ArticleBrain & spine2025
Reorganizing outpatient spine services increased efficiency and patient satisfaction.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: The workload in orthopedic outpatient departments is increasing while the available medical resources are often limited. Research questions: Can reorganizing the outpatient work routines for referred patients with spinal disorders improve cost-effectiveness and patient's experience of care (PEC) without negatively affecting the waiting time required for the healthcare guarantee? Material and methods: We compared our standard routine (control group) to a new routine (study group) for evaluating referrals of patients with spinal complaints. In the control group, the referral was first evaluated by a spinal surgeon, and when deemed indicated, a visit to a spinal surgeon was booked. In the study group, a spinal surgeon first evaluated all referral notes and either assigned a spinal surgeon or a physiotherapist to meet the patient, depending on certain criteria. If considered eligible for surgical intervention, the patient is appointed for a follow-up visit to the spinal surgeon. For both groups, calculations were made for the number of waiting days and visits, as well as the cost. Also, we compared the PEC between the two groups through telephone interviews. Results: The number of waiting days and visits, as well as the cost, were significantly reduced (p < 0.01) in the study group. Also, the study group showed slightly higher mean values for the PEC components, with significant differences related to the waiting time, treatment with respect, and taking account of patient knowledge. Discussion and conclusions: Reorganizing outpatient work routines could eliminate the need for locum doctors while maintaining patient satisfaction and reducing costs.
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.