BackgroundContinuity, usually considered a quality aspect of primary care, is under pressure in Norway, and elsewhere.AimTo analyse the association between longitudinal continuity with a named regular general practitioner (RGP) and use of out-of-hours (OOH) services, acute hospital admission, and mortality.Design and settingRegistry-based observational study in Norway covering 4 552 978 Norwegians listed with their RGPs.MethodDuration of RGP–patient relationship was used as explanatory variable for the use of OOH services, acute hospital admission, and mortality in 2018. Several patient-related and RGP-related covariates were included in the analyses by individual linking to high-quality national registries. Duration of RGP–patient relationship was categorised as 1, 2–3, 4–5, 6–10, 11–15, or >15 years. Results are given as adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) resulting from multilevel logistic regression analyses.ResultsCompared with a 1-year RGP–patient relationship, the OR for use of OOH services decreased gradually from 0.87 (95% CI = 0.86 to 0.88) after 2–3 years’ duration to 0.70 (95% CI = 0.69 to 0.71) after >15 years. OR for acute hospital admission decreased gradually from 0.88 (95% CI = 0.86 to 0.90) after 2–3 years’ duration to 0.72 (95% CI = 0.70 to 0.73) after >15 years. OR for dying decreased gradually from 0.92 (95% CI = 0.86 to 0.98) after 2–3 years’ duration, to 0.75 (95% CI = 0.70 to 0.80) after an RGP–patient relationship of >15 years.ConclusionLength of RGP–patient relationship is significantly associated with lower use of OOH services, fewer acute hospital admissions, and lower mortality. The presence of a dose–response relationship between continuity and these outcomes indicates that the associations are causal.
Background Primary care doctors have a gatekeeper function in many healthcare systems, and strategies to reduce emergency hospital admissions often focus on general practitioners’ (GPs’) and out-of-hours (OOH) doctors’ role. The aim of the present study was to investigate these doctors’ role in emergency admissions to somatic hospitals in the Norwegian public healthcare system, where GPs and OOH doctors have a distinct gatekeeper function. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed by linking data from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) and the physicians’ claims database. The referring doctor was defined as the physician who had sent a claim for a consultation with the patient within 24 h prior to an emergency admission. If there was no claim registered prior to hospital arrival, the admission was defined as direct, representing admissions from ambulance services, referrals from nursing home doctors, and admissions initiated by in-hospital doctors. Results In 2014 there were 497,587 emergency admissions to somatic hospitals in Norway after excluding birth related conditions. Direct admissions were most frequent (43%), 31% were referred by OOH doctors, 25% were referred by GPs, whereas only 2% were referred from outpatient clinics or private specialists with public contract. Direct admissions were more common in central areas (52%), here GPs’ referrals constituted only 16%. The prehospital paths varied with the hospital discharge diagnosis. For anaemias, 46–49% were referred by GPs, for acute appendicitis and mental/alcohol related disorders 52 and 49% were referred by OOH doctors, respectively. For both malignant neoplasms and cardiac arrest 63% were direct admissions. Conclusions GPs or OOH doctors referred many emergencies to somatic hospitals, and for some clinical conditions GPs’ and OOH doctors’ gatekeeping role was substantial. However, a significant proportion of the emergency admissions was direct, and this reduces the impact of the GPs’ and OOH doctors’ gatekeeper roles, even in a strict gatekeeping system.
An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.
Background Continuity of care (CoC) is accepted as a core value of primary care and is especially appreciated by patients with chronic conditions. Nevertheless, there are few studies investigating CoC for these patients across levels of healthcare. Objective This study aims to investigate CoC for patients with somatic chronic diseases, both with regular general practitioners (RGPs) and across care levels. Methods We conducted a registry-based observational study by using nationwide consultation data from Norwegian general practices, out-of-hours services, hospital outpatient care, and private specialists with public contracts. Patients with diabetes mellitus (type I or II), asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or heart failure in 2012, who had ≥2 consultations with these diagnoses during 2014 were included. CoC was measured during 2014 by using the usual provider of care (UPC) index and Bice–Boxerman continuity of care score (COCI). Both indices have a value between 0 and 1. Results Patients with diabetes mellitus comprised the largest study population (N = 79,165) and heart failure the smallest (N = 4,122). The highest mean UPC and COCI were measured for patients with heart failure, 0.75 and 0.77, respectively. UPC increased gradually with age for all diagnoses, while COCI showed this trend only for asthma. Both indices had higher values in urban areas. Conclusions Our findings suggest that CoC in Norwegian healthcare system is achieved for a majority of patients with chronic diseases. Patients with heart failure had the highest continuity with their RGP. Higher CoC was associated with older age and living in urban areas.
