How Much More Time Neurologic Examination Adds to Outpatient Visits: A Study of Cross-Sectional Data.

IF 2.3 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurology. Clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200404
John Ney, Andrew Michael Wilson, Marc Raphaelson, Adam de Havenon
{"title":"How Much More Time Neurologic Examination Adds to Outpatient Visits: A Study of Cross-Sectional Data.","authors":"John Ney, Andrew Michael Wilson, Marc Raphaelson, Adam de Havenon","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The neurologic examination is a key part of neurologist visits. The neurologic examination leads to more accurate diagnoses, avoidance of unnecessary tests and procedures, and a stronger doctor-patient relationship. However, the neurologic examination takes time to perform, leading to longer visits with neurologists than with other specialists. We hypothesize that the neurologic examination adds quantifiable time to patient visits to a neurologist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined a 5-year cross-section of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2012-2016, selecting visits to a neurologist. We extracted an indicator for neurologic examination, time spent with the patient in minutes, patient demographics, new or established visit, reasons for visit, new vs chronic problems, insurance status, geographic region, collection year, and survey design variables. We report descriptive statistics among patient visits with and without neurologic examinations and built a generalized linear model of visit time and neurologic examination with patient and visit information as covariates and interaction terms between neurologic examination and new/established visits. A subgroup analysis was conducted by reasons for visit. All analyses incorporated survey design variables for accurate standard errors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 4,009 patient visits among 211 neurologists, comprising 11.3 million annual visits in the weighted sample. Neurologic examination was reported in 58%, with no difference in demographics, geographic regions, or reasons for visit between those who did or did not receive a neurologic examination. The mean time spent with the patient in visits with a neurologic examination was 29.9 minutes, compared with 25.0 minutes without (<i>p</i> = 0.002). In the adjusted model, new visits with a neurologic examination were associated with 4.1 minutes greater time spent with the patient (95% CI + 0.6 minutes, +7.7 minutes, <i>p</i> = 0.02) and established visits with a neurologic examination were 4.6 minutes longer (95% CI + 1.5 minutes, +7.5 minutes, <i>p</i> = 0.006.) In subgroup analysis, association of neurologic examination with time spent with the patient was greatest for visits for pain (+6.7 minutes, 95% CI + 0.7 minutes, +12.9 minutes, <i>p</i> = 0.03) and known neurologic diagnoses (+7.5 minutes, 95% CI + 4.2 minutes, +10.7 minutes, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study demonstrates the association of neurologic examinations with increased time spent with the patient in ambulatory care. Further work is needed to assess the effects on medical decision making, costs of care, and patient access to neurologists.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":"15 1","pages":"e200404"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11620545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: The neurologic examination is a key part of neurologist visits. The neurologic examination leads to more accurate diagnoses, avoidance of unnecessary tests and procedures, and a stronger doctor-patient relationship. However, the neurologic examination takes time to perform, leading to longer visits with neurologists than with other specialists. We hypothesize that the neurologic examination adds quantifiable time to patient visits to a neurologist.

Methods: We examined a 5-year cross-section of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2012-2016, selecting visits to a neurologist. We extracted an indicator for neurologic examination, time spent with the patient in minutes, patient demographics, new or established visit, reasons for visit, new vs chronic problems, insurance status, geographic region, collection year, and survey design variables. We report descriptive statistics among patient visits with and without neurologic examinations and built a generalized linear model of visit time and neurologic examination with patient and visit information as covariates and interaction terms between neurologic examination and new/established visits. A subgroup analysis was conducted by reasons for visit. All analyses incorporated survey design variables for accurate standard errors.

Results: There were 4,009 patient visits among 211 neurologists, comprising 11.3 million annual visits in the weighted sample. Neurologic examination was reported in 58%, with no difference in demographics, geographic regions, or reasons for visit between those who did or did not receive a neurologic examination. The mean time spent with the patient in visits with a neurologic examination was 29.9 minutes, compared with 25.0 minutes without (p = 0.002). In the adjusted model, new visits with a neurologic examination were associated with 4.1 minutes greater time spent with the patient (95% CI + 0.6 minutes, +7.7 minutes, p = 0.02) and established visits with a neurologic examination were 4.6 minutes longer (95% CI + 1.5 minutes, +7.5 minutes, p = 0.006.) In subgroup analysis, association of neurologic examination with time spent with the patient was greatest for visits for pain (+6.7 minutes, 95% CI + 0.7 minutes, +12.9 minutes, p = 0.03) and known neurologic diagnoses (+7.5 minutes, 95% CI + 4.2 minutes, +10.7 minutes, p < 0.001).

Discussion: This study demonstrates the association of neurologic examinations with increased time spent with the patient in ambulatory care. Further work is needed to assess the effects on medical decision making, costs of care, and patient access to neurologists.

神经系统检查增加门诊就诊的时间:一项横断面数据研究。
背景与目的:神经系统检查是神经科医生就诊的重要组成部分。神经系统检查导致更准确的诊断,避免不必要的检查和程序,并加强医患关系。然而,神经系统检查需要时间,导致神经科医生比其他专家的访问时间更长。我们假设神经系统检查增加了病人去神经科医生就诊的可量化时间。方法:我们检查了2012-2016年全国门诊医疗调查的5年横截面,选择了神经科医生的访问量。我们提取了神经系统检查、与患者在一起的时间(以分钟为单位)、患者人口统计、新就诊或已就诊、就诊原因、新发与慢性疾病、保险状况、地理区域、收集年份和调查设计变量的指标。我们报告了有和没有神经系统检查的患者就诊的描述性统计数据,并建立了就诊时间和神经系统检查的广义线性模型,患者和就诊信息作为协变量和神经系统检查与新就诊/新就诊之间的交互项。按访视原因进行亚组分析。所有分析都纳入了精确标准误差的调查设计变量。结果:211名神经科医生中有4009名患者就诊,加权样本中有1130万人次就诊。58%的人接受了神经系统检查,在人口统计学、地理区域或就诊原因方面,接受或未接受神经系统检查的人没有差异。患者接受神经系统检查的平均时间为29.9分钟,而未接受神经系统检查的平均时间为25.0分钟(p = 0.002)。在调整后的模型中,新就诊的神经系统检查患者与患者的时间增加了4.1分钟(95% CI + 0.6分钟,+7.7分钟,p = 0.02),而已就诊的神经系统检查患者的时间增加了4.6分钟(95% CI + 1.5分钟,+7.5分钟,p = 0.006)。在亚组分析中,因疼痛就诊(+6.7分钟,95% CI + 0.7分钟,+12.9分钟,p = 0.03)和已知神经系统诊断(+7.5分钟,95% CI + 4.2分钟,+10.7分钟,p < 0.001)的神经系统检查与患者就诊时间的相关性最大。讨论:本研究证明了神经系统检查与门诊护理时间增加的关系。需要进一步的工作来评估对医疗决策、护理成本和患者获得神经科医生的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurology. Clinical practice
Neurology. Clinical practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信