Importance of continuity of care from a patient perspective - a cross-sectional study in Swedish health care
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patients' view on continuity of care (CoC), including preference for a certain general practitioner (GP) and importance and access to a regular general practitioner (RGP).
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Primary care center in Halland County, in the western part of Sweden.
SUBJECTS: Patients ≥18 years old and having at least one appointment at the primary care center during October-December 2022.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preference for a certain GP and importance of and accessibility for an RGP.
RESULTS: The study included 404 patients. Importance of having an RGP was considered by 86% of the patients. Preference for a certain GP was thought by 73% of the patients, and when asked as a bivariate question, 69% considered having an RGP. Both the importance of an RGP and preference for a certain GP were more often considered by patients ≥65 years (p < .0001). Regarding accessibility, 67% of the patients reported having access to their RGP 'always/most of the time or a lot of the time' and 62% reported seeing their RGP at last visit.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study showed that the majority of patients value CoC in terms of importance of having an RGP. Older patients were more likely to have a preference for a certain GP. Two-third of the patients succeeded in seeing their RGP always or a lot of the time. The results in this study provide evidence that CoC is important for most patients, regardless of age and gender.Key pointsPrevious studies have showed that continuity of care (CoC) is important regarding mortality and morbidity. In primary care, there is a current debate regarding CoC, accessibility and the strive for CoC. This study showed that the majority of patients, regardless of age and gender, value CoC and consider it being important. However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding age, where patients above 65 years old thought it was more important to have a regular general practitioner and more often had a preference for a certain GP.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:42 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Scandinavian journal of primary health care - 42(2024), 1 vom: 08. Feb., Seite 195-200 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Cohen, Ebba [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Continuity of care |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 08.02.2024 Date Revised 10.02.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM366805673 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM366805673 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240210233100.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240114s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1287.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM366805673 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38189945 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Cohen, Ebba |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Importance of continuity of care from a patient perspective - a cross-sectional study in Swedish health care |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 08.02.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 10.02.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patients' view on continuity of care (CoC), including preference for a certain general practitioner (GP) and importance and access to a regular general practitioner (RGP) | ||
| 520 | |a DESIGN: Cross-sectional study | ||
| 520 | |a SETTING: Primary care center in Halland County, in the western part of Sweden | ||
| 520 | |a SUBJECTS: Patients ≥18 years old and having at least one appointment at the primary care center during October-December 2022 | ||
| 520 | |a MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preference for a certain GP and importance of and accessibility for an RGP | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: The study included 404 patients. Importance of having an RGP was considered by 86% of the patients. Preference for a certain GP was thought by 73% of the patients, and when asked as a bivariate question, 69% considered having an RGP. Both the importance of an RGP and preference for a certain GP were more often considered by patients ≥65 years (p < .0001). Regarding accessibility, 67% of the patients reported having access to their RGP 'always/most of the time or a lot of the time' and 62% reported seeing their RGP at last visit | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study showed that the majority of patients value CoC in terms of importance of having an RGP. Older patients were more likely to have a preference for a certain GP. Two-third of the patients succeeded in seeing their RGP always or a lot of the time. The results in this study provide evidence that CoC is important for most patients, regardless of age and gender.Key pointsPrevious studies have showed that continuity of care (CoC) is important regarding mortality and morbidity. In primary care, there is a current debate regarding CoC, accessibility and the strive for CoC. This study showed that the majority of patients, regardless of age and gender, value CoC and consider it being important. However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding age, where patients above 65 years old thought it was more important to have a regular general practitioner and more often had a preference for a certain GP | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Continuity of care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a family practice | |
| 650 | 4 | |a general practice | |
| 650 | 4 | |a general practitioner | |
| 650 | 4 | |a primary health care | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lindman, Ida |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Scandinavian journal of primary health care |d 1993 |g 42(2024), 1 vom: 08. Feb., Seite 195-200 |w (DE-627)NLM013266128 |x 1502-7724 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:42 |g year:2024 |g number:1 |g day:08 |g month:02 |g pages:195-200 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 42 |j 2024 |e 1 |b 08 |c 02 |h 195-200 | ||