Table 3

Univariable analyses of predictor variables of practice admission rate (n=145) 2006/2007

VariableIRR (95% CI)% Changep Value
Total clinical points0.999 (0.997 to 1.001)−0.1%0.15
Total organisational points0.997 (0.995 to 0.999)−0.3%0.005
% Satisfied with phone access0.996 (0.992 to 0.999)−0.4%0.01
% Able to book 2 days ahead0.997 (0.994 to 0.999)−0.3%0.005
% Able to get appointment in 48 h0.992 (0.986 to 0.997)−0.8%0.002
% Able to book with a specific GP0.993 (0.988 to 0.998)−0.7%0.005
% Satisfied with opening hours1.001 (0.994 to 1.008)0.1%0.83
Distance from hospital (miles)0.984 (0.977 to 0.991)−1.6%<0.0001
% of Practice male0.99 (0.966 to 1.014)−1.0%0.38
Age (% of practice patients 65+ years)1.01 (1.00 to 1.03)1.0%0.01
Practice deprivation score1.01 (1.008 to 1.016)1.0%<0.0001
% of Practice white ethnicity0.999 (0.996 to 1.002)−0.1%0.29
Size of practice (no of patients)0.99998 (0.99997 to 0.99999)−0.002%0.0005
Coronary heart disease prevalence1.11 (1.04 to 1.18)11%0.0004
% Response rate to access survey0.995 (0.98 to 1.01)−0.5%0.053
  • N=145 for all variables.

  • Figures in the second column are incident rate ratios (IRR). Subtracting 1 from the IRR and then multiplying by 100 gives the percentage change in the expected admissions count for a 1 unit increase in the predictor. So for practice deprivation score, for every extra deprivation point, the expected admissions count increases by 1%. For distance, for every mile more distant from the practice, the expected admissions count decreases by 1.6%. IRR less than 1.0 represent decreases and IRR greater than 1.0 represent increases in the count. Statistical model: negative binomial regression, using log of the list size as the offset.

  • GP, general practitioner.