Abstract
Aims and methods
A mixed methods study was conducted to evaluate a recently established general practitioner (GP) led minor injury (MI) service; it included a patient feedback study, a qualitative enquiry into the experience of the MI GPs, and analysis of use of radiology.
Results
Forty-nine (81.6 %) patients surveyed were seen in 30 min or less. Forty-five (75 %) felt that the quality of the service was excellent/very good. Twenty-seven (45 %) responders felt that the X-ray service was expensive; 49 (81.6 %) patients said that they would be happy to use the service again. 271 X-rays were taken (137, 50.55 % upper limb, 95, 35.06 % lower limb, 18, 6.64 % CXR). One hundred and ninety-four (73.48 %) patients were self-financing. There was an 86.72 % (235/271) concordance between GP/radiologist findings. Issues elaborated by MI GPs at the focus group included secondary care/hospital interaction, patients’ experience, professional fulfilment, competence concerns, finances, and interest in educational resources; they were unanimous in maintaining the service at 10 months.
Conclusions
This study demonstrates a positive experience by patients, and conservative evaluation of X-rays by GPs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Starfield B (2003) William Pickles Lecture. Primary and specialty care interfaces: the imperative of disease continuity. Br J Gen Pract 53:723–729
O’Kelly FD, Teljeur C, Carter I et al (2010) Impact of a GP cooperative on lower acuity emergency department attendances. Emerg Med J 27:770–773
Thompson C, Hayhurst C, Boyle A (2010) How have changes to out-of-hours primary care services since 2004 affected emergency department attendances at a UK District General Hospital? A longitudinal study. Emerg Med J 27:22–25
Krueger R, Casey MA (2009) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks
Sempere-Selva T, Peiró S, Sendra-Pina P et al (2001) Inappropriate use of an accident and emergency department: magnitude, associated factors, and reasons—an approach with explicit criteria. Ann Emerg Med 37:568–579
Laffoy M, O’Herlihy B, Keye G (1997) A profile of attenders to a south Dublin city accident and emergency department. Ir J Med Sci 166:35–37
van Uden CJT, Winkens RAG, Wesseling G et al (2005) The impact of a primary care physician cooperative on the caseload of an emergency department: the Maastricht integrated out-of-hours service. J Gen Intern Med 20:612–617
Dale J, Green J, Reid F et al (1995) Primary care in the accident and emergency department: II. Comparison of general practitioners and hospital doctors. BMJ 311:427–430
Dale J, Dolan B (1996) Do patients use minor injury units appropriately? J Public Health Med 18:152–156
Campbell JL, Clay JH (2010) Out-of-hours care: do we? Br J Gen Pract 60:155–157
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Redmond, P., Darker, C., McDonnell, M. et al. Establishing a general practitioner led minor injury service: mixed methods evaluation at 10 months with an emphasis on use of radiology by GPs in the out-of-hours setting. Ir J Med Sci 182, 213–216 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-012-0860-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-012-0860-3