Table 7 Interpretation of the interaction between the association of deprivation and booking with a preferred doctor with emergency admissions, from the Access Survey and Demographic model
From: What aspects of primary care predict emergency admission rates? A cross sectional study
For each1% absolute increase in % Able to book with a preferred GP | For the ‘typical’ (median) practice with 580 EAs per year – the corresponding decrease in EAs | Median value of ‘% Able to book with a preferred GP’ for each IMD Quintile | |
|---|---|---|---|
Deprivation quintile 1 (typically 6 IMD points) - Least deprived | decrease of 1.2% in EAs | decrease of 6.8 EAs | 87% |
Deprivation quintile 2 (typically 13 IMD points) | decrease of 0.9% in EAs | decrease of 5.2 EAs | 87% |
Deprivation quintile 3 (typically 20 IMD points) | decrease of 0.6% in EAs | decrease of 3.6 EAs | 86% |
Deprivation quintile 4 (typically 25 IMD points) | decrease of 0.4% in EAs | decrease of 2.4 EAs | 89% |
Deprivation quintile 5 (typically 40 IMD points) - Most deprived | increase of 0.2% in EAs | increase of 1.1 EAs | 87% |