Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32503509›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Reorganising dermatology care: predictors of the substitution of secondary care with primary care.

Esther H A van den Bogaart, Mariëlle E A L Kroese, Marieke D Spreeuwenberg, Herm Martens, Peter M Steijlen, Dirk Ruwaard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Esther H A van den BogaartDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, Maastricht, 6229, GT, The Netherlands. e.vandenbogaart@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6489-9586
Mariëlle E A L KroeseDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, Maastricht, 6229, GT, The Netherlands.
Marieke D SpreeuwenbergDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, Maastricht, 6229, GT, The Netherlands.
Herm MartensDepartment of Dermatology and GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Peter M SteijlenDepartment of Dermatology and GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Dirk RuwaardDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, Maastricht, 6229, GT, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe substitution of healthcare is a way to control rising healthcare costs. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention of the Dutch 'Blue Care' pioneer site aims to achieve this feat by facilitating consultations with medical specialists in the primary care setting. One of the specialties involved is dermatology. This study explores referral decisions following dermatology care in PC+ and the influence of predictive patient and consultation characteristics on this decision.

methodsThis retrospective study used clinical data of patients who received dermatology care in PC+ between January 2015 and March 2017. The referral decision following PC+, (i.e., referral back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care) was the primary outcome. Stepwise logistic regression modelling was used to describe variations in the referral decisions following PC+, with patient age and gender, number of PC+ consultations, patient diagnosis and treatment specialist as the predicting factors.

resultsA total of 2952 patients visited PC+ for dermatology care. Of those patients with a registered referral, 80.2% (N = 2254) were referred back to the GP, and 19.8% (N = 558) were referred to outpatient hospital care. In the multivariable model, only the treating specialist and patient's diagnosis independently influenced the referral decisions following PC+.

conclusionThe aim of PC+ is to reduce the number of referrals to outpatient hospital care. According to the results, the treating specialist and patient diagnosis influence referral decisions. Therefore, the results of this study can be used to discuss and improve specialist and patient profiles for PC+ to further optimise the effectiveness of the initiative.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDermatologyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesSecondary Health CareDermatologyOutpatient carePrimary careReferral decisionSubstitution

Identifiers

PMID32503509
PMCPMC7275501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.