Referrals from community optometrists in England and their replies: A mixed methods study.

IF 2.4
Krystynne Harvey, David F Edgar, Rishi Agarwal, Martin J Benwell, Bruce Jw Evans
{"title":"Referrals from community optometrists in England and their replies: A mixed methods study.","authors":"Krystynne Harvey,&nbsp;David F Edgar,&nbsp;Rishi Agarwal,&nbsp;Martin J Benwell,&nbsp;Bruce Jw Evans","doi":"10.1111/opo.12948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Community optometrists, through routine eye examinations, identify patients with disease or ocular abnormalities requiring referral to the Hospital Eye Service. In many cases no reply to the referral letter is received, resulting in some patients being re-referred unnecessarily, potentially increasing the number of other patients who lose sight whilst on hospital waiting lists. This study investigated, qualitatively and quantitatively, factors influencing optometric referrals and replies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The three-phase, sequential mixed methods study started with a literature review and qualitative phase, interviewing stakeholders to identify issues for exploration in subsequent phases. The second, quantitative phase, undertook documentary analysis of 349 patient referral records from three optometric practice modalities (domiciliary, independently owned, and corporate chain) in England. A final qualitative phase obtained views from stakeholders to explore unexplained findings from the first two phases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Phase 1 identified communication, financial, professional and technological issues for further exploration. In Phase 2, the referral rate was 22.2% for domiciliary provider, 2.1% for independent practice and 2.5% for the corporate chain, with the variation most likely explained by patient age and associated ophthalmic disease, illness and disability. The referral reply rate was 5.7% for domiciliary provider, 25.0% for independent practice and 4.9% for the corporate chain. The community optometrist remained unaware of the outcome of their referral in 72.8% of cases. Qualitative analyses indicate the main factors influencing referral reply rates are technology, the General Medical Practitioner, community optometrists' utility to and utility of the National Health Service and patient mobilisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The low referral reply rate creates a break in the feedback loop required to raise the standard of referrals and avoid unnecessary re-referral. Of the factors identified that influence referral reply rates, technology is key in view of the increasing use of online referral platforms. Feedback to the referring optometrist should be embedded in such systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":520731,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)","volume":" ","pages":"454-470"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12948","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Purpose: Community optometrists, through routine eye examinations, identify patients with disease or ocular abnormalities requiring referral to the Hospital Eye Service. In many cases no reply to the referral letter is received, resulting in some patients being re-referred unnecessarily, potentially increasing the number of other patients who lose sight whilst on hospital waiting lists. This study investigated, qualitatively and quantitatively, factors influencing optometric referrals and replies.

Methods: The three-phase, sequential mixed methods study started with a literature review and qualitative phase, interviewing stakeholders to identify issues for exploration in subsequent phases. The second, quantitative phase, undertook documentary analysis of 349 patient referral records from three optometric practice modalities (domiciliary, independently owned, and corporate chain) in England. A final qualitative phase obtained views from stakeholders to explore unexplained findings from the first two phases.

Results: Phase 1 identified communication, financial, professional and technological issues for further exploration. In Phase 2, the referral rate was 22.2% for domiciliary provider, 2.1% for independent practice and 2.5% for the corporate chain, with the variation most likely explained by patient age and associated ophthalmic disease, illness and disability. The referral reply rate was 5.7% for domiciliary provider, 25.0% for independent practice and 4.9% for the corporate chain. The community optometrist remained unaware of the outcome of their referral in 72.8% of cases. Qualitative analyses indicate the main factors influencing referral reply rates are technology, the General Medical Practitioner, community optometrists' utility to and utility of the National Health Service and patient mobilisation.

Conclusions: The low referral reply rate creates a break in the feedback loop required to raise the standard of referrals and avoid unnecessary re-referral. Of the factors identified that influence referral reply rates, technology is key in view of the increasing use of online referral platforms. Feedback to the referring optometrist should be embedded in such systems.

来自英格兰社区验光师的转诊和他们的回复:一项混合方法研究。
目的:社区验光师通过常规眼科检查,确定需要转介到医院眼科服务的疾病或眼部异常患者。在许多情况下,没有收到对转诊信的答复,导致一些病人被不必要地重新转诊,可能增加在医院等候名单上失明的其他病人的人数。本研究定性和定量地调查了影响验光转诊和复诊的因素。方法:该研究分为三个阶段,顺序混合方法,从文献回顾和定性阶段开始,采访利益相关者,以确定后续阶段探索的问题。第二,定量阶段,对349名患者转诊记录进行了文献分析,这些患者来自英国三种验光实践模式(家庭、独立经营和连锁企业)。最后的定性阶段获得了利益相关者的意见,以探索前两个阶段中未解释的发现。结果:第一阶段确定了进一步探索的沟通、财务、专业和技术问题。在第二阶段,家庭医生的转诊率为22.2%,独立诊所为2.1%,连锁公司为2.5%,这种差异最有可能由患者年龄和相关的眼科疾病、疾病和残疾来解释。家庭医生的复复率为5.7%,独立医生为25.0%,连锁公司为4.9%。在72.8%的病例中,社区验光师不知道他们转诊的结果。定性分析表明,影响转诊回复率的主要因素是技术、全科医生、社区验光师对国家卫生服务的利用和利用以及患者动员。结论:低转诊回复率造成了提高转诊标准和避免不必要的再转诊所需的反馈回路的中断。在确定的影响转介回复率的因素中,鉴于越来越多地使用在线转介平台,技术是关键。向转诊验光师的反馈应嵌入到此类系统中。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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