Do callers to out-of-hours care misuse an option to jump the phone queue?

J F Ebert, L Huibers, B Christensen, F K Lippert, M B Christensen, J F Ebert, L Huibers, B Christensen, F K Lippert, M B Christensen

Abstract

Objectives: Out-of-hours (OOH) services provide access to healthcare outside normal office hours, but the waiting time can sometimes be long. All callers must wait in the telephone queue, even if the health problem is urgent or life-threatening. We tested an emergency access button (EAB), which allowed callers with perceived severe health problems to bypass the queue. We aimed to investigate the severity of the health problems and the relevance of EAB use (assessed by triage professionals). Additionally, we aimed to calculate the number of suspected acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) and ambulance dispatches. Design: Descriptive study of a randomized intervention. Setting: OOH services in two major Danish healthcare regions. Subjects: 217,510 callers participated; 146,355 were randomized to intervention, and 6554 of 6631 (98.8%) questionnaires were completed by OOH triage professionals. Intervention: An EAB allowing randomly selected callers to bypass the telephone queue. Main outcome measures: Severity of contact and relevance of EAB use. Number of suspected AMIs and ambulance dispatches. Results: In both settings, contacts with EAB use concerned significantly more severe health problems than contacts without EAB use (p < 0.001). Triage professionals rated EAB use as "not relevant" in 23% of cases. Significantly more EAB users (10.4%) than EAB non-users (3.3% with EAB option and 1.7% without EAB option, p < 0.001) had a suspected AMI. Conclusions: We found higher proportions of severe health problems, suspected AMIs, and ambulance dispatches among EAB users. Only 23% of EAB use was rated "not relevant". This suggests that the EAB is used as intended. Key points Out-of-hours healthcare is challenged by increasing demand and long triage waiting times. An emergency access button may allow severely ill callers to jump the queue. Callers who bypassed the queue were more severely ill than callers who did not bypass the queue. Only 23% of bypassers presented "not relevant" health problems according to the triage staff.Trial registration: Identifier NCT02572115 registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 5 October 2015.

Keywords: After-Hours Care; Delivery of Health Care; General Practice; Health Services Accessibility; Risk Assessment; Triage.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of included subjects (based on CONSORT guidelines). EAB: emergency action button; GPC: general practice cooperative (Central Denmark Region); MH-1813: medical helpline 1813 (Capital Region of Denmark).

References

    1. Huibers L, Giesen P, Wensing M, et al. . Out-of-hours care in western countries: assessment of different organizational models. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9:105.
    1. Keizer E, Smits M, Peters Y, et al. . Contacts with out-of-hours primary care for nonurgent problems: patients' beliefs or deficiencies in healthcare? BMC Fam Pract. 2015;16:157.
    1. Grol R, Giesen P, van Uden C. After-hours care in the United Kingdom, Denmark, and the Netherlands: new models. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25:1733–1737.
    1. Moth G, Flarup L, Christensen MB, et al. Kontakt- og sygdomsmønsteret i laegevagten LV-KOS 2011 [Survey on reasons for encounters and disease patterns in OOH primary care LV-KOS 2011] Available from: .
    1. Moth G, Huibers L, Christensen MB, et al. . Out-of-hours primary care: a population-based study of the diagnostic scope of telephone contacts. Famprj. 2016;33:504–509.
    1. Philips H, Van Bergen J, Huibers L, et al. . Agreement on urgency assessment between secretaries and general practitioners: an observational study in out-of-hours general practice service in Belgium. Acta Clin Belg. 2015;70:309–314.
    1. Zakariassen E, Hansen EH, Hunskaar S. Incidence of emergency contacts (red responses) to Norwegian emergency primary healthcare services in 2007–a prospective observational study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2009;17:17–30.
    1. Anderson A, Roland M. Potential for advice from doctors to reduce the number of patients referred to emergency departments by NHS 111 call handlers: observational study. BMJ Open 2015;5:009444.
    1. Lehm KK, Andersen MS, Riddervold IS. Non-urgent emergency callers: characteristics and prognosis. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2017;21:166–173.
    1. Cannon CP, Gibson CM, Lambrew CT, et al. . Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2000;283:2941–2947.
    1. Reed GW, Rossi JE, Cannon CP. Acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 2017;389:197–210.
    1. Ebert JF, Huibers L, Lippert FK, et al. . Development and evaluation of an "emergency access button" in Danish out-of-hours primary care: a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res 2017;17:379.
    1. Giesen P, Smits M, Huibers L, et al. . Quality of after-hours primary care in the Netherlands: a narrative review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:108–113.
    1. Ebert JF, Huibers L, Christensen B, et al. . Giving callers the option to bypass the telephone waiting line in out-of-hours primary services: a comparative intervention study Submitted to Scand J Prim Health Care 2019. Mar;37:120–127.
    1. Christensen MB, Olesen F. Out of hours service in Denmark: evaluation five years after reform. BMJ. 1998;316:1502–1505.
    1. Flarup L, Moth G, Christensen MB, et al. . A feasible method to study the Danish out-of-hours primary care service. Dan Med J. 2014;61:A4847
    1. Noroxe KB, Huibers L, Moth G, et al. . Medical appropriateness of adult calls to Danish out-of-hours primary care: a questionnaire-based survey. BMC Fam Pract 2017;18:34.
    1. WHO ICPC-2 2018. [cited 2018 Apr 5]. Available from:
    1. Pope C, Turnbull J, Jones J, et al. . Has the NHS 111 urgent care telephone service been a success? Case study and secondary data analysis in England. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e014815
    1. McHale P, Wood S, Hughes K, et al. . Who uses emergency departments inappropriately and when - a national cross-sectional study using a monitoring data system. BMC Med 2013;11:11–258.
    1. Carret ML, Fassa AC, Domingues MR. Inappropriate use of emergency services: a systematic review of prevalence and associated factors. Cad Saude Publica. 2009;25:7–28.
    1. Moller TP, Ersboll AK, Tolstrup JS, et al. . Why and when citizens call for emergency help: an observational study of 211,193 medical emergency calls. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2015;23:88.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