Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1
Standardized Multiple Regression Model With Partial Correlation Coefficients Between Variables and Access Outcome
Partial r SE P Value FTE −0.51 0.11 <.001 Clinicians/site 0.12 0.09 .220 Panel size 0.22 0.10 .032 FTE = clinician full-time equivalent value; r = correlation coefficient; SE = standard error.
Note: We report the estimate of the partial r, SE, and P value via an F test for each independent variable, with the access outcome (days until third next available appointment) controlling for the other 2 independent variables in the standardized multiple regression model. Multiple R2 = 0.22; adjusted R2 = 0.20.
Additional Files
The Article in Brief
Panel Size, Clinician Time in Clinic, and Access to Appointments
David Margolius , and colleagues
Background With a worsening shortage of primary care clinicians, the availability of follow-up appointments could become more scarce. This study investigates if wait time for appointments is associated with panel sizes (the number of patients under a clinician's care) or the number of half-days primary care clinicians work.
What This Study Found Part-time clinicians may be less able to offer timely appointments to their patients than their full-time counterparts. Researchers examined the relationship between appointment backlog, panel size, and clinician time in clinic. Among 114 primary care clinicians, less clinician time in clinic was independently associated with longer backlogs for appointments. Panel size, without adjusting for full-time equivalency and number of clinicians per site, had almost no correlation with access.
Implications
- These findings are particularly important in light of the increasing rate of clinicians who work part-time.
- The authors suggest that primary care practices consider, (1) establishing clinician teams to co-manage a patient panel and deliver more timely access to appointments, (2) establishing teams of clinicians and non-clinicians to reduce the need for traditional face-to-face clinician visits, and (3) reducing panel sizes which, the authors suggest, may be less feasible and perhaps less important than the presence of a clinician in the practice.
