Abstract / Description of output
Background
Expanding primary care multi-disciplinary teams (MDTs) was a key component of the 2018 Scottish GP contract, with over 4,700 MDT staff appointed since then.
Aim
To explore patients’ views on primary care MDT expansion in Scotland.
Design and methods
(1) Survey of patients recently consulting a GP in deprived-urban, affluent-urban and remote/rural areas, assessing awareness of five MDT roles and attitudes towards receptionist signposting; (2) 30 individual interviews exploring MDT-care experiences.
Results
Of 1,053 survey respondents, most were unaware of the option of MDT rather than GP consultations for three out of five roles (69% unaware of link worker appointments; 68% mental health nurse; 58% pharmacist). Reception signposting was less popular in deprived-urban areas (34% unhappy vs 29% in remote/rural vs 21% affluent-urban; p<0.001), and in patients with multimorbidity (31% unhappy vs 24% in non-multimorbid; p<0.05).
Two-thirds of interviewees had multimorbidity and almost all reported positive MDT-care experiences. However, MDT-care was generally seen as a supplement rather than a substitute for GP care. Around half of patients expressed concerns about reception signposting. These patients were more likely to also express concerns about GP access in general. Both of these concerns were more common in deprived-urban areas than in remote/rural or affluent-urban areas.
Conclusion
MDT-care has expanded in Scotland with limited patient awareness. Although patients understand its potential value, many are unhappy with reception signposting to first-contact MDT care, especially those in deprived-urban areas living with multimorbidity. This represents a barrier to the aims of the new GP contract.
Expanding primary care multi-disciplinary teams (MDTs) was a key component of the 2018 Scottish GP contract, with over 4,700 MDT staff appointed since then.
Aim
To explore patients’ views on primary care MDT expansion in Scotland.
Design and methods
(1) Survey of patients recently consulting a GP in deprived-urban, affluent-urban and remote/rural areas, assessing awareness of five MDT roles and attitudes towards receptionist signposting; (2) 30 individual interviews exploring MDT-care experiences.
Results
Of 1,053 survey respondents, most were unaware of the option of MDT rather than GP consultations for three out of five roles (69% unaware of link worker appointments; 68% mental health nurse; 58% pharmacist). Reception signposting was less popular in deprived-urban areas (34% unhappy vs 29% in remote/rural vs 21% affluent-urban; p<0.001), and in patients with multimorbidity (31% unhappy vs 24% in non-multimorbid; p<0.05).
Two-thirds of interviewees had multimorbidity and almost all reported positive MDT-care experiences. However, MDT-care was generally seen as a supplement rather than a substitute for GP care. Around half of patients expressed concerns about reception signposting. These patients were more likely to also express concerns about GP access in general. Both of these concerns were more common in deprived-urban areas than in remote/rural or affluent-urban areas.
Conclusion
MDT-care has expanded in Scotland with limited patient awareness. Although patients understand its potential value, many are unhappy with reception signposting to first-contact MDT care, especially those in deprived-urban areas living with multimorbidity. This represents a barrier to the aims of the new GP contract.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | British Journal of General Practice Open (BJGP Open) |
| Early online date | 25 Apr 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 25 Apr 2024 |