ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2018
Impact and cost-effectiveness of formal gastroenterology outpatient referral Clinical Assessment Service.
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creation of an Inflammatory Bowel Disease Referral Pathway for Identifying Patients Who Would Benefit From Inflammatory Bowel Disease Specialist Consultation.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2023Review
- Improving medical consults for surgical inpatients: a quality improvement project using an e-referral system linked to clinical pathways.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- COVID-19: Effect on gastroenterology and hepatology service provision and training: Lessons learnt and planning for the future.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Challenges and opportunities of COVID-19 for gastroenterology and hepatology services.Frontline gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Prevention of overuse: A view on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Testing, testing.Frontline gastroenterology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to assess the financial and operational impact of our new gastroenterology referral pathway model on our services.
designAn electronic 'Clinical Assessment Service' (CAS) proforma and an information platform were developed, and all data were analysed retrospectively.
settingRoyal Wolverhampton NHS Trust. PATIENTS: 14 245 general practitioner (GP) referrals were received during January 2014-December 2016 with 9773 of them being triaged via our CAS.
main outcome measuresWe looked into patients' clinical outcome along with departmental performance and finances.
resultsA new outpatient appointment was offered to 60.1% (n=5873) of the CAS referred patients. Endoscopic or radiological investigations were requested for 29.2% (n=2854) of patients prior to deciding on further management plan. Out of those, 27% (n=765) went on to receive another gastroenterology (GI) clinic appointment. The remaining 21.3% (n=2089) of the CAS patients were discharged back to their GP following initial investigations. 5.5% (n=538) were discharged back to primary care with a letter of advice, whereas 5.2% (n=509) were deemed inappropriate for GI clinic and were redirected to other specialists. Overall, 32% (n=3127) of patients were managed without a face to face consultation in the GI clinic. This corresponds to 3136 less outpatient appointments with estimated reduced expenditure by the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) of £481K. The 18-week performance and waiting times remained stable despite the increasing referral population. The DNA rate dropped from 14% pre to 8.5%.
conclusionsOur clinical assessment model has, in addition to the clinical benefits, a considerable positive financial impact to the health economy.
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.