首页> 外文OA文献 >Reasons for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic versus a regular general practitioner - a survey among immigrant and native walk-in patients in Oslo, Norway
【2h】

Reasons for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic versus a regular general practitioner - a survey among immigrant and native walk-in patients in Oslo, Norway

机译:参加普通急诊门诊与普通全科医生的原因 - 挪威奥斯陆的移民和本地门诊病人调查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: To explore reasons for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic versus a regular general practitioner (RGP).Design: Cross-sectional study using a multilingual anonymous questionnaire.Setting: Native and immigrant walk-in patients attending a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo (Monday–Friday, 08:00–23:00) during 2 weeks in September 2009.Subjects: We included 1022 walk-in patients: 565 native Norwegians (55%) and 457 immigrants (45%).Main outcome measures: Patients’ reasons for attending an emergency outpatient clinic versus their RGP.Results: Among patients reporting an RGP affiliation, 49% tried to contact their RGP before this emergency encounter: 44% of native Norwegian and 58% of immigrant respondents. Immigrants from Africa [odds ratio (OR) = 2.55 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46–4.46)] and Asia [OR = 2.32 (95% CI: 1.42–3.78)] were more likely to contact their RGP before attending the general emergency outpatient clinic compared with native Norwegians. The most frequent reason for attending the emergency clinic was difficulty making an immediate appointment with their RGP. A frequent reason for not contacting an RGP was lack of access: 21% of the native Norwegians versus 4% of the immigrants claimed their RGP was in another district/municipality, and 31% of the immigrants reported a lack of affiliation with the RGP scheme.Conclusions and implications: Access to primary care provided by an RGP affects patients’ use of emergency health care services. To facilitate continuity of health care, policymakers should emphasize initiatives to improve access to primary health care services.
机译:目的:探讨与普通全科医生(RGP)相比在普通急诊门诊就诊的原因设计:使用多语言匿名问卷调查进行横断面研究环境:在奥斯陆普通急诊门诊就诊的本地和外来临时患者在2009年9月的2周内(周一至周五,08:00至23:00)。研究对象:我们纳入了1022名门诊患者:565名挪威本地人(55%)和457名移民(45%)。主要结局指标:患者结果:在报告有RGP隶属关系的患者中,有49%试图在此紧急情况之前联系他们的RGP:44%的挪威本地人和58%的移民回覆者。来自非洲的移民[优势比(OR)= 2.55(95%置信区间[CI]:1.46-4.46)]和亚洲的移民[OR = 2.32(95%CI:1.42-3.78)]在参加之前更可能联系他们的RGP普通急诊门诊与挪威本地人相比。前往急诊室的最常见原因是难以立即预约他们的RGP。不与RGP联系的常见原因是无法获得RGP:21%的挪威原住民与4%的移民声称他们的RGP在另一个地区/市镇,而31%的移民报告称与RGP计划缺乏联系结论和影响:RGP提供的初级保健会影响患者对紧急医疗服务的使用。为了促进卫生保健的连续性,政策制定者应强调旨在改善获得初级卫生保健服务的机会的举措。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号