The Work of Doctors in Accident and Medical Clinics

Published online: 
02 October 2006


The characteristics of participating doctors in A&M clinics differed from the wider General Practitioner population. They were younger, more likely to be of Māori or Asian ethnicity, less likely to be female and, on average, had been in practice for just over ten years. On average they saw 90 daytime patients a week, and worked 6.3 half days and saw an average of 13.7 patients per day.

Overall the distribution of A&M clinic contacts showed a marked skew to the younger age groups, and only 17% of visits were for patients 45 years or older. For those in “out of office” hours, that is outside Monday-Friday 8am to 6pm, 31% were for under fives while in “normal” office hours less than a fifth of patients who attended were in this age group. The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) funds a significant number of visits, especially during normal hours.

Understandably, given the nature of the practices, few patients had an established relationship with the practitioner they saw. For nearly half of the patients during “normal office hours” and two-thirds of patients during “out of office hours” the recorded visit was their first to the practice.

Most visits were associated with only one “reason for visit” and common reasons for visits were injury/poison related conditions, respiratory and non-specific symptoms. New and short-term problems accounted for 75% of visits.

About a fifth of visits resulted in an investigation, and X-Rays were ordered for between one sixth and one fifth of visits depending on the time of day. About a quarter of visits during normal hours resulted in no treatment, and a further one third involved non-pharmacological treatment. A higher number of patients received pharmacological treatment in “out of office hours” and the number of items prescribed in each script was higher.

The study compares general practices and A&M centres. On average, A&M centres had more staff, particularly nursing staff. Nearly all clinics had separate management structures. They were more likely to have policies for written complaints and/or quality management policies than other practices. The distribution of urgency and severity between patients in each practice type was similar. However practitioners spent longer with the patients.

Generally A&M clinics are focussed around episodic and reactive care for patients and are not aiming to establish either the continuity of care or enrolment signalled in the Primary Health Care Strategy.

The writers noted some limitations with the data. Unlike the GP surveys, data was only collected for one week and there is no summer data. There is no after-hours data from orthodox general practices to allow for comparisons.


The views expressed in this occasional paper are the personal views of the authors and should not be taken to represent the views or policy of the Ministry of Health or the Government. Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information, no responsibility is accepted for the reliance by any person on any information contained in this occasional paper, nor for any error in or omission from the occasional paper.

Publishing information

  • Date of publication:
    02 October 2006
  • ISBN:
    0-478-29668-1 (Book), 0-478-2967-1 (Internet)
  • HP number:
  • Citation:
    Hider P, Lay-Yee R, Davis P. 2005. The Work of Doctors in Accident and Medical Clinics: The National Primary Medical Care Survey (NatMedCa): 2001/02. Report 5. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
  • Ordering information:
    Only soft copy available to download
Back to top