神经病学高级转诊管理系统(NARMS)减少了60%以上的面对面咨询。

Q3 Medicine
Ulster Medical Journal Pub Date : 2023-01-01
John McConville, Annemarie Hunter, Ailsa Fulton, Orla Gray, Andrew Kerr, Victor Patterson
{"title":"神经病学高级转诊管理系统(NARMS)减少了60%以上的面对面咨询。","authors":"John McConville,&nbsp;Annemarie Hunter,&nbsp;Ailsa Fulton,&nbsp;Orla Gray,&nbsp;Andrew Kerr,&nbsp;Victor Patterson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic has made neurology clinic waiting times longer. To prevent a build-up of patients waiting, we introduced a neurology advanced referral management system (NARMS) to deal with new referrals from GPs, using advice, investigations, or the telephone, as alternatives to face-to-face (FF) assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For six months, electronic referrals from GPs were triaged to the above categories. We recorded the numbers in each category, patient satisfaction, inter-consultant triage variation, re-referrals, and calculated CO2 emissions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 573 referrals. Triage destinations were advice 33%, investigations 27%, telephone 17%, and FF 33%. Of patients referred for MRI, 95% were happy not to be seen if their investigation was normal. Less-experienced consultants triaged 20% and 30% respectively, to advice or investigations, compared with 40% by a triage-experienced neurologist. Four percent were re-referred. Numbers on the waiting list did not increase. CO2 emissions were reduced by 50%.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Two thirds of neurological referrals from GPs did not need to be seen FF and 50% were dealt with without the neurologist meeting the patient. Carbon emission was halved. This system should be employed more, with FF examination reserved for those patients who need a neurological examination for diagnosis and management.</p>","PeriodicalId":38815,"journal":{"name":"Ulster Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7f/17/umj-92-01-19.PMC9899032.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Neurology Advanced Referral Management System (NARMS) Reduces Face-to-Face Consultations By Over Sixty Percent.\",\"authors\":\"John McConville,&nbsp;Annemarie Hunter,&nbsp;Ailsa Fulton,&nbsp;Orla Gray,&nbsp;Andrew Kerr,&nbsp;Victor Patterson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic has made neurology clinic waiting times longer. To prevent a build-up of patients waiting, we introduced a neurology advanced referral management system (NARMS) to deal with new referrals from GPs, using advice, investigations, or the telephone, as alternatives to face-to-face (FF) assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For six months, electronic referrals from GPs were triaged to the above categories. We recorded the numbers in each category, patient satisfaction, inter-consultant triage variation, re-referrals, and calculated CO2 emissions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 573 referrals. Triage destinations were advice 33%, investigations 27%, telephone 17%, and FF 33%. Of patients referred for MRI, 95% were happy not to be seen if their investigation was normal. Less-experienced consultants triaged 20% and 30% respectively, to advice or investigations, compared with 40% by a triage-experienced neurologist. Four percent were re-referred. Numbers on the waiting list did not increase. CO2 emissions were reduced by 50%.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Two thirds of neurological referrals from GPs did not need to be seen FF and 50% were dealt with without the neurologist meeting the patient. Carbon emission was halved. This system should be employed more, with FF examination reserved for those patients who need a neurological examination for diagnosis and management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ulster Medical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7f/17/umj-92-01-19.PMC9899032.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ulster Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulster Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:新冠肺炎大流行导致神经内科门诊等待时间延长。为了防止等待的患者增加,我们引入了神经病学高级转诊管理系统(NARMS)来处理来自全科医生的新转诊,使用建议,调查或电话,作为面对面(FF)评估的替代方案。方法:在六个月的时间里,对来自全科医生的电子转诊进行分类。我们记录了每个类别的数字、患者满意度、咨询师之间的分诊差异、转诊,并计算了二氧化碳排放量。结果:共转诊573例。分诊目的为建议33%,调查27%,电话17%,FF 33%。在接受核磁共振检查的患者中,如果检查正常,95%的人很高兴没有被发现。经验不足的咨询师分别为20%和30%的患者提供咨询或调查,而经验丰富的神经科医生为40%。4%的人被重新推荐。等候名单上的人数没有增加。二氧化碳排放量减少了50%。讨论:三分之二来自全科医生的神经系统转诊不需要看FF, 50%的神经科医生没有见过病人就处理了。碳排放量减半。应更多地使用该系统,FF检查保留给需要进行神经学检查进行诊断和管理的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Neurology Advanced Referral Management System (NARMS) Reduces Face-to-Face Consultations By Over Sixty Percent.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has made neurology clinic waiting times longer. To prevent a build-up of patients waiting, we introduced a neurology advanced referral management system (NARMS) to deal with new referrals from GPs, using advice, investigations, or the telephone, as alternatives to face-to-face (FF) assessment.

Methods: For six months, electronic referrals from GPs were triaged to the above categories. We recorded the numbers in each category, patient satisfaction, inter-consultant triage variation, re-referrals, and calculated CO2 emissions.

Results: There were 573 referrals. Triage destinations were advice 33%, investigations 27%, telephone 17%, and FF 33%. Of patients referred for MRI, 95% were happy not to be seen if their investigation was normal. Less-experienced consultants triaged 20% and 30% respectively, to advice or investigations, compared with 40% by a triage-experienced neurologist. Four percent were re-referred. Numbers on the waiting list did not increase. CO2 emissions were reduced by 50%.

Discussion: Two thirds of neurological referrals from GPs did not need to be seen FF and 50% were dealt with without the neurologist meeting the patient. Carbon emission was halved. This system should be employed more, with FF examination reserved for those patients who need a neurological examination for diagnosis and management.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ulster Medical Journal
Ulster Medical Journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
×
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