Comparing the clinical practice and prescribing safety of locum and permanent doctors: observational study of primary care consultations in England

Christos Grigoroglou*, Kieran Walshe, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Jane Ferguson, Gemma Stringer, Darren M. Ashcroft, Thomas Allen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Temporary doctors, known as locums, are a key component of the medical workforce in the NHS but evidence on differences in quality and safety between locum and permanent doctors is limited. We aimed to examine differences in the clinical practice, and prescribing safety for locum and permanent doctors working in primary care in England.

Methods: We accessed electronic health care records (EHRs) for 3.5 million patients from the CPRD GOLD database with linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics from 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2022. We used multi-level mixed effects logistic regression to compare consultations with locum and permanent GPs for several patient outcomes including general practice revisits; prescribing of antibiotics; strong opioids; hypnotics; A&E visits; emergency hospital admissions; admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions; test ordering; referrals; and prescribing safety indicators while controlling for patient and practice characteristics.

Results: Consultations with locum GPs were 22% more likely to involve a prescription for an antibiotic (OR = 1.22 (1.21 to 1.22)), 8% more likely to involve a prescription for a strong opioid (OR = 1.08 (1.06 to 1.09)), 4% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit on the same day (OR = 1.04 (1.01 to 1.08)) and 5% more likely to be followed by an A&E visit within 1 to 7 days (OR = 1.05 (1.02 to 1.08)). Consultations with a locum were 12% less likely to lead to a practice revisit within 7 days (OR = 0.88 (0.87 to 0.88)), 4% less likely to involve a prescription for a hypnotic (OR = 0.96 (0.94 to 0.98)), 15% less likely to involve a referral (OR = 0.85 (0.84 to 0.86)) and 19% less likely to involve a test (OR = 0.81 (0.80 to 0.82)). We found no evidence that emergency admissions, ACSC admissions and eight out of the eleven prescribing safety indicators were different if patients were seen by a locum or a permanent GP.

Conclusions: Despite existing concerns, the clinical practice and performance of locum GPs did not appear to be systematically different from that of permanent GPs. The practice and performance of both locum and permanent GPs is likely shaped by the organisational setting and systems within which they work.
Original languageEnglish
Article number126
Number of pages11
JournalBMC medicine
Volume22
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Mar 2024

Bibliographical note

Funding:
This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Service and Delivery Research programme (project reference number: NIHR128349) and the NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Keywords

  • Electronic health records
  • General practice
  • Quality
  • Patient safety
  • Locum doctors
  • Medical workforce

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing the clinical practice and prescribing safety of locum and permanent doctors: observational study of primary care consultations in England'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this