Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34983505›Full record

Observational studyBMC health services research2022

To which non-physician health professionals do French general practitioners refer their patients to and what factors are associated with these referrals? Secondary analysis of the French national cross-sectional ECOGEN study.

Matthieu Peurois, Matthieu Chopin, Gaëlle Texier-Legendre, Cécile Angoulvant, William Bellanger, Cyril Bègue, Aline Ramond-Roquin

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthieu PeuroisDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
Matthieu ChopinDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
Gaëlle Texier-LegendreDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
Cécile AngoulvantDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
William BellangerDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
Cyril BègueDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France.
Aline Ramond-RoquinDépartement de médecine générale, Univ Angers, F-49000, Angers, France. aline.ramond@univ-angers.fr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0952-2844
Université d'Angers · FRInserm · FRUniversité de Sherbrooke · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiprofessional practice is a key component in primary care. Examining general practitioner (GP) referral frequency to non-physician health professionals (NPHP) can provide information about how primary care is organised and works which is useful for policymakers. Our study aimed to describe French GP referral frequency to various NPHPs in France and identify associated factors.

methodsThis is an ancillary study to the observational, cross-sectional (ECOGEN) study conducted in 2011/2012 in France among 128 GPs. Data about consultations using the standardised International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2), and patient and GP characteristics were collected from 20,613 GP consultations. Referrals were identified through inductive and deductive approaches using ICPC-2 codes, keywords, and deep, open manual searches. Referral frequency was described overall and per NPHP. Patient, GP, and consultation-related factors associated with referral rates were described for the three most frequently identified NPHPs. To minimise potential sources of bias, this observational study followed the STROBE guidelines.

resultsFrench GPs referred 6.8% of patients to NPHPs, with physiotherapists, podiatrists, and nurses accounting for 85.2% of referrals. Older patients, retired patients, multiple health problems managed, and longer consultation durations were found to be associated with higher referral rates (p < 0.001). Specific trends were observed for nurse, physiotherapist, and podiatrist referrals. Women (p < 0.001) and regular patients (p = 0.002) were more likely to receive physiotherapy referrals while people with no professional activity were less likely (p < 0.001). Female GPs and those working in urban practices were more likely to issue a physiotherapy referral (p < 0.001), while GPs working in rural practices (p < 0.001) and those with higher annual consultation numbers (p = 0.002) were more likely to refer to a nurse. Working in multiprofessional centres appeared to have little impact on referral rates, being only slightly associated with podiatrist referrals (p = 0.003).

conclusionsReferral frequency is more associated with patient characteristics and clinical situations than GP-related factors suggesting patients needing referral most are most often referred. Furthermore, the three NPHPs that GPs refer to the most are those for which a referral is required for reimbursement in France, suggesting that health system legislation and NPHP reimbursement are strong determinants for referrals.

Indexed as

General PractitionersCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFranceHumansPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationGeneral practiceHealth care organisationHealth workforceManagementPrimary careReferral

Identifiers

PMID34983505
PMCPMC8729109
OpenAlexW4205218265

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.