ArticleHeliyon2024
Sustainability of an intervention to reduce waiting for access to an epilepsy outpatient clinic.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Delays in outpatient specialist neurologist care for people with epilepsy are common despite recommendations for prompt access. There is evidence to suggest that there are interventions that can minimise waitlists and waiting time. However, little is known about whether such interventions can result in sustained improvements in waiting. The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which an intervention to reduce waiting in an epilepsy specialist outpatient clinic demonstrated sustained outcomes two years after the intervention was implemented. Methods: This observational study analysed routinely collected epilepsy clinic data over three study periods: pre-intervention, post-intervention and at two-year follow-up. The intervention, Specific Timely Assessment and Triage (STAT), combined a short-term backlog reduction strategy and creation of protected appointments for new referrals based on analysis of demand. After the initial intervention, there was no further active intervention in the following two years. The primary outcome was waiting measured by 1.) waiting time for access to a clinic appointment, defined as the number of days between referral and first appointment for all patients referred to the epilepsy clinic during the three study periods; and 2.) a snapshot of the number of patients on the waitlist at two time points for each of the three study periods. Results: Two years after implementing the STAT model in an epilepsy clinic, median waiting time from post-intervention to two-year follow-up was stable (52-51 days) and the interquartile range of days waited reduced from 37 to 77 days post-intervention to 45-57 days at two-year follow-up, with a reduction in the most lengthy wait times observed. After a dramatic reduction of the total number of patients on the waitlist immediately following the intervention, a small rise was seen at two years (n = 69) which remained well below the pre-intervention level (n = 582). Conclusion: The STAT model is a promising intervention for reducing waiting in an epilepsy clinic. While there was a small increase in the waitlist after two years, the median waiting time was sustained.
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.