Abstract
Background Patient non-attendance remains a major challenge for health services. Few studies have examined how health service providers think about, potentially address, and prioritise non-attendance within the scope of their practice. This study aimed to (1) explore healthcare professionals’ perspectives, beliefs, and opinions about the impact of patient non-attendance within a publicly-funded outpatient physiotherapy clinic context; (2) explore perceived barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of non-attendance mitigation strategies; and (3) identify health service staff generated solutions to address perceived barriers and enhance facilitators.
Methods A focus group discussion and semi-structured interviews were conducted between June 2023 to January 2024 with 27 physiotherapy department clinic outpatient staff involved in operationalising clinic referral processing, appointment scheduling, or providing care to patients. Data was analysed using a hybrid inductive/deductive framework analysis approach.
Results Participants indicated that non-attendance had predominantly negative implications for the health service, healthcare provider, and patient. The interconnected issue of non-attendance encompassed multiple areas and were broadly categorised into five inductively identified themes: impact of non-attendance, perceptions of value, material deprivation, service delivery and built environment, and professional role and identity. Non-attendance mitigation strategies generated by participants were deductively mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to explore behavioural determinants that may influence successful implementation. This included knowledge, reinforcement, goals, optimism, memory, attention and decision-making, environmental resources and context, and emotions.
Conclusions Staff identified multiple strategies for reducing non-attendance; implementing many of these strategies would require additional resourcing. Research determining the effectiveness of such strategies both in the short-term and long-term following implementation into practice remains a priority for future investigation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study received ethical approval from the Metro South Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/2021/QMS/81605) and written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset (which includes individual transcripts) is not publicly available due to confidentiality policies.
