MJA
MJA

Determinants of consultation length in Australian general practice

Med J Aust 2005; 183 (2): 68-71.

Summary

Objective: To measure the independent effect on length of general-practice consultations of a range of characteristics of the general practitioner (GP), practice, patient and consultation, as a basis for considering future GP workforce needs.

Design: Secondary analysis of data from the BEACH (Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health) study.

Setting and participants: Data were obtained from 1904 GPs Australia-wide on 70 758 consultations between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2002; all consultations that were claimable from the Australian Government’s Medicare system as General Practice Attendances and had recorded start and finish times were included.

Main outcome variables: Characteristics of the GP, practice, patient and consultation that were significantly related to consultation length, determined by multiple regression analysis.

Results: The following variables had an independent positive effect on consultation length: GP female, older, graduated in Australia, FRACGP-qualified, and in rural practice; patient female, older, new to practice, with higher socioeconomic status, no health concession card, more reasons for encounter, and more problems managed; and management of specific problem types (social, psychological and female genital problems), management of chronic disease, and provision of clinical treatments.

Conclusion: The independent relationship of some GP, practice, patient and consultation characteristics with length of consultation may affect future GP supply. These factors should be considered in modelling future general practice workforce needs.

  • Helena C Britt1
  • Lisa Valenti2
  • Graeme C Miller3

  • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare General Practice Statistics and Classification Unit, University of Sydney, Westmead, NSW.

Correspondence: 

Acknowledgements: 

We thank the general practitioners who participated, and the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing; Astra Zeneca (Australia), Aventis Pharma, Roche Products, Janssen–Cilag and Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) for funding the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program in 2001–2002.

Competing interests:

None identified.

  • 1. Britt H, Miller GC, Knox S, et al. General practice activity in the states and territories of Australia 1998–2003. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2004. (General Practice Series No. 15.)
  • 2. Australian Medical Workforce Advisory Committee. The general practice workforce in Australia. Supply and requirements 1999–2010. AMWAC Report 2000.2. Sydney: AMWAC, 2000.
  • 3. Access Economics. An analysis of the widening gap between community need and the availability of GP services. A report to the Australian Medical Association. Canberra: AMA, 2002.
  • 4. Charles J, Britt H, Valenti L. The evolution of the general practice workforce in Australia, 1991–2003. Med J Aust 2004; 181: 85-90. <MJA full text>
  • 5. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian social trends 2002. Canberra: ABS, 2002. (Cat. No. 4102.0.)
  • 6. Mathers C, Vos T, Stevenson C. The burden of disease and injury in Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 1999.
  • 7. Britt H, Valenti L, Miller G. Time for care. Length of general practice consultations in Australia. Aust Fam Physician 2002; 31: 876-880.
  • 8. Deveugele M, Derese A, van den Brink-Muinen A, et al. Consultation length in general practice: cross sectional study in six European countries. BMJ 2002; 325: 472-478.
  • 9. Voo YO. Consultation length and case mix in a general practice clinic. Singapore Med J 1999; 40: 13-17.
  • 10. Martin CM, Attewell RG, Nisa M, et al. Characteristics of longer consultations in Australian general practice. Med J Aust 1997; 167: 76-79.
  • 11. Campbell JL, Ramsay J, Green G. Practice size: impact on consultation length, workload, and patient assessment of care. Br J Gen Pract 2001; 51: 644–650.
  • 12. Britt H, Bhasale A, Miles DA, et al. The sex of the general practitioner: a comparison of characteristics, patients, and medical conditions managed. Med Care 1996; 34: 403-415.
  • 13. Britt H, Miller GC, Knox S, et al. General practice activity in Australia 2003–04. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2004. (General Practice Series No. 16.)
  • 14. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Medicare benefits schedule book. Canberra: the Department, 2004.
  • 15. Classification Committee of the World Organization of Family Doctors. ICPC-2: international classification of primary care. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
  • 16. O’Halloran J, Miller GC, Britt H. Defining chronic conditions for primary care with ICPC-2. Fam Pract 2004; 21: 381-386.
  • 17. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 census of population and housing: socio-economic indexes for areas. Canberra: ABS, 1998. (Cat. No. 2039.0.)
  • 18. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE, Nizam A. Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. 3rd ed. Pacific Grove, Calif: Duxbury Press, 1998.
  • 19. Australian Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Department of Human Services and Health. Rural, Remote and Metropolitan Areas (RRMA) Classification. Canberra: DPIE, DHSH, 1994.
  • 20. Britt H, Miller G, Sayer G, Sedgwick D. Comparison of practice patterns using Health Insurance Commission data for GPs who have completed the RACGP Training Program and those who have not. Melbourne: Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, 1999.
  • 21. Britt H, Valenti L, Miller GC, Farmer J. Determinants of GP billing in Australia: content and time. Med J Aust 2004; 181: 100-104.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article