Impact of an interdisciplinary digital consultation platform on general practitioner referrals for musculoskeletal symptoms: a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sanne M Sanavro, Henk van der Worp, Henk Schers, Joke Stoffelen, Clarinda van den Bosch, Joris van Dijk, Petra Buist, Michiel R de Boer, Guus J M Janus, Marco H Blanker
{"title":"Impact of an interdisciplinary digital consultation platform on general practitioner referrals for musculoskeletal symptoms: a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.","authors":"Sanne M Sanavro, Henk van der Worp, Henk Schers, Joke Stoffelen, Clarinda van den Bosch, Joris van Dijk, Petra Buist, Michiel R de Boer, Guus J M Janus, Marco H Blanker","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmaf071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the study was to assess the effect of an interdisciplinary, digital consultation platform on the proportion of appropriate referrals from general practitioners (GPs) to an orthopaedic outpatient hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a stepped wedge, cluster, randomized controlled trial. Sixty GP practices in the catchment area of a large teaching hospital in the Netherlands were randomized. Groups of GP practices entered the trial in four steps at 13-week intervals, at which point they received access to the Prisma platform. The platform allowed them to post questions about anonymized cases to a multidisciplinary group of specialists. During the control condition, GPs did not receive platform access. In both conditions, GPs provided care as usual. The proportion of appropriate referrals, defined as referrals for which a patient had either (i) more than one consultation with an orthopaedic surgeon or (ii) one consultation with additional diagnostics or interventions, was the primary outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participating GPs referred 4928 patients to hospital. Intention-to-treat analysis showed a 4.4% estimated increase in the proportion of appropriate referrals among GP practices randomized to have access to the platform compared to the control group, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.46; P = 0.037]. Per-protocol analysis showed a smaller, but non-significant, 2.2% difference between interventions, with an OR of 1.11 (95% CI, of 0.96%-1.28%; P = 0.178).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed a modest increase in appropriate referrals for orthopaedic review among GP practices randomized to the platform. On a larger scale, this could contribute to more sustainable access to specialist care.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":"42 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12449199/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaf071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to assess the effect of an interdisciplinary, digital consultation platform on the proportion of appropriate referrals from general practitioners (GPs) to an orthopaedic outpatient hospital.

Methods: We performed a stepped wedge, cluster, randomized controlled trial. Sixty GP practices in the catchment area of a large teaching hospital in the Netherlands were randomized. Groups of GP practices entered the trial in four steps at 13-week intervals, at which point they received access to the Prisma platform. The platform allowed them to post questions about anonymized cases to a multidisciplinary group of specialists. During the control condition, GPs did not receive platform access. In both conditions, GPs provided care as usual. The proportion of appropriate referrals, defined as referrals for which a patient had either (i) more than one consultation with an orthopaedic surgeon or (ii) one consultation with additional diagnostics or interventions, was the primary outcome.

Results: Participating GPs referred 4928 patients to hospital. Intention-to-treat analysis showed a 4.4% estimated increase in the proportion of appropriate referrals among GP practices randomized to have access to the platform compared to the control group, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.46; P = 0.037]. Per-protocol analysis showed a smaller, but non-significant, 2.2% difference between interventions, with an OR of 1.11 (95% CI, of 0.96%-1.28%; P = 0.178).

Conclusions: We observed a modest increase in appropriate referrals for orthopaedic review among GP practices randomized to the platform. On a larger scale, this could contribute to more sustainable access to specialist care.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

跨学科数字咨询平台对全科医生转诊肌肉骨骼症状的影响:阶梯式楔形聚类随机试验
背景:本研究的目的是评估一个跨学科的数字咨询平台对从全科医生(gp)到骨科门诊医院的适当转诊比例的影响。方法:采用楔形、聚类、随机对照试验。在荷兰的一个大型教学医院的集水区60 GP实践是随机的。全科医生分组按4个步骤进入试验,每隔13周进行一次,此时他们可以使用Prisma平台。该平台允许他们向多学科专家小组发布有关匿名病例的问题。在控制条件下,gp不接受平台访问。在这两种情况下,全科医生照常提供护理。适当转诊的比例,定义为转诊患者有(i)不止一次咨询骨科医生或(ii)一次咨询额外的诊断或干预措施,是主要结果。结果:参与的全科医生将4928例患者转诊至医院。意向治疗分析显示,与对照组相比,随机分配到该平台的全科医生中,适当转诊的比例估计增加了4.4%,优势比(OR)为1.22[95%置信区间(CI), 1.01-1.46;P = 0.037]。按方案分析显示,干预措施之间的差异较小,但不显著,为2.2%,OR为1.11 (95% CI为0.96%-1.28%;P = 0.178)。结论:我们观察到在随机分配到平台的全科医生实践中,适当的骨科审查转诊适度增加。在更大的范围内,这可能有助于更可持续地获得专科护理。
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
Family practice
Family practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Practice is an international journal aimed at practitioners, teachers, and researchers in the fields of family medicine, general practice, and primary care in both developed and developing countries. Family Practice offers its readership an international view of the problems and preoccupations in the field, while providing a medium of instruction and exploration. The journal''s range and content covers such areas as health care delivery, epidemiology, public health, and clinical case studies. The journal aims to be interdisciplinary and contributions from other disciplines of medicine and social science are always welcomed.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信