Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Felicity Thompson a Health Care
Research Unit, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, b Academic Department of Primary Medical Care, Aldemoor Health
Centre, Southampton SO9 5NH, c University
Department of Medical Statistics, Southampton General Hospital, d School of
Postgraduate Medicine, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6
3LY, e School of Nursing, Southampton SO17 1BJ
Correspondence to: Dr George pluto{at}soton.ac.uk
We recently published the results of a randomised
controlled trial of a nurse telephone consultation service in primary
care out of hours.1 The new service, operating at evenings
and weekends, significantly reduced general practitioners' workload
and was at least as safe as the existing out of hours service. Contacts diminish sharply after about 10 pm,2 and, anecdotally, a
higher proportion of night calls necessitate consultation with a
general practitioner. We report here a parallel trial aimed at
establishing whether nurse telephone consultation was equally effective
in managing workload at night.
This study was an adjunct to a randomised controlled trial
in a 55 member general practice cooperative serving 97 000 patients in
Wiltshire. The design has been described.1 The night nurse telephone consultation service ran over two two-week periods (15-28 October 1997 and 12-25 November 1997) from 11.15 pm until 8 am. Outcome
measures were as used in the main trial with one addition: the number
of patients attending daytime surgery within three days of a
call.1 One of us (FT) visited each surgery to extract details of attendances from patient records.
![]()
Subjects, methods, and results
Top
Subjects, methods, and results
Comment
References
In the main study 49.8% of calls were handled by the nurse alone.
Specifying
=0.1 (0.05 in a one sided calculation) and
=0.2, we
calculated that the night nurse service would need to receive 78 calls
to establish equivalence with this figure, with equivalence limits
being 40% and 60%.3 A one sided calculation was used as
we were interested to establish only whether the night nurse intervention produced worse results (lower numbers of calls handled without referral to a doctor) than the evening and weekend service. For
other within-trial outcomes, results are presented as relative risks
with 95% confidence intervals, calculated with EpiInfo. This trial was
not powered to show within-trial equivalence in numbers of adverse events.
During the study 210 callers made 223 calls, 123 in the control group and 100 in the nurse telephone consultation (intervention) group. Follow up was 94% complete: 12 sets of patient records (6%) could not be found, seven in the control group and five in the intervention group. The median age (range) of patients was 34.0 ( 0.01-97.2) years in the control group and 32.5 (0.49-97.0) years in the intervention group. Fifty three patients (43%) in the control group and 44 (44%) in the intervention group were male.
The table shows details of call management and outcome. Altogether 59%
of calls (95% confidence interval 48.7% to 68.7%) were handled by
the nurse alone. As we were interested only in whether the nurse
service handled fewer calls at night, this can be interpreted as
showing equivalence with the proportion observed in the main trial. The
proportions of calls in which callers received advice from a general
practitioner and calls ending in a home visit showed clear reductions,
with 95% confidence intervals not embracing 1. A lower proportion of
calls resulted in a daytime surgery attendance in the intervention arm,
although the 95% confidence interval embraced 1. Other differences had
wide confidence intervals.
| |
Comment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This study shows that nurses on the telephone can manage as
high a proportion of primary care calls at night as during evenings and
weekends, and without more patients attending daytime surgery within
the next three days. Over the same period as this study, however, the
evening and weekend service received 994 calls
over four times as many
as at night, and in fewer hours. A nurse telephone consultation service
at cooperative level might therefore be uneconomic at night. In that
case the economies of scale offered by larger groups of practices, or
by NHS Direct, may be beneficial.4
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the Royal College of Nursing for its support, and Dr Jeremy Dale and Mr Robert Crouch, of King's College Hospital, London, and Mr Mike Bennett, of Plain Software, for their help.
Contributors: SG, VL, HS, ET, and EAG initiated the study and obtained funding. M Moore and FT facilitated the piloting; VL, FT, M Moore, and HB were responsible for running the service. Data collection was done by VL, FT, and JT and data analysis by FT, JT, M Mullee and SG. All authors participated in the discussion about and interpretation of the results. FT and SG wrote the paper, with comments from all authors. SG is the guarantor.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: British Telecom and the South and West regional office of the NHS Executive funded this work.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Lattimer V, George S, Thompson F, Thomas E, Mullee M, Turnbull J, et al.
Safety and effectiveness of nurse telephone consultation in out-of-hours primary care: randomised controlled trial.
BMJ
1998;
317:
1054-1059 |
| 2. |
Brogan C, Pickard D, Gray A, Fairman S, Hill A.
The use of out of hours health services: a cross sectional survey.
BMJ
1998;
316:
524-527 |
| 3. |
Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, Ebbutt AF.
Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods.
BMJ
1996;
313:
36-39 |
| 4. | College of Health. Developing NHS Direct. London: CoH, 1998. |
(Accepted 29 July 1999)