Designed for simplicity, used for complexity: The systemic pressures shaping walk-in clinic practices and outcomes

Walk-in clinics (WICs), appreciated for their accessibility and convenience, have become an increasingly popular healthcare option in Ontario for patients with and without primary care enrolment. Despite their utility, WICs face criticism for delivering lower-quality care compared to comprehensive, enrolment-based primary care models. Critics argue that WICs contribute to system inefficiencies and encourage practice patterns misaligned with population health goals. This study explored physician perspectives on two key outcomes often associated with low-quality care in WICs: repeat primary care visits and potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Ontario-based family physicians (N = 19) who had experience practicing in both WICs and enrolment-based primary care. The findings highlight systemic challenges, including limited access to enrolment-based primary care and increasing healthcare demands, which have pushed WICs beyond their intended role. This misalignment has created tensions between their structure and purpose, resulting in visits that participants described as more transactional than those in primary care. These constraints-rooted in a lack of informational and relational continuity-often limited participants' ability to provide in-depth engagement or follow-up care. Repeat visits were frequently linked to efforts to ensure continuity for complex or chronic conditions. Similarly, participants acknowledged the reality of potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, attributing it to the high patient volume, desire to satisfy patient expectations, and a tendency to "err on the side of caution" when the nature of the illness is in question. The findings underscore how health system pressures and well-intended policies, such as Ontario's primary care access bonus, can produce unintended consequences, including inequities in access and difficulties with care coordination across settings. Addressing these challenges requires reforms to better integrate WICs with the primary care system, alongside tailored training to support physician decision-making in episodic care contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2025-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0325793
Primary Topic
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Designed for simplicity, used for complexity: The systemic pressures shaping walk-in clinic practices and outcomes

Rita McCracken, Simon Berthelot, Bahram Rahman, Christine Salahub et al.
PLoS ONE
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
article

Designed for simplicity, used for complexity: The systemic pressures shaping walk-in clinic practices and outcomes

Rita McCracken, Simon Berthelot, Bahram Rahman, Christine Salahub, Laura Desveaux, J. Michael Paterson, Aïsha Lofters, Mina Tadrous, Tara Kiran, Noah Ivers, Lauren Lapointe‐Shaw, Jennifer Shuldiner, Braeden A. Terpou, Ruoxi Wang, Danielle Martin, Kerry McBrien, Sacha Bhatia, Niels Thakkar
article en

Abstract

Walk-in clinics (WICs), appreciated for their accessibility and convenience, have become an increasingly popular healthcare option in Ontario for patients with and without primary care enrolment. Despite their utility, WICs face criticism for delivering lower-quality care compared to comprehensive, enrolment-based primary care models. Critics argue that WICs contribute to system inefficiencies and encourage practice patterns misaligned with population health goals. This study explored physician perspectives on two key outcomes often associated with low-quality care in WICs: repeat primary care visits and potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Ontario-based family physicians (N = 19) who had experience practicing in both WICs and enrolment-based primary care. The findings highlight systemic challenges, including limited access to enrolment-based primary care and increasing healthcare demands, which have pushed WICs beyond their intended role. This misalignment has created tensions between their structure and purpose, resulting in visits that participants described as more transactional than those in primary care. These constraints-rooted in a lack of informational and relational continuity-often limited participants' ability to provide in-depth engagement or follow-up care. Repeat visits were frequently linked to efforts to ensure continuity for complex or chronic conditions. Similarly, participants acknowledged the reality of potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, attributing it to the high patient volume, desire to satisfy patient expectations, and a tendency to "err on the side of caution" when the nature of the illness is in question. The findings underscore how health system pressures and well-intended policies, such as Ontario's primary care access bonus, can produce unintended consequences, including inequities in access and difficulties with care coordination across settings. Addressing these challenges requires reforms to better integrate WICs with the primary care system, alongside tailored training to support physician decision-making in episodic care contexts.

PLoS ONEVol. 20(6)
St. Michael's Hospital (CA), University Health Network (CA), University of British Columbia (CA), University of Calgary (CA), Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Trillium Health Centre (CA), Women's College Hospital (CA), Toronto General Hospital (CA), Sinai Health System (CA), Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (CA), Impact (CA), Université Laval (CA), McMaster University (CA)
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Primary Care and Health Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.