ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the location and the number of nurse consultations have changed in response to the continuously decreasing number of GP consultations in the fourth-largest city in Finland. It has been suggested that nurse consultations are replacing GP consultations. DESIGN: A retrospective register-based follow-up cohort study. SETTING: Public primary health care in the City of Vantaa, Finland. SUBJECTS: All documented face-to-face office-hour consultations with practical and registered nurses, and consultations with practical and registered nurse in the emergency department of Vantaa primary health care between 1 January 2009 and 31 December, 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in the number of consultations with practical and registered nurses between 2009 and 2014 in primary health care both during office-hours and in the emergency department. RESULTS: Over the follow-up period, the monthly median number of practical nurse consultations in the emergency department per 1000 inhabitants increased from 1.6 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.3-1.7) to 10.5 (10.3-12.2) (p < 0.001) and registered nurse consultations from a median of 3.6 (3.0-4.0) to 14.5 (13.0-16.6) (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant change in the median monthly number of office-hour consultations with practical or registered nurses. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that in primary health care, medical consultations have shifted from GPs to nurses with lower education levels, and from care during office-hours to emergency care.
The number of general practitioner (GP) consultations are decreasing. Tasks are being transferred from GPs to nurses to improve access to care.The number of office-hour consultations with nurses did not change, despite the decrease in GP consultations.In the emergency department, the number of nurse consultations increased significantly when GP consultations decreased.Medical consultations seem to have shifted to the emergency department and the nurses.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Finland, there have been various strategies attempting to provide access to GPs. The 'restricted-List General Practitioner model' (rLGP) was launched in primary health care (PHC) in the city of Vantaa after the 'named General Practitioner model' (nGP) failed to provide sufficient access to GPs. This was done to improve access to GP appointments for those most needing care. AIM: To evaluate the impact of the transition from nGP to rLGP on access to non-urgent scheduled appointments among patients aged ≥75 years. DESIGN & SETTING: A register-based follow-up study in public PHC in Vantaa, Finland. METHOD: The study focused on patients aged ≥75 years who used PHC from 2004-2008. It looked at the number of non-urgent and urgent scheduled appointments, patient contacts, home visits, PHC emergency department appointments, and cancelled appointments, which were recorded 7 years before and after the transition from nGP to rLGP in 2011 and adjusted to patient-years. Non-urgent appointments were booked to the patient's own nGP or rLGP in public PHC, whereas urgent appointments could be to any GP. RESULTS: The number of non-urgent scheduled appointments to GPs was halved during the time of nGP, before launching the rLGP. Simultaneously, the number of urgent scheduled appointments more than tripled. The number of both started to plateau a year before the rLGP was launched. The number of both non-urgent and urgent scheduled appointments remained mainly at that level after rLGP was implemented. CONCLUSION: The rLGP model was unsuccessful in improving access to non-urgent scheduled appointments to GPs.
