Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39623296›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

How primary and tertiary care services collaborate in urgent care delivery: an evaluation of general practice advice lines.

Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele, Meredith Makeham, Diane Kancijanic, Nicki Newton, Kavisha Shah, Miranda Shaw, Adam Johnston, Fiona Robinson, Owen Hutchings, Sarah Norris and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Adeola Bamgboje-AyodeleFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney, Australia.
Meredith MakehamFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Diane KancijanicWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Nicki NewtonFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney, Australia.
Kavisha ShahFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Miranda ShawSydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Adam JohnstonNorthern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Fiona RobinsonFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Owen HutchingsSydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Sarah NorrisFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jagdev SinghFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Melissa BaysariFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney, Australia.
Clara K ChowWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Tim Shaw *Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Liliana Laranjo *Westmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. liliana.laranjo@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo address the rising demand for urgent care and decrease hospital use, health systems are implementing different strategies to support urgent care patients (i.e. patients who would have typically been treated in hospital) in the community, such as general practitioner (GP) advice lines. The aims of this study were to: identify the support and resources GPs need to manage urgent care patients in the community; assess the need for GP advice lines by primary care services in Australia; and identify the facilitators and barriers to adoption, and strategies to support the sustainability of GP advice lines.

methodsQualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with GPs, hospital-based healthcare providers, consumers, and healthcare management, recruited via existing investigator networks and snowballing approach. The interviews were conducted between February and August 2023. Major themes were identified by an iterative and inductive thematic analysis.

resultsWe interviewed 16 participants (median age 50, IQR 38-59). Based on the aims of the study, three themes emerged: support and resources for GPs; motivation for GP advice lines; and factors influencing the uptake and sustainability of GP advice lines. Participants reported that better communication from hospital services with GPs is critical to ensure continuity of care between tertiary and primary settings. They also noted that GP advice lines can help increase capacity to manage urgent care patients in the community by providing timely decision-support to GPs. However, a reported barrier to the uptake and ongoing use of GP advice lines was the limited hours of the service. To sustain GP advice lines, participants highlighted a need to broaden the scope of the service beyond the pandemic, conduct rigorous evaluation on health outcomes, and further digitise the service so that a tiered level of support could be provided based on risk stratification.

conclusionsThe benefits of GP advice lines are yet to be fully realised. With increasing technology sophistication, there remain opportunities to further digitise and optimise GP advice lines, whilst ensuring better integration within and across primary and tertiary care services. This is however dependent on continued financial and policy support from the government.

Indexed as

General PracticePrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchAdultAmbulatory CareAustraliaCooperative BehaviorFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedTertiary Health CareAdvice linesContinuity of careGeneral practiceUrgent care

Identifiers

PMID39623296
PMCPMC11610272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.