title: Academic family health teams:   Part 2: patient perceptions of access.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To explore patients' perceptions of primary care (PC) in the early development of academic family health teams (aFHTs)--interprofessional PC teams delivering care where family medicine and other health professional learners are trained--focusing on patients' perceptions of access and patients' satisfaction with services.
  
  
  METHODS
  Self-administered survey.
  
  
  METHODS
  Six aFHTs in Ontario.
  
  
  METHODS
  Adult patients attending appointments and administrators at each of the aFHTs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Answers to questions about access from the Primary Care Assessment Tool Adult Expanded Version, the Primary Care Assessment Survey, and research team questions.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The response rate was 47.3% (1026 of 2167). The mean (SD) Primary Care Assessment Tool first-contact accessibility score was 2.28 (0.36) out of 4, with 96.5% of patients rating access less than 3, which was the minimum expected level of care. Two-thirds (66.6%) indicated someone from their aFHTs would definitely or probably see them the same day if they were sick, 56.8% could definitely or probably get advice quickly by telephone, and 14.5% indicated it was definitely or probably difficult to be seen by their primary health care provider (HCP). Additionally, 46.9% indicated they would like to get medical advice by e-mail. For a routine or follow-up visit, 73.4% would be willing to see another aFHT physician if their regular provider were unavailable, while only 48.3% would see a nonphysician HCP. If sick, 88.2% would see another aFHT physician and 55.2% would see a nonphysician HCP. Most (75.3%) were satisfied with access to their regular HCP.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although patients are generally satisfied with care, there is room for improvement in access. Strategies are needed to enhance access to care, including addressing appropriate roles and scopes of practice for nonphysician HCPs. The accessibility challenges for aFHTs will likely affect new family physicians and other HCPs training in these practices and their approach to future practice.
authors.forename: June C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Carroll
authors.forename: Yves
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Talbot
authors.forename: Joanne
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Permaul
authors.forename: Anastasia
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Tobin
authors.forename: Rahim
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Moineddin
authors.forename: Sean
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Blaine
authors.forename: Jeff
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Bloom
authors.forename: Debra
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Butt
authors.forename: Kelly
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Kay
authors.forename: Deanna
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Telner
mesh_terms: D000046:Academic Medical Centers; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001294:Attitude to Health; D003266:Continuity of Patient Care; D005194:Family Practice / Q000193:education / Q000592:standards*; D005260:Female; D006297:Health Services Accessibility; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D009864:Ontario; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000592:standards*; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult