학술논문

Regional differences in reasons for consultation and general practitioners' spectrum of services in northern Germany – results of a cross-sectional observational study.
Document Type
Article
Source
BMC Family Practice. 1/31/2020, Vol. 21 Issue 1, p1-12. 12p. 4 Charts, 1 Map.
Subject
*CLINICAL competence
*COMMUNITY health services
*CONFIDENCE intervals
*FAMILY medicine
*HEALTH services accessibility
*INTERVIEWING
*MEDICAL care use
*MEDICAL referrals
*MULTIVARIATE analysis
*SCIENTIFIC observation
*GENERAL practitioners
*POPULATION density
*POPULATION geography
*RURAL health services
*STATISTICAL sampling
*URBAN health
*LOGISTIC regression analysis
*MULTIPLE regression analysis
*PSYCHOSOCIAL factors
*CROSS-sectional method
Language
ISSN
1471-2296
Abstract
Background: Among other factors, the patients' consultation reasons and GPs' spectrum of services determine the process and outcome of the medical treatment. So far, however, there has been little information on differences in reasons for consultation and GPs' services between urban and rural areas. Our study's goal was thus to investigate these factors in relation to the regional location of GPs' practices. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study based on standardised GP interviews in a quota sampling design. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were divided into three regional categories (urban area, environs, rural area) and stratified proportionally to the population size. Differences in the number of reasons for consultation and services were analysed by multivariate linear regressions in mixed models adjusted for random effects on the levels of the German federal states and administrative districts. Differences in individual consultation reasons and services were identified by logistic regression via stepwise forward and backward selection. Results: Primary care practices in 34 of the 37 selected administrative districts (91.9%) were represented in the dataset. In total, 211 GPs were personally interviewed. On average, GPs saw 344 patients per month with a slightly higher number of patients in rural areas. They reported 59.1 ± 15.4 different reasons for consultation and 30.3 ± 3.9 different services. There was no statistically significant regional variation in the number of different consultation reasons, but there was a broader service spectrum by rural GPs (ß = − 1.42; 95% confidence interval − 2.75/− 0.08; p = 0.038) which was statistically explained by a higher level of medical training. Additionally, there were differences in the frequency of individual consultation reasons and services between rural and urban areas. Conclusion: GPs in rural areas performed more frequently services usually provided by medical specialists in urban areas. This might be caused by a low availability of specialists in rural areas. The association between medical training and service spectrum might imply that GPs compensate the specific needs of their patients by completing advanced medical training before or after setting up a medical practice. Trial registration: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02558322). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]