Journal of Medical Internet Research (Jul 2024)

The Use of Online Consultation Systems and Patient Experience of Primary Care: Cross-Sectional Analysis Using the General Practice Patient Survey

  • Xiaochen Ge,
  • Paul Chappell,
  • Jean Ledger,
  • Minal Bakhai,
  • Geraldine M Clarke

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2196/51272
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 26
p. e51272

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundNHS England encourages the use of online consultation (OC) systems alongside traditional access methods for patients to contact their general practice online and for practices to manage workflow. Access is a key driver of patients’ primary care experience. The use of online technology and patient experience vary by sociodemographic characteristics. ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the association between OC system use and patient experience of primary care in English general practice and how that varies by OC system model and practice sociodemographic characteristics (rurality, deprivation, age, and ethnicity). MethodsWe categorized practices as “low-use” or “high-use” according to the volume of patient-initiated contacts made via the OC system. We considered practices using one of 2 OC systems with distinct designs and implementation models—shorter “free text” input with an embedded single workflow OC system (FT practices) and longer “mixed text” input with variation in implemented workflow OC system (MT practices). We used 2022 General Practice Patient Survey data to capture 4 dimensions of patient experience—overall experience, experience of making an appointment, continuity of care, and use of self-care before making an appointment. We used logistic regression at the practice level to explore the association between OC system use and patient experience, including interaction terms to assess sociodemographic variation. ResultsWe included 287,194 responses from 2423 MT and 170 FT practices. The proportions of patients reporting positive experiences at MT and FT practices were similar or better than practices nationally, except at high-use MT practices. At high-use MT practices, patients were 19.8% (odds ratio [OR] 0.802, 95% CI 0.782-0.823) less likely to report a good overall experience; 24.5% (OR 0.755, 95% CI 0.738-0.773) less likely to report a good experience of making an appointment; and 18.9% (OR 0.811, 95% CI 0.792-0.83) less likely to see their preferred general practitioner; but 27.8% (OR 1.278, 95% CI 1.249-1.308) more likely to use self-care, compared with low-use MT practices. Opposite trends were seen at FT practices. Sociodemographic inequalities in patient experience were generally lower at high-use than low-use practices; for example, gaps in overall experience between practices with the most and fewest White patients decreased by 2.7 percentage points at MT practices and 6.4 percentage points at FT practices. Trends suggested greater improvements in experience for traditionally underserved groups—patients from urban and deprived areas, younger patients, and non-White patients. ConclusionsAn OC system with shorter free text input and an integrated single workflow can enhance patient experience and reduce sociodemographic inequalities. Variation in patient experience between practices with different sociodemographic characteristics and OC systems underscores the importance of tailored design and implementation. Generalizing results across different OC systems is difficult due to variations in how they are integrated into practice workflows and communicated to patients.