Does total triage and remote-by-default consulting impact vulnerable groups: A pilot study
Verity, A.; Naidu, D.; Tzortziou-Brown, V.
Show abstract
BackgroundCOVID-19 mandated a rapid and dramatic transformation of general practice. Total Triage (TT), where all consultations should be triaged first, and Remote-by-Default (RbD) consulting, where a clinician should consult remotely unless there is a "clinical exception", were advised. It is unclear how these new ways of working were implemented in practice, and how they impacted vulnerable patients. AimTo assess the impact of TT and RbD on vulnerable patients and identify mitigation strategies. Design and SettingA mixed methods service evaluation in Lewisham, London, an area of high deprivation. MethodThree parallel datasets were collected and analysed: Semi-structured interviews with stakeholders working with vulnerable groups and qualitative data from forums with black and ethnic minority patients, a survey of General Practitioners exploring implementation of TT and RbD, and a mystery shopper exercise reviewing access and messaging of ten practices. ResultsBarriers to access for vulnerable patients included challenges navigating the new model, difficulty engaging with remote consultations and digital exclusion. There was wide variation in messaging regarding changes to services and the practical application of TT and RbD. Potential solutions included clearer practice guidance and patient messaging, more consistent implementation, and identification and recording of patient access needs to enable better tailoring of care provision. ConclusionThis pilot study identified perceived and actual barriers to accessing general practice for vulnerable patients following the rapid introduction of TT and RbD consulting. It proposes immediate steps to mitigate some of these impacts and highlights the need for further research in this area. How This Fits InThe rapid and widespread adoption, recommended by NHS England, of total triage and remote-by-default consulting in general practice has yet to be evaluated. We provide a first look at how these changes are impacting those with historic difficulties in accessing primary care under the traditional GP model. We also provide some local recommendations that can be implemented easily at practice level and beyond, to mitigate the impact of these changes whilst making recommendations for further research to corroborate these findings widely.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 97%
- Impact of COVID-19 on Migrants’ Access to Primary Care: A National Qualitative Study 97%
- Developing the PATH-GP (Prevention and Testing for HIV in General Practice) intervention: a Person-Based Approach intervention development study to increase HIV testing and PrEP access. 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- A mixed-methods evaluation of patients’ views on primary care multi-disciplinary teams in Scotland 97%
- Integrating primary care and social services for older adults with multimorbidity: A qualitative study 96%
- Community end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Initial findings of a UK primary care survey 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 96%
- Trauma informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs 96%
- Patients’ and carers’ experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Factors influencing referral to maternity models of care in Australian general practice 95%
- “The impact of the Little Orange Book on how parents/carers manage symptoms of illness in children: A mixed methods study” 95%
- Wading through Molasses: A qualitative examination of the experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of Australian medical practitioners regarding medical billing 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Adverse event reviews in healthcare: What matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family 95%
- Primary care use of laboratory tests in Northern Ireland Western Health and Social Care Trust: a cross-sectional study 94%
- What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.