These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Open-access versus bookable appointment systems: survey of patients attending appointments with general practitioners.
    Author: Pascoe SW, Neal RD, Allgar VL.
    Journal: Br J Gen Pract; 2004 May; 54(502):367-9. PubMed ID: 15113521.
    Abstract:
    Access to consultations with general practitioners (GPs) is an important health policy issue. One method of providing 24-hour access is through the provision of open-access surgeries. The study aimed to compare patients' perceptions of 'bookable' and 'non-bookable' (open-access) appointments. A cross-sectional survey design was used and recruited 834 patients in a general practice. There were statistically significant differences between the bookable and the non-bookable appointments for the questions on 'choice of doctor', 'whether able to see the doctor in the time they needed to', and 'convenience of the appointment'. More patients with bookable appointments saw their doctor of choice. One-fifth of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, did not feel that they were seen within the time they needed to be. Almost three-fifths of patients, equally distributed between the two groups, reported that it was either 'easy' or 'very easy' to make the appointment. Greater convenience was reported by those with bookable appointments. These findings support the hypothesis that within a single practice, there is scope for a combined appointment system in which patients can self-select, with equal satisfaction, the type of appointment that they prefer, dependent upon their own preferences or needs at the time.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]