A general practitioner in an ophthalmology accident and emergency department.

After a short period of intensive training, a general practitioner successfully replaced a senior house officer (SHO) in the accident and emergency department of an eye hospital on one morning a week for a year. An unbiased observer compared the performance of the general practitioner after one year with that of a full-time SHO who had had 17 months'' experience; their performances were about equal. Although a sessional general practitioner costs about 28% more than an SHO, the real cost is much less because undue length of service as an SHO or change to another specialty (because of the SHO surplus) delays achievement of a permanent grade. Continuity is a great advantage of the general practitioner. Replacement of some SHOs by general practitioners would reduce the surplus of SHOs with poor promotion prospects. The commonest diagnoses were Meibomian cysts (18%), corneal foreign bodies (20%), corneal abrasions (12%), and conjunctivitis (8%).     

Organisation of telephone services and patients' access to doctors by telephone in general practice.

OBJECTIVES--To assess how accessible general practitioners are to patients by telephone and to examine the relations between organisation, number of lines, and number of patient-doctor calls. DESIGN--Postal survey of a random sample of general practitioners stratified by rural and urban practice areas, with differential sampling fractions. SETTING--General practices in England and Wales. SUBJECTS--2000 general practitioners, of whom 1459 (74%) responded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Number of calls received by general practitioner a day, time reserved for patients'' calls, and communication of availability of telephone contact. RESULTS--1421 general practitioners said that they accepted non-emergency calls from patients during the day and 285 reported reserving specific times of the day for this purpose. 848 estimated that they received four or fewer patient calls a day. The number of calls was significantly related to reserving time for calls (p less than 0.001), informing patients that the doctor was accessible by telephone (p less than 0.00001), and the number of periods when calls were accepted (p less than 0.00001). On average there were 3659 patients per incoming line; the number of patients per incoming line rose significantly as practice size increased (p less than 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS--The apparent willingness of general practitioners to accept calls was not reflected in the number of calls received. Reserving time, increasing periods of availability, and publicising telephone access increased the number of doctor-patient telephone contacts. Line congestion may be a problem, and impartial advice and guidance on telephone organisation and line requirements would be helpful.     

Cost effectiveness of treating primary care patients in accident and emergency: a comparison between general practitioners,senior house officers,and registrars.

OBJECTIVES--To compare outcome and costs of general practitioners, senior house officers, and registrars treating patients who attended accident and emergency department with problems assessed at triage as being of primary care type. DESIGN--Prospective intervention study which was later costed. SETTING--Inner city accident and emergency department in south east London. SUBJECTS--4641 patients presenting with primary care problems: 1702 were seen by general practitioners, 2382 by senior house officers, and 557 by registrars. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Satisfaction and outcome assessed in subsample of 565 patients 7-10 days after hospital attendance and aggregate costs of hospital care provided. RESULTS--Most patients expressed high levels of satisfaction with clinical assessment (430/562 (77%)), treatment (418/557 (75%)), and consulting doctor''s manner (434/492 (88%)). Patients'' reported outcome and use of general practice in 7-10 days after attendance were similar: 206/241 (85%), 224/263 (85%), and 52/59 (88%) of those seen by general practitioners, senior house officers, and registrars respectively were fully recovered or improving (chi2 = 0.35, P = 0.840), while 48/240 (20%), 48/268 (18%), and 12/57 (21%) respectively consulted a general practitioner or practice nurse (chi2 = 0.51, P = 0.774). Excluding costs of admissions, the average costs per case were 19.30 pounds, 17.97 pounds, and 11.70 pounds for senior house officers, registrars, and general practitioners respectively. With cost of admissions included, these costs were 58.25 pounds, 44.68 pounds, and 32.30 pounds respectively. CONCLUSION--Management of patients with primary care needs in accident and emergency department by general practitioners reduced costs with no apparent detrimental effect on outcome. These results support new role for general practitioners.     

Relation of out of hours activity by general practice and accident and emergency services with deprivation in Nottingham: longitudinal survey.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relation between out of hours activity of general practice and accident and emergency services with deprivation and distance from accident and emergency department. DESIGN: Six month longitudinal study. SETTING: Six general practices and the sole accident and emergency department in Nottingham. SUBJECTS: 4745 out of hours contacts generated by 45,182 patients from 23 electoral wards registered with six practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of out of hours contacts for general practice and accident and emergency services calculated by electoral ward; Jarman and Townsend deprivation scores and distance from accident and emergency department of electoral wards. RESULTS: Distances of wards from accident and emergency department ranged from 0.8 to 9 km, and Jarman deprivation scores ranged from -23.4 to 51.8. Out of hours contacts varied by ward from 110 to 350 events/1000 patients/year, and 58% of this variation was explained by the Jarman score. General practice and accident and emergency rates were positively correlated (Pearson coefficient 0.50, P = 0.015). Proximity to accident and emergency department was not significantly associated with increased activity when deprivation was included in regression analysis. One practice had substantially higher out of hours activity (B coefficient 124 (95% confidence interval 67 to 181)) even when deprivation was included in regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A disproportionate amount of out of hours workload fell on deprived inner city practices. High general practice and high accident and emergency activity occurred in the same areas rather than one service substituting for the other.