|
If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | |||||||||||||
  Emergency Medicine AustralasiaVolume 19 Issue 4, Pages 333 - 340 Published Online: 6 Jun 2007 Journal compilation © 2010 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine Official Journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 86K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  Original Research Why patients attend emergency departments for conditions potentially appropriate for primary care: Reasons given by patients and clinicians differ Malcolm Masso, MPH, MNA, BSc(Econ), RN, CM, Senior Research Fellow; Andrew J Bezzina, MB BS, Dip RACOG, FACEM, Senior Staff Specialist; Peter Siminski, BMathEcon(Hons), BA, Research Fellow; Rebekkah Middleton, RN, BN, Grad Cert Emergency Nursing, Grad Cert Clinical Management, Clinical Nurse Consultant – Emergency Services; Kathy Eagar, PhD, Professor, Director. Copyright © 2007 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2007 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine KEYWORDS attitude of health personnel • emergency medical service • primary health care • questionnaire Abstract
Objectives: To compare reasons identified by clinical staff for potential primary care attendances to the ED with those previously identified by patients. Methods: Survey of staff and primary care patients in five ED in New South Wales, Australia using questionnaire based on reasons identified in published studies. Results: Clinicians in the survey identify a broader spectrum of reasons for potential primary care cases presenting to the ED than the patients themselves report. Doctors reported on average 4.1 very important reasons and nurses 4.8 compared with patients 2.4 very important reasons. The main reasons identified by both doctors and nurses were similar and quite different to those identified by patients. Clinicians were more likely to emphasize cost and access issues rather than acuity and complexity issues. There was no difference within the clinician group between doctors and nurses nor by varying levels of experience. Furthermore doctors with significant experience in both primary care and emergency medicine did not differ from the overall clinicians' pattern. Conclusions: These data confirm that clinician perspectives on reasons for potential primary care patients' use of ED differ quite markedly from the perspectives of patients themselves. Those differences do not necessarily represent a punitive or blaming philosophy but will stem from the very different paradigms from which the two protagonists approach the interactions, reflecting the standard tension in a provider – consumer relationship. If policy is to be developed to improve system use and access, it must take both perspectives into account with respect to redesign, expectations and education. Accepted 27 February 2007 | 
|
