Cited by 390Healthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Why We Don’t Come: Patient Perceptions on No-Shows

Open access
Lacy, N. L.·2004·The Annals of Family Medicine

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patients who schedule clinic appointments and fail to keep them have a negative impact on the workflow of a clinic in many ways. This study was conducted to identify the reasons patients in an urban family practice setting give for not keeping scheduled appointments. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 34 adult patients coming to the clinic for outpatient care. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. A multidisciplinary team used an immersion-crystallization organizing style to analyze the content of the qualitative interviews individually and in team meetings. RESULTS: Participants identified 3 types of issues related to missing appointments without notifying the clinic staff: emotions, perceived disrespect, and not understanding the scheduling system. Although they discussed logistical issues of appointment keeping, participants did not identify these issues as key reasons for nonattendance. Appointment making among these participants was driven by immediate symptoms and a desire for self-care. At the same time, many of these participants experienced anticipatory fear and anxiety about both procedures and bad news. Participants did not feel obligated to keep a scheduled appointment in part because they felt disrespected by the health care system. The effect of this feeling was compounded by participants' lack of understanding of the scheduling system. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that reducing no-show rates among patients who sometimes attend might be addressed by reviewing waiting times and participants' perspectives of personal respect.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1370/afm.123

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Festinger DS, Lamb RJ, Marlowe DB, Kirby KC. From telephone to offi ce: intake attendance as a function of appointment delay. Addict Behav. 2002;27:131-137.
  2. Sharp DJ, Hamilton W. Non-attendance at general practices and out- patient clinics. BMJ. 2001;323:1081-1082.
  3. Borkan J. Chapter 10: Immersion/Crystallization. In: Crabtree BF, Miller WL, eds. Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1999:406.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lacy, N. L.
Affiliations
Nebraska Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Lacy, N. L.
Venue
The Annals of Family Medicine
Published
2004-11-01
Volume
2
Issue
6
Pages
541-545
ISSN
  • 1544-1709 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-1717
OpenAlex
W2146444359
Cited by
390
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 18
FWCI
9.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • The Annals of Family Medicine (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
appointment no-shows, missed appointments, patient perspectives, general practice, outpatient care, anticipatory anxiety, waiting time, patient obligations, clinic workflow
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Care, Appointments and Schedules, Family Practice, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outpatients, Surveys and Questionnaires, Urban Population, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review