Public Health
Volume 123, Issue 7 , Pages 506-510, July 2009

Repeat attenders at National Health Service walk-in centres – a descriptive study using routine data

  • R. Maheswaran

      Affiliations

    • Public Health GIS Unit, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 114 2220681; fax: +44 114 2220791.
  • ,
  • T. Pearson

      Affiliations

    • Public Health GIS Unit, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK
  • ,
  • M. Jiwa

      Affiliations

    • School of Pharmacy, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia

Received 12 November 2008; received in revised form 14 April 2009; accepted 15 June 2009. published online 15 July 2009.

Summary 

Objectives

Whilst numerous studies have examined repeat attendance at general practices or emergency departments, little is known about repeat attenders at walk-in centres. The aim of this study was to examine age, gender, socio-economic status, distance from walk-in centre, day and time of attendance in relation to repeat attendance at walk-in centres.

Study design

Descriptive study using routine data from four walk-in centres in England, two of which were located in London and were accessible to local and commuter populations.

Methods

Data for 2 years (2003–2004) were examined. Age, gender, day and time of attendance were obtained from administrative records. Distance was calculated from the census output area of residence to walk-in centre attended. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (Income Domain) was used as an indicator of socio-economic deprivation at the small-area level.

Results

Thirty-nine percent of 272,701 attendances by 166,486 patients were repeat attendances. Seventy percent of patients attended once, 27.9% attended two to five times, and 2.2% attended on over five occasions over the 2-year study period. Patients attending the two London walk-in centres lived closer than those attending the two walk-in centres outside London (percentage living 6km or more from walk-in centre: 9% and 12% compared with 18% and 22%). The London walk-in centres had a higher percentage of single attenders (74.1% and 78%) compared with the other two walk-in centres (63.3% and 64.7%). Repeat attenders lived closer to walk-in centres than single attenders. Adjusted odds ratios for patients living within 3km of the walk-in centre relative to patients living 6km or more from the walk-in centre ranged from 1.59 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42–1.78] to 3.34 (95% CI 3.12–3.57) for patients attending two to five times, and from 2.37 (95% CI 1.36–4.11) to 14.99 (95% CI 11.30–19.88) for patients with over five attendances. There was substantial variation with significant contrasting patterns in odds ratios across walk-in centres in relation to the other variables. Repeat attenders were older than single attenders at three of the four walk-in centres. Repeat attenders tended to be more likely to be male at two walk-in centres, and less likely to be male at the other two walk-in centres. Socio-economic deprivation tended to be associated with repeat attendance at one of the walk-in centres. There were also significant and contrasting patterns in relation to day and, to a lesser extent, time of attendance.

Conclusions

Users living near walk-in centres are more likely to be repeat attenders. Age, gender, socio-economic deprivation, day and time of attendance had significantly higher or lower odds ratios for repeat attendance at different walk-in centres, suggesting that organizational and other factors may determine patterns of repeat attendance.

Keywords: Repeat attenders, Walk-in centres, Socio-economic deprivation, Distance

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0033-3506(09)00165-6

doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2009.06.008

Public Health
Volume 123, Issue 7 , Pages 506-510, July 2009