Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 22, Issue 12, pp 1641–1647 | Cite as

Primary Care Visit Length, Quality, and Satisfaction for Standardized Patients with Depression

  • Estella M. Geraghty
  • Peter Franks
  • Richard L. Kravitz
original Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The contribution of physician and organizational factors to visit length, quality, and satisfaction remains uncertain, in part, because of confounding by patient presentation.

OBJECTIVE

To determine associations among visit length, quality, and satisfaction when patient presentation is controlled.

DESIGN

A factorial experiment using standardized patients to make primary care visits presenting with either major depression or adjustment disorder, and a musculoskeletal complaint.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred fifty-two primary care physicians, each seeing 2 standardized patients.

MEASUREMENTS

Visit length was determined from surreptitiously obtained audiorecordings. Other key measures were derived from physician and standardized patient report.

RESULTS

Mean visit length for 294 completed encounters was 22.3 minutes (range = 5.8–72.2, SD = 9.4). Key factors associated with visit length were: physician style (ρ = 0.68 and 0.54 after multivariate adjustment), nonprofessional experience with depression (11% longer, 95% CI = 0–23%), practicing within an HMO (26% shorter, 95% CI = 61–90%), and greater practice volume (those working >9 half-day clinic sessions/week had 15% shorter visits than those working fewer than 6, 95% CI = 0–27%, and those seeing >12 patients/half-day had 27% shorter visits than those seeing <10 patients/half-day, 95% CI = 13–39%). Suicidal inquiry (a process-based quality-of-care measure for depression) was not associated with adjusted visit length. Satisfaction was linearly associated with visit length but not with suicide inquiry or follow-up interval.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite experimental control for clinical presentation, wide variation in visit length persists, largely reflecting individual physician styles. Visit length is a significant determinant of standardized patient satisfaction.

KEY WORDS

visit length quality satisfaction primary care standardized patient 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by a training award to Dr. Geraghty (Health Resources Services Administration grant no. D55 HP00232) and by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01-MH064683 and K24-MH072756) to Dr. Kravitz.

Conflict of interest

The sponsors played no role in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data. All of the authors had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The authors have no other financial interests, disclosures, or conflicts of interest to report.

References

  1. 1.
    Mechanic D, McAlpine DD, Rosenthal M. Are patients’ office visits with physicians getting shorter? N Engl J Med. 2001;344:198–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heany D, Howie J, Porter A. Factors influencing waiting times and consultation times in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1991;41:315–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Gandek B, Rogers WH, Ware JE. Characteristics of physicians with participatory decision-making styles. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:497–504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hulka BS, Romm FJ, Parkerson GR Jr, Russell IT, Clapp NE, Johnson, FS. Peer review in ambulatory care: use of explicit criteria and implicit judgments. Med Care. 1979;17 (3 Suppl):i–vi, 1–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hartzema A, Christensen D. Non-medical factors associated with the prescribing volume among family practitioners in an HMO. Med Care. 1983;21:990–1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andersson S, Mattsson B. Features of a good consultation in general practice: is time important? Scand J Prim Health Care. 1994;12:227–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deveugele M, Derese A, van den Brink-Muinen A, Bensing J, De Maeseneer J. Consultation length in general practice: cross sectional study in six European countries. BMJ. 2002;325:472–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilson MA, Childs S. The relationship between consultation length, process and outcomes in general practice: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2002;52:1012–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Franks P, Bertakis KD. Physician gender, patient gender, and primary care. J Womens Health. 2003;12(1):73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper L, Roter D, Johnson R, Ford D, Steinwachs D, Powe N. Patient-centered communication, ratings of care, and concordance of patient and physician race. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(11):907–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Radecki SE, Kane RL, Solomon DH, Mendenhall RC, Beck JC. Do physicians spend less time with older patients? J Am Geriatr Soc. 1988;36:713–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Balkrishnan R, Hall MA, Mehrabi D, Chen GJ, Feldman SR, Fleischer AB. Capitation payment, length of visit, and preventive services: evidence from a national sample of outpatient visits. Am J Manag Care. 2002;8(4):332–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Howie J, Porter A, Heany D, Hopton J. Long to short consultation ratio: a proxy measure of quality of care in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1991;41:48–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gross D, Zyzanski S, Borawski E, Cebul R, Stange K. Patient satisfaction with time spent with their physician. J Fam Pract. 1998;47:133–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hull F, Hull F. Time and the general practitioner: the patient’s view. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1984;34:71–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson R, Barbara A, Feldman S. What patients want: A content analysis of key qualities that influence patient satisfaction. J Med Pract Manage. 2007;22(5):255–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Otani K, Krurz RS, Harris LE. Managing primary care using patient satisfaction measures. J Healthc Manag. 2005;50(5):311–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Safran D, Taira D, Rogers W, Kosinski M, Ware J, Tarlov A. Linking primary care performance to outcomes of care. J Fam Pract. 1998;47:213–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fiscella K, Franks P, Srinivasan M, Kravitz RL, Epstein R. Ratings of physician communication by real and standardized patients. Ann Fam Med. 2007;5:151–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schulberg HC, Bruce ML, Lee PW, Williams JW, Dietrich AJ. Preventing suicide in primary care patients: the primary care physician’s role. Gen Hosp Psych. 2004;26:337–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williams J, Noel P, Cordes J, Ramirez G, Pignone M. Is this patient clinically depressed? JAMA. 2002;287:1160–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wells KB, Schoenbaum M, Unutzer J, Lagomasino IT, Rubenstein LV. Quality of care for primary care patients with depression in managed care. Arch Fam Med. 1999;8:529–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kravitz RL, Epstein RM, Feldman MD, et al. Influence of patients’ requests for direct-to-consumer advertised antidepressants: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;293:1995–2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meredith LS, Rubenstein LV, Rost K, et al. Treating depression in staff-model versus network-model managed care organizations. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:39–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1986.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Funder D. Toward a social psychology of person judgments: implications for person perception accuracy and self-knowledge. In: Williams K, ed. Social Judgments: Implicit and Explicit Processes. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003:115–33.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Snow V, Lascher S, Mottur-Pilson C. Pharmacologic treatment of acute major depression and dysthymia. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132(9):738–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stettin GD, Yao J, Verbrugge RR, Aubert RE. Frequency of follow-up care for adult and pediatric patients during initiation of antidepressant therapy. Am J Manag Care. 2006;12:453–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schulberg HC, Katon W, Simon GE, Rush AJ. An update of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Practice Guidelines. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55:1121–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Snijders T, Bosker R. Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Multilevel Modeling. London: Sage; 1999.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Davidoff F. Time. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:483–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weissman JS, Blumenthal D, Silk AJ, et al. Physicians report on patient encounters involving direct-to-consumer advertising: doctors see both the positive and some negative effects on their patients and practices. Health Aff. 2004;W4:219–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Estella M. Geraghty
    • 1
  • Peter Franks
    • 2
  • Richard L. Kravitz
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal MedicineUC DavisSacramentoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Family and Community Medicine and Center for Healthcare Policy and ResearchUC DavisSacramentoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Internal Medicine and Center for Healthcare Policy and ResearchUC DavisSacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations