| Title |
Using alternatives to face-to-face consultations: a survey of prevalence and attitudes in general practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp16x685597 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather Brant, Helen Atherton, Sue Ziebland, Brian McKinstry, John L Campbell, Chris Salisbury |
| Abstract |
The ubiquitous use of communication technologies has led to an expectation that a similar approach should extend to health care. Despite considerable rhetoric about the need for general practices to offer alternatives to face-to-face consultations, such as telephone, email, and internet video consultations, the extent to which such technologies are actually used at present is unclear. The aim of the survey was to identify the frequency and range of ways in which general practices are providing (or planning) alternatives to face-to-face consultations. A postal survey of practices around Bristol, Oxford, Lothian, the Highlands, and the Western Isles of Scotland. A postal questionnaire survey was sent to each of the GPs and practice managers of 421 practices between January and May 2015. A response was received from 319/421 practices (76%). Although the majority of the practices reported that they were conducting telephone consultations frequently (n = 211/318, 66%), fewer were implementing email consultations (n = 18/318, 6%), and most (n = 169/318, 53%) had no plans to introduce this. None were currently using internet video, and 86% (n = 273/318) had no plans to introduce internet video consultations. These findings were repeated in the reported use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations at an individual GP level. Optional free text responses were completed by 28% of responders, and offered an explanation for the (often perceived) barriers and incentives for implementation. Despite policy pressure to introduce consultations by email and internet video, there is a general reluctance among GPs to implement alternatives to face-to-face consultations. This identifies a substantial gap between rhetoric and reality in terms of the likelihood of certain alternatives (email, video) changing practice in the near future. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 19 | 56% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 53% |
| Scientists | 9 | 26% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Unknown | 189 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 17% |
| Researcher | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 41 | 21% |
| Unknown | 53 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 13% |
| Unknown | 54 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 116. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2020.
All research outputs
#355,616
of 25,142,442 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#134
of 4,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,924
of 341,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#4
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,142,442 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.