RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Characteristics of Walk-In Clinic Physicians and Patients in Ontario, Canada: A Cross-Sectional Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.01.16.24301360
DO 10.1101/2024.01.16.24301360
A1 Lapointe-Shaw, Lauren
A1 Salahub, Christine
A1 Austin, Peter C.
A1 Bai, Li
A1 Banwatt, Sundeep
A1 Berthelot, Simon
A1 Bhatia, R. Sacha
A1 Bird, Cherryl
A1 Desveaux, Laura
A1 Kiran, Tara
A1 Lofters, Aisha
A1 Maclure, Malcolm
A1 Martin, Danielle
A1 McBrien, Kerry A.
A1 McCracken, Rita K.
A1 Paterson, J. Michael
A1 Rahman, Bahram
A1 Shuldiner, Jennifer
A1 Tadrous, Mina
A1 Terpou, Braeden A.
A1 Thakkar, Niels
A1 Wang, Ruoxi
A1 Ivers, Noah M.
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/17/2024.01.16.24301360.abstract
AB Objective We aimed to describe family physicians who primarily practice in a walk-in clinic setting and compare them to family physicians who provide longitudinal care.Design A cross-sectional study that linked results from an annual physician survey (2019) to administrative healthcare data from Ontario, Canada. We compared the characteristics, practice patterns, and patients of physicians primarily working in a walk-in clinic setting, with family physicians providing longitudinal care.Setting Ontario, Canada.Participants Physicians who primarily worked in a walk-in clinic setting in 2019, as indicated by an annual physician survey.Exposure Whether the physician was a walk-in clinic physician or a family physician who provided longitudinal care.Main Measures Physician demographic and practice characteristics, as well as their patients’ demographic and healthcare utilization characteristics.Results Compared to the 9,137 family physicians practicing longitudinal care, the 597 physicians who self-identified as practicing primarily in walk-in clinics were more frequently male (67% vs. 49%) and could speak a language other than English or French (43% vs. 32%). Walk-in clinic physicians had more encounters with patients who were younger (M 37 vs. 47 years), had lower levels of prior healthcare utilization (15% vs. 19% in highest band), who resided in large urban areas (87% vs. 77%), and in highly ethnically diverse neighborhoods (45% vs. 35%). Walk-in clinic physicians had more encounters with unattached patients (32% vs. 17%) and with patients attached to another physician outside their group (54% vs. 18%).Conclusion Physicians who primarily work in walk-in clinics saw many patients from historically underserved groups, and many patients who were attached to another family physician.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was supported by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Ministry of Long-Term Care. This study also received funding from a Canadian Institutes of Health Research project grant awarded to L. Lapointe-Shaw and N.M. Ivers (grant #175285).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Women's College Hospital Research Ethics Board (REB 2020-0095-E) with a waiver of patient consent.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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe dataset from this study is held securely in coded form at ICES. While legal data sharing agreements between ICES and data providers (e.g., healthcare organizations and government) prohibit ICES from making the dataset publicly available, access may be granted to those who meet pre-specified criteria for confidential access, available at www.ices.on.ca/DAS (email: das{at}ices.on.ca). The full dataset creation plan and underlying analytic code are available from the authors upon request, understanding that the computer programs may rely upon coding templates or macros that are unique to ICES and are therefore either inaccessible or may require modification.