Back

Primary care clinicians working in or near hospital emergency departments in the UK: A mixed methods systematic review

Howard Wilsher, S.; Brainard, J. S.; Hanson, S.; Peacock, D.; Everden, P.

2024-08-20 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2024.08.19.24312212 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesTo synthesise evidence about primary care clinicians treating patients in or adjacent to hospital emergency departments in the UK. Study designMixed methods narrative systematic review. MethodsEligible studies were in English and described primary care services (general practitioners, GPs, or nurse practitioners) that treat patients within or adjacent to hospital Emergency Departments (ED). Searches were conducted on Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases. The search included extraction from an international review updated from 2020 to October 2022, and grey literature from inception to October 2022. The methods were informed by consultation with members of the public. ResultsFrom 4189 studies screened, 20 met inclusion criteria. Four studies assessed typology and streaming of services. Seven studies reported patient and public involvement. Ten studies reported differences in clinical outcomes between primary care and emergency services, but not definitive benefit for either. Likewise, results were equivocal for economic evaluations. Diverse delivery formats complicate evaluation and may explain why clinicians had mixed opinions about the utility of such services. Patients were generally satisfied with the service they received, in either primary care or emergency services. ConclusionDiversity of implementation complicate conclusions that can be drawn. Existing evaluations provide little evidence that primary care services in or near emergency departments offers any system advantages for clinical outcomes, or cost savings. Process evaluation in future evaluations is essential to understand what aspects of primary care at emergency departments are likely to improve system and patient care. Implications for the profession and/or patient careThe systematic review assessed outcomes arising due to primary care clinicians providing treatment in or near Emergency Departments (ED) in the UK. There were no consistent benefits for having primary care clinicians in or near EDs. This research highlights the need for healthcare leaders and policy makers to provide more clarity in developing primary care services in or near EDs. It will have impact for leaders in healthcare to consider whether primary care clinicians in or near EDs are providing best value healthcare, or whether other models could provide patients appropriate NHS resources according to their health need. Patient and public involvementThree focus groups (with 13 public advisors) were conducted to understand patients priorities and perspectives for attending EDs with relatively minor health conditions. This helped to guide study design, data extraction and analysis of this review.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
23.0%
2
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.0%
3
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
5
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.5%
6
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
7
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
8
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
9
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
10
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
11
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
12
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
13
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
14
Palliative Medicine
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
15
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
16
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
17
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
18
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
19
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
20
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
22
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
23
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%