↓ Skip to main content

Opportunities for primary care to reduce hospital admissions: a cross-sectional study of geographical variation

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 1,899)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
30 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
2 Mendeley
Title
Opportunities for primary care to reduce hospital admissions: a cross-sectional study of geographical variation
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, October 2016
DOI 10.3399/bjgp16x687949
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Busby, Sarah Purdy, William Hollingworth

Abstract

Reducing unplanned hospital admissions is a key priority within the UK. Substantial interpractice variation in admission rates for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) suggests that decreases might be possible. To identify the clinical areas and patient subgroups where the greatest opportunities exist for GPs to improve ACSC care. Cross-sectional study using routine hospital data from patients registered at 8123 English GP practices during 2011 and 2012. The authors used random effects Poisson models to estimate interpractice variation after adjusting for several drivers of healthcare need and availability of local hospital services. Interpractice variation was contrasted across patient subgroups based on age. There were 1.8 million hospital admissions. Overall, high-utilisation practices had ACSC admission rates that were 55% (95% CI = 53 to 56) greater than low-utilisation practices. Differences of 67% (95% CI = 65 to 69) were found for chronic ACSCs, which was much larger than the 51% (95% CI = 49 to 52) difference exhibited by acute presentations. At least two-fold differences were found for 15 (54%) ACSCs, although large interpractice variations were not ubiquitous. Admission rates were consistently more variable among younger-than-average patients. The most variable conditions tended to disproportionately affect deprived patients. Substantial interpractice variation suggests that current efforts to standardise primary care have had a limited effect on unplanned hospital admissions. GPs and healthcare commissioners should ensure they are offering best practice care for the most variable clinical areas and patient subgroups identified in the study, particularly in adults aged <70 years with chronic conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 50%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 1 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#106,079
of 8,089,090 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#38
of 1,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,715
of 242,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#4
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,089,090 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 1,899 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. 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 242,442 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 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 95% of its contemporaries.