Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2019 Nov 28;69(689):e878-e886.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp19X706601. Print 2019 Dec.

Safety netting in routine primary care consultations: an observational study using video-recorded UK consultations

Affiliations
Observational Study

Safety netting in routine primary care consultations: an observational study using video-recorded UK consultations

Peter J Edwards et al. Br J Gen Pract. .

Abstract

Background: Safety-netting advice is information shared with a patient or their carer designed to help them identify the need to seek further medical help if their condition fails to improve, changes, or if they have concerns about their health.

Aim: To assess when and how safety-netting advice is delivered in routine GP consultations.

Design and setting: This was an observational study using 318 recorded GP consultations with adult patients in the UK.

Method: A safety-netting coding tool was applied to all consultations. Logistic regression for the presence or absence of safety-netting advice was compared between patient, clinician, and problem variables.

Results: A total of 390 episodes of safety-netting advice were observed in 205/318 (64.5%) consultations for 257/555 (46.3%) problems. Most advice was initiated by the GP (94.9%) and delivered in the treatment planning (52.1%) or closing (31.5%) consultation phases. Specific advice was delivered in almost half (47.2%) of episodes. Safety-netting advice was more likely to be present for problems that were acute (odds ratio [OR] 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 3.64), assessed first in the consultation (OR 2.94, 95% CI = 1.85 to 4.68) or assessed by GPs aged ≤49 years (OR 2.56, 95% CI = 1.45 to 4.51). Safety-netting advice was documented for only 109/242 (45.0%) problems.

Conclusion: GPs appear to commonly give safety-netting advice, but the contingencies or actions required on the patient's part may not always be specific or documented. The likelihood of safety-netting advice being delivered may vary according to characteristics of the problem or the GP. How to assess safety-netting outcomes in terms of patient benefits and harms does warrant further exploration.

Keywords: health communication; patient safety; primary care; safety netting; video-recording.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Nicholson BD, Goyder CR, Bankhead CR, et al. Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. Br J Gen Pract. 2018. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Almond S, Mant D, Thompson M. Diagnostic safety-netting. Br J Gen Pract. 2009. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jones D, Dunn L, Watt I, Macleod U. Safety netting for primary care: evidence from a literature review. Br J Gen Pract. 2019. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nicholson BD, Mant D, Bankhead C. Can safety-netting improve cancer detection in patients with vague symptoms? BMJ. 2016;355:i5515. - PubMed
    1. Edwards PJ, Ridd MJ, Sanderson E, Barnes RK. Development of a tool for coding safety-netting behaviours in primary care: a mixed-methods study using existing UK consultation recordings. Br J Gen Pract. 2019. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types