{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012472487160674981, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.621359223300971, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Improving General Practitioner Access to Physiotherapy: A Review of the Economic Evidence

The provision of physiotherapy via general practitioner (GP) ‘direct access’ arrangements or in primary care itself has become increasingly common in the UK. Evidence on the economics and the cost-effectiveness of alternative methods of organizing access to physiotherapy services is reviewed, and the likely impacts of different organizational models are discussed. GP direct access physiotherapy and primary care provision appear to have a lower average cost than consultant access physiotherapy models, while GP direct access appears to minimize health care resource use per patient. Primary care physiotherapy provision appears to minimize the costs to patients of seeking care, and appears to generate a greater demand for service than other models. The extent to which physiotherapy provision in primary care can substitute for physiotherapy and other resources in the hospital sector is discussed, as is the extent to which patients may benefit from receiving physiotherapy in primary care. It is argued that continued expansion of access to physiotherapy should be critically appraised, and its ability to improve health status compared with that achievable in alternative patient groups who might benefit from physiotherapy in hospital or rehabilitation settings.