Comparing the clinical practice and prescribing safety of locum and permanent doctors: observational study of primary care consultations in England

Christos Grigoroglou*, Kieran Walshe, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Jane Ferguson, Gemma Stringer, Darren M. Ashcroft, Thomas Allen

*Kontaktforfatter

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

7 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Temporary doctors, known as locums, are a key component of the medical workforce in the NHS but evidence on differences in quality and safety between locum and permanent doctors is limited. We aimed to examine differences in the clinical practice, and prescribing safety for locum and permanent doctors working in primary care in England. 

Methods: We accessed electronic health care records (EHRs) for 3.5 million patients from the CPRD GOLD database with linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics from 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2022. We used multi-level mixed effects logistic regression to compare consultations with locum and permanent GPs for several patient outcomes including general practice revisits; prescribing of antibiotics; strong opioids; hypnotics; A&E visits; emergency hospital admissions; admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions; test ordering; referrals; and prescribing safety indicators while controlling for patient and practice characteristics. 

Results: Consultations with locum GPs were 22% more likely to involve a prescription for an antibiotic (OR = 1.22 (1.21 to 1.22)), 8% more likely to involve a prescription for a strong opioid (OR = 1.08 (1.06 to 1.09)), 4% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit on the same day (OR = 1.04 (1.01 to 1.08)) and 5% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit within 1 to 7 days (OR = 1.05 (1.02 to 1.08)). Consultations with a locum were 12% less likely to lead to a practice revisit within 7 days (OR = 0.88 (0.87 to 0.88)), 4% less likely to involve a prescription for a hypnotic (OR = 0.96 (0.94 to 0.98)), 15% less likely to involve a referral (OR = 0.85 (0.84 to 0.86)) and 19% less likely to involve a test (OR = 0.81 (0.80 to 0.82)). We found no evidence that emergency admissions, ACSC admissions and eight out of the eleven prescribing safety indicators were different if patients were seen by a locum or a permanent GP. 

Conclusions: Despite existing concerns, the clinical practice and performance of locum GPs did not appear to be systematically different from that of permanent GPs. The practice and performance of both locum and permanent GPs is likely shaped by the organisational setting and systems within which they work.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer126
TidsskriftBMC Medicine
Vol/bind22
Udgave nummer1
Antal sider11
ISSN1741-7015
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 27. mar. 2024

Bibliografisk note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Comparing the clinical practice and prescribing safety of locum and permanent doctors: observational study of primary care consultations in England'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater