Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Jul 28, 2023
Date Accepted: Apr 17, 2024
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Implementation of an online consultation tool and reported patient experience of primary care: a cross-sectional analysis of the 2022 General Practice Patient Survey in England
ABSTRACT
Background:
Patient experience is a key outcome of health and care, a key component of quality of care and an important policy focus for the NHS. Patient experience of general practice can be influenced by using online consultation tools for access and triage. Patient experience is known to vary in relation to socio-demographic factors.
Objective:
Given the rapid scale up and diversity of online consultation tools in English general practice, we investigated the association between implementation of an online consultation tools and patient experience, and how that varied by the online consultation tool design and implementation model and practice socio-demographic factors.
Methods:
We categorised practices according to their usage of one of two online consultation tools which differed in their design and implementation model: ‘free-text’ (FT) with an embedded single workflow with supporting total triage; or ‘mixed-text’ (MT) with mixed input of free-text and logic based multiple choice without an embedded workflow supporting total triage. We considered survey responses from the General Practice Patient Survey in England in relation to domains of overall experience, experience of making an appointment, continuity of care and use of self-care before making an appointment. We used logistic regression models at practice level to explore association between usage of the online consultation tool and patient experience.
Results:
We included 287,194 responses from 2,423 MT and 170 FT practices. At MT practices increased usage was associated with reductions of more than 19% (P<.001) in experience across all dimensions other than self-care but an increase of 28% (P<.001) in self-care. Conversely, at FT practices increased usage was associated with improvements of more than 23% (P<.001) in experience across all dimensions other than self-care, but no effect on self-care. The association between usage and patient experience varied by practice socio-demographic characteristics. For example, greater improvements in overall patient experience with increased usage at FT practices in urban areas, and with the greatest proportions of younger and non-White ethnicity patients masked declines at the opposite cohorts of FT practices (in rural areas and with the smallest proportions of younger and non-White ethnicity patients). In general, inequalities in patient experience tended to narrow with increased usage reflecting greater improvements for groups that traditionally experience most challenges.
Conclusions:
Online consultation tools offering free-text input and embedded using a single workflow with total triage can lead to improved patient experience of general practice and reduced socio-demographic disparities in access to care. However, stark differences in reported patient experience at practices using different online consultation tools suggest that careful consideration as to how online consultation tools are designed and implemented is required to achieve this. Generalising impacts across different online consultation tools is likely to be difficult or impossible.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.