Skip to main content

Fewer A&E visits where access to GPs is better

Patients with more timely access to general practitioner (GP) appointments make fewer visits to accident and emergency departments, suggests a study published in the journal PLoS One. The findings of the article reinforce the need for more investment in GP services. People living in more affluent areas areas also had lower rates of use of A & E. Improving access to GPs by employing more GPs in deprived, urban areas and giving primary care teams more resources could help improve access to health services, improve quality of care and reduce pressures on other parts of the NHS.

Lead author Thomas Cowling, from the School of Public Health at Imperial College London, said: “This is the first national evidence of an association between access to GP appointments and rates of A&E attendances in England. Policy makers should consider this relationship when designing plans to reduce the use of A&E departments. A new era of service commissioning, led by GPs, has just started in the NHS. It will be interesting to see what effect, if any, this has on access to GP appointments and, in turn, on A&E visits.Increasing demand for urgent and emergency care is a major issue in many developed countries, in addition to England. In the United States, the situation is more complex as some patients experience financial barriers to accessing primary care. This is increasingly also the case in some European countries as a result of economic austerity.”

The article was featured by a number of organisations, including the BMJRCGP, Sky News, Yahoo, and the Conversation, as well as featuring on social networks such as Twitter.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...

MPH Student Presentations on the NHS Care.Data Programme

As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...