Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

Impact of Advanced Access

Sheryl White and Melvyn Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2004; 54 (505): 622.
Sheryl White
Roles: Medical Student (4th year)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Melvyn Jones
Roles: GP and Lecturer in Primary Care and Population Studies
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Last year we conducted a qualitative study entitled ‘The impact of Advanced Access’, as part of an Intercalated BSc degree, at a practice involved in the National Primary Care Collaborative who were implementing Advanced Access in January 2003. We interviewed patients and staff to investigate whether their opinions of appointment systems, job satisfaction and workload had changed.

Advanced Access ensured patients had better access to their own GP and many enjoyed not having to wait 3 weeks for an appointment, especially those employed full time. However this was at the expense of elderly, more chronically ill patients, who were unable to successfully navigate the telephone system and tended to forget to make their follow-up appointments. We were unsure as to whether access to care was still in equilibrium with continuity of care.

Advanced Access has the motto ‘doing today's work today’.1 According to the GPs, this meant that you were dealing with an unlimited demand, especially because patients presented earlier in their illness. This demand probably exceeded the primary care capacity, hence the need for the nurse practitioner to be deployed to doctor-type duties to increase the number of available appointments, and thus changing her role.

Advanced Access was seen to reduce job satisfaction, especially among the receptionists, as they had lost their, in the broadest terms, ‘gate-keeping’ role.2 They used to decide who should reach the doctor or the nurse, but now they just gave out appointments.

Finally, it seemed that Advanced Access may even affect the recruitment and retention of GPs. It no longer allowed GPs to control their availability and work around family and childcare commitments, as they would have to work with an open-ended commitment when demand was high. Meanwhile, training seemed problematic, with registrars seeing more minor illness and less clinical variety, as when patients could see the GP of their choice, they rarely offered to see the registrar.

GPs may welcome the new initiatives to improve patient access to primary care,3 but perhaps in reality this is in the form of a mixed system of same-day and bookable appointments.4,5 This way, patients are satisfied by access to care that is in equilibrium with continuity of care, and GPs are still in control of their workload, with no changes to the roles of staff.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, 2004.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Oldham J
    (2001) Advanced Access in primary care (National Primary Care Development Team, Manchester) http://www.npdt.org/1626/advancedaccess.pdf (accessed 7 July 2004).
  2. ↵
    1. Arber S,
    2. Sawyer L
    (1985) The role of the receptionist in general practice: a ‘dragon behind the desk’? Soc Sci Med 20(9):911–921.
  3. ↵
    1. Pickin M,
    2. O'Cathain A,
    3. Sampson FC,
    4. Dixon S
    (2004) Evaluation of Advanced Access in the National Primary Care Collaborative. Br J Gen Pract 54:334–340.
  4. ↵
    1. Windridge K,
    2. Tarrant C,
    3. Freeman GK,
    4. et al.
    (2004) Problems with a ‘target’ approach to access in primary care: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 54:364–366.
  5. ↵
    1. Pascoe SW,
    2. Neal RD,
    3. Allgar VL
    (2004) Open-access versus bookable appointment systems: survey of patients attending appointments with general practitioners. Br J Gen Pract 54:367–369.
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 54 (505)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 54, Issue 505
August 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Impact of Advanced Access
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Impact of Advanced Access
Sheryl White, Melvyn Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2004; 54 (505): 622.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Impact of Advanced Access
Sheryl White, Melvyn Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2004; 54 (505): 622.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • References
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • It’s time to look again at GP funding
  • Inequalities in CKD management can be overcome
  • Changes in patient experience associated with growth and collaboration in general practice
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2021 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242