently. Not everyone may benefit and local decisions will need to be made about trade-offs. Process changes tailored to local circumstances are critical to making effective use of online consultation tools. Unintended consequences also present clinical challenges that result from asynchronous communication. Online consultation tools favour simple, well-formulated information exchange that leads to diffuse relationships and a more transactional style of medicine.

Indexed as

General PracticeReferral and ConsultationHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdomdigital first primary caredigital healthhealth services accessibilityonline consultationsqualitative researchunintended consequences

Identifiers

PMID34903520
PMCPMC8813120

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.