Primary-care access is not a clinic demand forecast

A real access gap is not a demand forecast

The Canadian Institute for Health Information reported on October 23, 2025, that 27% of adults with a regular health provider said they could see one the same day or next day for a non-urgent primary-care need in 2024. That is a serious access signal. It is not a count of people seeking a particular clinic, a measure of private-service demand or evidence that any one practice should increase promotion. CIHI's indicator report

Access is shaped by service type, referral pathways, public funding, location, eligibility and the capacity of a specific clinic. A search campaign cannot repair a full schedule, an unclear referral rule or a booking path that does not match the care being promoted.

What the 2024 data covers

CIHI's adult figure comes from a custom tabulation of Statistics Canada's 2024 Survey on Health Care Access and Experiences, Primary and Specialist Care. It covers adults age 18 and older who reported having a regular health provider. The published national and provincial comparison excludes the territories because 2024 results were unavailable. CIHI's notes and method

Statistics Canada's April 2026 analysis uses the same 2024 cross-sectional survey for adults in the 10 provinces. It found that 69% of recent immigrants reported a regular health care provider, compared with 85% of established immigrants and 82% of non-immigrants. Those are reported access differences, not a reading of clinical need, purchasing intent or a clinic's addressable market. Statistics Canada study

• Study period: 2024. CIHI published its indicator summary in October 2025; Statistics Canada published its immigrant-access analysis in April 2026.
• Geography: Canada, with adult results reported for the 10 provinces and no 2024 territorial results in the indicator comparison.
• Population: adults age 18 and older. The timely-access measure is limited to respondents who reported a regular health provider.
• Method and limitation: survey responses describe reported access. They do not identify a particular clinic, its wait list, patient fit, capacity or why an individual did not book.

Availability belongs in the marketing brief

AKIERO's interpretation is operational, not a claim about what the survey proves. If a clinic is considering a campaign because access looks difficult in its market, the first question is whether it can serve a suitable inquiry promptly and appropriately. The second is whether the website makes the route into care clear.

Check the promoted service, who can book it, whether a referral is needed, which practitioner and location have capacity, and what happens after a call or form. For a practice with an open service line, clear local patient acquisition work can help suitable people find the right path. For a full service line, a better decision may be to pause promotion, clarify availability or direct effort to a service the clinic can accommodate.

Four questions before you create more inquiries

These questions keep a clinic from turning a population-level access problem into a blunt demand-generation target. They also make the work more honest for prospective patients. Clear information and a workable booking path are useful even when a clinic decides not to increase spend.

For a small starting point, map one service from first contact to attendance. Then compare the result with why cost per lead is the wrong finish line for a clinic or review the clinic journey with AKIERO.

• Which service has room for suitable appointments in the next few weeks?
• What non-clinical information must a person understand before they inquire, such as location, referral, hours or booking route?
• Can the team record whether an inquiry was contacted, booked and attended without copying clinical details into marketing tools?
• What would make us stop or redirect the campaign if capacity changes?