Objectives In epidemiological studies it is often necessary to describe morbidity. The aim of the present study is to construct and validate a morbidity index based on the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2). Design and Setting This is a cohort study based on linked data from national registries. An ICPC morbidity index was constructed based on a list of longstanding health problems in earlier published Scottish data from general practice and adapted to diagnostic ICPC-2 codes recorded in Norwegian general practice 2015 − 2017. Subjects The index was constructed among Norwegian born people only ( N = 4 509 382) and validated in a different population, foreign-born people living in Norway ( N = 959 496). Main outcome measures Predictive ability for death in 2018 in these populations was compared with the Charlson index. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify morbidities with the highest odds ratios (OR) for death and predictive ability for different combinations of morbidities was estimated by the area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Results An index based on 18 morbidities was found to be optimal, predicting mortality with an AUC of 0.78, slightly better than the Charlson index (AUC 0.77). External validation in a foreign-born population yielded an AUC of 0.76 for the ICPC morbidity index and 0.77 for the Charlson index. Conclusions The ICPC morbidity index performs equal to the Charlson index and can be recommended for use in data materials collected in primary health care. Key points This is the first morbidity index based on the International Classification of Primary Care, 2 nd edition (ICPC-2) It predicted mortality equal to the Charlson index and validated acceptably in a different population The ICPC morbidity index can be used as an adjustment variable in epidemiological research in primary care databases
Background The emergency primary care (EPC) services in Norway have been at the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic. Knowledge about the EPC services’ management of the COVID-19 outbreak can be used to prepare for future outbreaks and improve patient management. The objectives of this study were to identify pandemic preparedness and management strategies in EPC centres in Norway during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods Questions regarding patient management of the COVID-19 outbreak were included in data collection for the National Out-Of-Hours Services Registry. The data collection was web-based, and an invitation was sent by email to the managers of all EPC services in Norway in June 2020. The EPC services were asked questions about pre-pandemic preparedness, access to personal protective equipment (PPE), organizational measures taken, and how staffing was organized during the onset of the pandemic. Results There were 169 municipal and inter-municipal EPC services in Norway in 2020, and all responded to the questionnaire. Among the EPC services, 66.7% (n = 112) had a pandemic plan, but only 4.2% had performed training for pandemic preparedness. Further, fewer than half of the EPC centres (47.5%) had access to supplies of PPE, and 92.8% answered that they needed extra supplies of PPE. 75.3% of the EPC services established one or more respiratory clinics. Staffing with other personnel than usual was done in 44.6% (n = 74) of the EPC services. All EPC services except one implemented new strategies for assessing patients, while about half of the wards implemented new strategies for responding to emergency calls. None of the largest EPC services experienced that their pandemic plan was adequate, while 13.3% of the medium-sized EPC services and 48.9% of the small EPC services reported having an adequate pandemic plan. Conclusions Even though the EPC services lacked well-tested plans and had insufficient supplies of PPE at the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, most services adapted to the pandemic by altering the ways they worked and by hiring health care professionals from other disciplines. These observations may help decision makers plan for future pandemics.
Background Research on continuity of care (CoC) is mainly conducted in primary care and has received little acknowledgment in other levels of care. This study sought to investigate CoC across care levels for patients with selected chronic diseases, along with its association with mortality. Methods In a registry-based cohort study, patients with ≥1 consultation in primary or specialist healthcare or hospital admission with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus, or heart failure in 2012 were linked to disease-related consultation data in 2013–2016. CoC was measured by Usual Provider of Care index (UPC) and Bice–Boxermann continuity of care score (COCI). Values equal to one were categorized into one group and the rest into three equal groups (tertiles). The association with mortality was determined by Cox regression models. Results The highest mean UPCtotal was measured for patients with diabetes mellitus (0.58) and the lowest for those with asthma (0.46). The population with heart failure had the highest death rate (26.5). In adjusted Cox regression analyses for COPD, mortality was 2.6 times higher (95% CI 2.25–3.04) for patients in the lowest tertile of continuity compared to those with UPCtotal = 1. Patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure showed similar results. Conclusion CoC was moderate to high for disease-related contacts across care levels. A higher mortality associated with lower CoC was observed for patients with COPD, diabetes mellitus, and heart failure. A similar, but not statistically significant trend was found for patients with asthma. This study suggests that higher CoC across levels of care can decrease mortality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.