ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2008
An audit of orthopaedic referrals via Multi-Professional Triage Teams.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What is orthopaedic triage? A systematic review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2015Pooled it
- Advanced practice physiotherapy-led triage in Irish orthopaedic and rheumatology services: national data audit.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Article
- A review of the surgical conversion rate and independent management of spinal extended scope practitioners in a secondary care setting.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMulti-Professional Triage Teams (MPTTs) were created to reduce the caseload of hospital orthopaedic clinics and this prospective study evaluated referrals made to a district general hospital orthopaedic department from a lower limb MPTT clinic. PATIENTS AND
methodsOver 9 months, 277 referrals to a lower limb hospital orthopaedic clinic were assessed. The temporal delay to hospital clinic review between patients seen at the MPTT clinic and those referred directly by their general practitioner (GP) was analysed using an ANOVA test. A qualitative assessment of diagnoses given to patients reviewed at the MPTT clinic was performed.
resultsThe 132 patients initially reviewed at the MPTT clinic and subsequently referred to a hospital consultant waited significantly longer (140 days compared to 62 days by direct GP referral; P < 0.05) to see an orthopaedic consultant. Over three-quarters of this patient cohort incorrectly identified the healthcare professional conducting their consultation at the MPTT clinic. One-third of cases (31%) had no diagnosis made and 22% were assessed as having an incorrect diagnosis.
conclusionsTime delays, patient confusion regarding professional roles and diagnostic indecision are significant problems for patients referred to hospital orthopaedic clinics from MPTT clinics. This risks sub-optimal patient care and may lead to future medicolegal implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.