Cochrane · systematic review · CD010763
Patient‐initiated appointment systems for adults with chronic conditions in secondary care
Whear, R, Thompson‐Coon, J, Rogers, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
Effective Practice and Organisation of CareAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 14.3%Low 6 · 85.7%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Patient‐initiated appointment systems compared with consultant‐led appointment systems for people with chronic conditions
Population: adults with a chronic or recurrent condition
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Patient outcomes: anxiety (HADS)a 12–24 months Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | OR 0.87 [0.68, 1.12] | 5 studies · 1019 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Patient outcomes: depression (HADS)a 9–24 months Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | OR 0.79 [0.51, 1.23] | 6 studies · 1835 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Patient outcomes: quality of life (different scales used across studies) Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | SMD 0.12 [0, 0.25] | 7 studies · 1486 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Service utilisation (contacts) Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | rate ratio 1.11 | 15 studies · 3348 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Service utilisation (costs) per patient per year Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 2235 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse events – relapse 12–60 months Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 888 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Patient satisfaction 6–72 months Patient‐initiated appointment systems vs consultant‐led appointment systems | SMD 0.05 | 2 studies · 375 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |