IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0227280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

General practitioners’ consultation counts and associated factors in Swiss primary care – A retrospective observational study

Author

Listed:
  • Yael Rachamin
  • Rahel Meier
  • Thomas Grischott
  • Thomas Rosemann
  • Stefan Markun

Abstract

Background: Research on individual general practitioner (GP) workload, e.g. in terms of consultation counts, is scarce. Accurate measures are desirable because GPs’ consultation counts might be related to their work satisfaction and arguably, there is a limit to the number of consultations a GP can hold per day without jeopardizing quality of care. Moreover, understanding the association of consultation counts with GP characteristics is crucial given current trends in general practice, such as the increasing proportion of female GPs, part-time work and group practices. Aim: The aim of this study was to describe GPs’ consultation counts and efficiency and to assess associations with GP and practice variables. Methods: In this retrospective observational study we used routine data in electronic medical records obtained from 245 Swiss GPs in 2018. We described GPs’ daily consultation counts as well as their efficiencies (i.e. total consultation counts adjusted for part-time work) and used hierarchical linear models to find associations of the GPs’ total consultation counts in 2018 with GP- and practice-level variables. Results: The median daily consultation count was 28 over all GPs and 33 for full-time working GPs. Total consultation counts increased non-linearly with part-time status, with high part-time working GPs (60%-90% of full-time) being equally or more efficient than full-time workers. Excluding part-time status in the regression resulted in higher consultation counts for male GPs working in single practices and with older patients, whereas part-time adjusted consultation counts were unaffected by GP gender and practice type. Conclusion: Female gender, part-time work in the range of 60%-90% of full-time, and working in group practices do not decrease GP efficiency. However, the challenge of recruiting sufficient numbers of GPs remains.

Suggested Citation

  • Yael Rachamin & Rahel Meier & Thomas Grischott & Thomas Rosemann & Stefan Markun, 2019. "General practitioners’ consultation counts and associated factors in Swiss primary care – A retrospective observational study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227280
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227280
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227280&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0227280?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Omar Al-Khalil & Fabio Valeri & Oliver Senn & Thomas Rosemann & Stefania Di Gangi, 2020. "Effects of a DRG-based hospital reimbursement on the health care utilization and costs in Swiss primary care: A retrospective “quasi-experimental” analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.