What matters to people with chronic conditions when accessing care in Australian general practice? A qualitative study of patient, carer, and provider perspectives

Abstract

Background Research underpinning the patient experience of people with chronic conditions in Australian general practice is not well developed. We aimed to ascertain the perspectives of key stakeholders on aspects of patient experience, more specifically with regards to accessing general practice in Australia. Methods Using a qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone and face-to-face with people living with one or more chronic conditions, informal carers, and primary care providers between October 2016 and October 2017. Participants were recruited and selected from three demographically representative primary health networks across Sydney, Australia. Interview transcripts and researcher’s reflective fieldnotes were coded and analyzed for key themes of access. Analysis and interpretation of data were guided by Levesque’s model of access, a conceptual framework to evaluate access broadly and from corresponding patient- and provider-side dimensions. Results A total of 40 interviews were included in the analysis. Most participants had attended their general practices for 10 years or more and had regular primary care providers. People with chronic conditions reported access barriers predominantly in their ability to reach services, which were related to illness-related disabilities (limited mobility, chronic pain, fatigue, frailty) and limitations in the availability and accommodation of health services to address patient preferences (unavailability of after-hours services, lack of alternative modes of service delivery). While cost was not a major barrier, we found a lack of clarity in the factors that determined providers’ decisions to waive or reduce costs for some patients and not others. Conclusions People managing chronic conditions with a long-term primary care provider experienced access barriers in general practice, particularly in their ability to physically reach care and to do so on a timely basis. This study has important policy and practice implications, as it highlights patients’ experiences of accessing care and possible areas for improvement to appropriately respond to these experiences. Themes identified may be useful in the design of a patient experience survey tool specific to this population. While it incorporates perspectives from patients, carers and providers, this study could be further strengthened by including perspectives from culturally and linguistically underrepresented patient groups and more carers. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0973-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Medical homes and chronic care: consumer lessons for regional Australia

“…A need for increased access to after-hours GP care, and the concomitant demand for connected, alternative primary care has been identified previously and was supported in this study (Song et al 2019;Northern Queensland Primary Health Network 2020). Both informational and interpersonal continuity of care are necessary for effective, alternative after-hours service provision (Cosgriff et al 2020).…”

How to implement patient experience surveys and use their findings for service improvement: a qualitative expert consultation study in Australian general practiceHow to implement patient experience surveys and use their findings for service improvement: a qualitative expert consultation study in Australian general practice

“…Currently, the science behind the development of validated survey tools-including research to identify relevant indicators of patient experience-is limited in Australian primary care and requires further development. 28 Furthermore, in order to ensure that all stakeholders find relevance and value in the survey activity, the purpose of the survey needs to be clearly defined and communicated to all involved, supporting previous research that has identified the clarity of survey objective as a factor in the success of patient surveys. 17 Defining the purpose of surveys also has significance for implementing findings.…”

Effectiveness of Remotely Delivered Interventions to Simultaneously Optimize Management of Hypertension, Hyperglycemia and Dyslipidemia in People With Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

“…This can contribute to confusion about how intensively risk factors should be controlled and who is responsible for managing these risk factors ( 12 ). It also disadvantages patients in rural and remote settings who may not be able to access specialist medical services easily ( 13 ).…”