Covariate | Entry access | Timeliness of care | Confidence and trust | Overall experience | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient (95% CI) | p Value | Coefficient (95% CI) | p Value | Coefficient (95% CI) | p Value | Coefficient (95% CI) | p Value | |
Call answer time | 0.13 (0.06 to 0.21) | 0.001 | 0.09 (0.03 to 0.15) | 0.006 | 0.00 (−0.06 to 0.05) | 0.945 | 0.01 (−0.05 to 0.07) | 0.808 |
Helpfulness of operator | 0.14 (0.04 to 0.24) | 0.008 | 0.06 (−0.03 to 0.15) | 0.204 | 0.04 (−0.04 to 0.12) | 0.345 | 0.12 (0.04 to 0.20) | 0.003 |
How operator listened | 0.15 (0.05 to 0.25) | 0.003 | 0.05 (−0.04 to 0.14) | 0.268 | 0.00 (−0.08 to 0.09) | 0.954 | 0.07 (−0.01 to 0.15) | 0.068 |
Health professional call back time* | 0.09 (0.03 to 0.16) | 0.007 | 0.45 (0.39 to 0.52) | <0.001 | 0.05 (−0.02 to 0.11) | 0.140 | 0.13 (0.08 to 0.19) | <0.001 |
Very poor/poor | Reference group | Reference group | Reference group | Reference group | ||||
Acceptable | 0.16 (−0.02 to 0.34) | 0.089 | 0.70 (0.54 to 0.86) | <0.001 | 0.07 (−0.09 to 0.23) | 0.376 | 0.38 (0.24 to 0.52) | <0.001 |
Good | 0.34 (0.15 to 0.53) | 0.001 | 1.05 (0.87 to 1.22) | <0.001 | 0.18 (0.02 to 0.35) | 0.030 | 0.51 (0.37 to 0.66) | <0.001 |
Excellent | 0.35 (0.14, 0.56) | 0.001 | 1.41 (1.22 to 1.60) | <0.001 | 0.10 (−0.08 to 0.29) | 0.271 | 0.48 (0.31 to 0.64) | <0.001 |
Not applicable | 0.29 (0.07 to 0.52) | 0.011 | 0.98 (0.79 to 1.17) | <0.001 | −0.04 (−0.23 to 0.15) | 0.706 | 0.35 (0.17 to 0.53) | <0.001 |
Happy with treatment option | ||||||||
Yes | Reference group | Reference group | Reference group | Reference group | ||||
No | −0.21 (−0.39 to −0.02) | 0.030 | −0.32 (−0.49 to −0.15) | <0.001 | −0.58 (−0.73 to −0.44) | <0.001 | −0.70 (−0.83 to −0.56) | <0.001 |
Consultation satisfaction | 0.05 (−0.01 to 0.12) | 0.105 | 0.06 (0.01 to 0.12) | 0.025 | 0.56 (0.51 to 0.61) | <0.001 | 0.43 (0.38 to 0.47) | <0.001 |
*Sensitivity analyses excluded the ‘not applicable’ category and entered this covariate as an ordinal variable to assess the global effect on each outcome, which is reported above the effects of the separate dummy variables. Models controlled for participants’ age, gender, deprivation quintile (IMD), ethnicity (white, other ethnic group) and management option received (telephone advice, treatment centre, home visit/other), as well as the type of provider contacted (NHS, commercial, social enterprise), and were clustered by provider (n=6). The GPPS items (dependent variables) were standardised so that regression coefficients are comparable across models. For all models, n=1396.
GPPS, General Practice Patient Survey; OPQ, Out-of-hours Patient Questionnaire; IMD, Index of Multiple Deprivation.