The impact of general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments: a rapid realist review

Author:

Cooper AlisonORCID,Davies FreyaORCID,Edwards MichelleORCID,Anderson PippaORCID,Carson-Stevens AndrewORCID,Cooke Matthew WORCID,Donaldson LiamORCID,Dale JeremyORCID,Evans Bridie AngelaORCID,Hibbert Peter DORCID,Hughes Thomas CORCID,Porter AlisonORCID,Rainer Tim,Siriwardena AloysiusORCID,Snooks HelenORCID,Edwards AdrianORCID

Abstract

ObjectivesWorldwide, emergency healthcare systems are under intense pressure from ever-increasing demand and evidence is urgently needed to understand how this can be safely managed. An estimated 10%–43% of emergency department patients could be treated by primary care services. In England, this has led to a policy proposal and £100 million of funding (US$130 million), for emergency departments to stream appropriate patients to a co-located primary care facility so they are ‘free to care for the sickest patients’. However, the research evidence to support this initiative is weak.DesignRapid realist literature review.SettingEmergency departments.Inclusion criteriaArticles describing general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments.AimTo develop context-specific theories that explain how and why general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments affect: patient flow; patient experience; patient safety and the wider healthcare system.ResultsNinety-six articles contributed data to theory development sourced from earlier systematic reviews, updated database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane DSR & CRCT, DARE, HTA Database, BSC, PsycINFO and SCOPUS) and citation tracking. We developed theories to explain: how staff interpret the streaming system; different roles general practitioners adopt in the emergency department setting (traditional, extended, gatekeeper or emergency clinician) and how these factors influence patient (experience and safety) and organisational (demand and cost-effectiveness) outcomes.ConclusionsMultiple factors influence the effectiveness of emergency department streaming to general practitioners; caution is needed in embedding the policy until further research and evaluation are available. Service models that encourage the traditional general practitioner approach may have shorter process times for non-urgent patients; however, there is little evidence that this frees up emergency department staff to care for the sickest patients. Distinct primary care services offering increased patient choice may result in provider-induced demand. Economic evaluation and safety requires further research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017069741.

Funder

Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference123 articles.

1. What’s going on with a&e waiting times? The king’s fund. https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/urgent-emergency-care/urgent-and-emergency-care-mythbusters.

2. Keogh B . Transforming urgent and emergency services in England: Urgent and emergecy care review. 2013. http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/keogh-review/Pages/urgent-and-emergency-care-review.aspx.

3. Emergency departments: More useful than the official data suggests The College of Emergency Medicine. 2014. http://www.kingstoned.org/uploads/2/4/0/2/24023085/ca_past_paper.pdf.

4. Primary care in London: an evaluation of general practitioners working in an inner city accident and emergency department.

5. To GP or not to GP: a natural experiment in children triaged to see a GP in a tertiary paediatric emergency department (ED)

Cited by 36 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3