ArticleBMC health services research2025
Drivers of primary care appointment volumes before and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Pre-pregnancy primary care and accident and emergency interactions among interpreter-users versus non-interpreter-users in England: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Trends in access to primary care among Canadian older adults before, during, and following the COVID-19 public health emergency.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic led to significant reconfiguration of primary care systems internationally. For example, a large proportion of face-to-face appointments have been replaced by telephone or online consultations. As a result, the relationship between primary care appointment provision and some of its key determinants, such as workforce and demographic characteristics, are likely to have changed. Conclusions from previous studies which used only pre-pandemic data may no longer be applicable under these new configurations.
methodsThis study aims to investigate whether the relationships between primary care appointment rates and their determinants, including workforce composition and the age structure of registered patients, have changed after the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted longitudinal analysis on the 106 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England over two periods of 24 months (March 2018 to February 2020 and March 2021 to February 2023). We used fixed-effects regression models to relate monthly general practice appointment rates per registered patient to workforce size and composition and population age structure, and compared the results between the two periods.
resultsIn the pre-pandemic period, changes in full time equivalent (FTE) numbers of GP trainees and nurses were the only time-varying variables associated with appointment rates. In the post-lockdown period, the age profile of registered patients became a key determinant of appointment rates. A 1% increase in the proportion of registered patients over 80 years was associated with a 0.165 (38.7%) increase in appointments per patient per month. Changes in FTE numbers of qualified GPs and direct patient care staff were not found to influence the appointment rate in either period.
conclusionThe relationships between primary care appointment rates and the workforce composition and population age structure have changed following the COVID-19 pandemic. The proportion of registered patients over the age of 80 years is now the most significant time-varying driver of appointment rates. General practices serving older patients may face much higher demand and have a bigger challenge providing sufficient appointments in the future compared to before the pandemic.
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.