Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2025
Continuity and locum use for acute consultations: observational study of subsequent workload.
Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consultations with locum doctors in UK general practice: longitudinal analysis of electronic health records.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Improving continuity of care in Finnish primary health care: Insights from a nationwide qualitative study of primary care physicians.The European journal of general practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorkload is probably the biggest challenge facing general practice and little is known about any modifiable factors. For GPs, both continuity and locum status are associated with differences in outcomes.
aimTo determine whether practice and hospital workload after an index acute consultation depend on the type of GP consulted (locums and practice GPs with [regular] and without [non-regular] continuity, and locums). DESIGN AND
settingAn observational, cross-sectional analysis of consultation-level data from English general practices from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink from 2015 to 2017.
methodAntibiotic prescription was used as a marker for acute consultations with regression models to calculate adjusted relative risks for emergency department consultations and admissions, outpatient referrals, and test ordering, as well as the patients' GP reconsultation interval following consultations with the three types of GP.
resultsAfter adjustment, consultations with antibiotic prescriptions with regular GPs with continuity were associated with fewer subsequent hospital admissions and lower emergency department use but higher outpatient referrals relative to locums and non-regular GPs. Locums ordered tests less often (relative risk [RR] -24.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -27.3 to -21.2) than regular GPs whereas non-regular GPs ordered tests more often (RR 19.1%, 95% CI = = 16.4 to 21.8). Patients seeing their regular GP had on average a 9% longer (95% CI = 8 to 10) reconsultation interval than if they saw any other GP.
conclusionThe differences in outcomes were associated more with having continuity than with GP locum status. Seeing a GP with whom the patient had continuity of care was associated with reduced workload within the practice and in hospital.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.