Skip to main content
The British Journal of General Practice logoLink to The British Journal of General Practice
. 1999 Feb;49(439):107–110.

Primary care units in A&E departments in North Thames in the 1990s: initial experience and future implications.

G K Freeman 1, R P Meakin 1, R A Lawrenson 1, G M Leydon 1, G Craig 1
PMCID: PMC1313343  PMID: 10326261

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 1992, the Tomlinson Report recommended a shift from secondary to primary care, including specific primary care provision in accident and emergency (A&E) departments. Availability of short-term so-called Tomlinson moneys allowed a number of experimental services. A study of the experience of A&E-based staff is reported to assist general practitioners (GPs) and purchasers and identify areas for further research. AIMS: To find the number and scope of primary care facilities in A&E services in North Thames; to find factors encouraging or inhibiting the setting-up of a successful service; to examine the views of a range of A&E staff including GPs, consultants, and nurses; and to suggest directions for more specific research. METHOD: A postal questionnaire was sent to all North Thames A&E departments, and an interview study of staff in one unit was arranged, leading to a questionnaire study of all GPs employed in North Thames primary care services in A&E. This was followed by interviews of staff members in five contrasting primary care units in A&E. RESULTS: By mid-1995, at least 16 of the 33 North Thames A&E departments ran a primary care service. Seven mainly employed GPs, the others employed nurse practitioners (NPs). Problems for GPs included unclear role definition and their non-availability at times of highest patient demand. GPs' reasons for working in A&E sometimes differed from the aims of primary care in an A&E service. Staff interviews revealed differing views about their role and about use of triage protocols. Ethnicity data were being collected, but not yet being used, to improve service to patients. CONCLUSIONS: A number of benefits follow the introduction of primary care practitioners into A&E. Different models have evolved, with a variety of GP and NP staffing arrangements according to local ideas and priorities. There is some confusion over whether these services aim to improve A&E-based care or to divert it to general practice. Cost information is inadequate so far, though the use of GPs has shown the possibility of economy. Appropriate location of services requires clearer identification of costs. This may be possible for the proposed primary care groups.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (45.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Dale J., Lang H., Roberts J. A., Green J., Glucksman E. Cost effectiveness of treating primary care patients in accident and emergency: a comparison between general practitioners, senior house officers, and registrars. BMJ. 1996 May 25;312(7042):1340–1344. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7042.1340. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. FRY L. Casualties and casuals. Lancet. 1960 Jan 16;1(7116):163–166. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(60)90073-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Freeman G., Hjortdahl P. What future for continuity of care in general practice? BMJ. 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1870–1873. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Lawrenson R., Leydon G., Freeman G., Fuller J., Ballard J., Ineichen B. Are we providing for ethnic diversity in accident & emergency (A&E) departments? Ethn Health. 1998 Feb-May;3(1-2):117–123. doi: 10.1080/13557858.1998.9961853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Leydon G. M., Lawrenson R., Meakin R., Roberts J. A. The cost of alternative models of care for primary care patients attending accident and emergency departments: a systematic review. J Accid Emerg Med. 1998 Mar;15(2):77–83. doi: 10.1136/emj.15.2.77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Murphy A. W., Bury G., Plunkett P. K., Gibney D., Smith M., Mullan E., Johnson Z. Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner versus usual medical care in an urban accident and emergency department: process, outcome, and comparative cost. BMJ. 1996 May 4;312(7039):1135–1142. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7039.1135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Robertson-Steel I. R. Providing primary care in the accident and emergency department. BMJ. 1998 Feb 7;316(7129):409–410. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7129.409. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ward P., Huddy J., Hargreaves S., Touquet R., Hurley J., Fothergill J. Primary care in London: an evaluation of general practitioners working in an inner city accident and emergency department. J Accid Emerg Med. 1996 Jan;13(1):11–15. doi: 10.1136/emj.13.1.11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners

RESOURCES