Ross S Liao, Roger K Khouri, Jason M Scovell, Adam Stiwald, Michelle Ponziano, Anna M Zampini, Molly E Dewitt-Foy
{"title":"门诊泌尿科预约患者爽约相关因素分析。","authors":"Ross S Liao, Roger K Khouri, Jason M Scovell, Adam Stiwald, Michelle Ponziano, Anna M Zampini, Molly E Dewitt-Foy","doi":"10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinic no-shows result in misallocation of health care resources and decreased access to care. There is minimal published data examining factors associated with no-shows for ambulatory urology visits. We analyzed data from a large cohort of outpatient encounters at a tertiary health system to identify factors that increase the likelihood of ambulatory urology no-show.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were available from scheduled ambulatory urology appointments at 18 clinics in an academic, tertiary health system between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2023. A control group of completed appointments and a study group of no-show appointments were used for comparative statistics. χ<sup>2</sup> and <i>t</i> tests were used to make comparisons. The false discovery rate-adjusted <i>P</i> value was calculated using Bonferroni method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were available from a total of 990,749 appointments. A total of 187,036 appointments from 10 clinics met inclusion and exclusion criteria, among which 177,718 (95%) were completed appointments and 9318 (5%) were patient no-shows. Patients who no-showed were younger (58 years vs 62 years; <i>P</i> < .01) and Black (odds ratio [OR] 3.74). No-shows were more common if the visit was virtual (OR 1.50) or follow-up (OR 1.50). Patients referred from the emergency department were more likely to no-show (OR 1.50). Of the 26 urologic diagnoses examined, testis cancer (OR 2.58) and orchitis (OR 2.49) appointments were more likely to no-show.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We analyzed ambulatory urology appointments within our hospital enterprise and found factors associated with a higher rate of no-show. These data may be helpful to identify patients at risk of no-show and to implement tailored strategies to enhance clinic attendance.</p>","PeriodicalId":45220,"journal":{"name":"Urology Practice","volume":" ","pages":"101097UPJ0000000000000760"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Factors Associated With Patient No-Shows to Ambulatory Urology Appointments.\",\"authors\":\"Ross S Liao, Roger K Khouri, Jason M Scovell, Adam Stiwald, Michelle Ponziano, Anna M Zampini, Molly E Dewitt-Foy\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinic no-shows result in misallocation of health care resources and decreased access to care. There is minimal published data examining factors associated with no-shows for ambulatory urology visits. We analyzed data from a large cohort of outpatient encounters at a tertiary health system to identify factors that increase the likelihood of ambulatory urology no-show.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were available from scheduled ambulatory urology appointments at 18 clinics in an academic, tertiary health system between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2023. A control group of completed appointments and a study group of no-show appointments were used for comparative statistics. χ<sup>2</sup> and <i>t</i> tests were used to make comparisons. The false discovery rate-adjusted <i>P</i> value was calculated using Bonferroni method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were available from a total of 990,749 appointments. A total of 187,036 appointments from 10 clinics met inclusion and exclusion criteria, among which 177,718 (95%) were completed appointments and 9318 (5%) were patient no-shows. Patients who no-showed were younger (58 years vs 62 years; <i>P</i> < .01) and Black (odds ratio [OR] 3.74). No-shows were more common if the visit was virtual (OR 1.50) or follow-up (OR 1.50). Patients referred from the emergency department were more likely to no-show (OR 1.50). Of the 26 urologic diagnoses examined, testis cancer (OR 2.58) and orchitis (OR 2.49) appointments were more likely to no-show.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We analyzed ambulatory urology appointments within our hospital enterprise and found factors associated with a higher rate of no-show. These data may be helpful to identify patients at risk of no-show and to implement tailored strategies to enhance clinic attendance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45220,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urology Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"101097UPJ0000000000000760\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urology Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of Factors Associated With Patient No-Shows to Ambulatory Urology Appointments.
Introduction: Clinic no-shows result in misallocation of health care resources and decreased access to care. There is minimal published data examining factors associated with no-shows for ambulatory urology visits. We analyzed data from a large cohort of outpatient encounters at a tertiary health system to identify factors that increase the likelihood of ambulatory urology no-show.
Methods: Data were available from scheduled ambulatory urology appointments at 18 clinics in an academic, tertiary health system between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2023. A control group of completed appointments and a study group of no-show appointments were used for comparative statistics. χ2 and t tests were used to make comparisons. The false discovery rate-adjusted P value was calculated using Bonferroni method.
Results: Data were available from a total of 990,749 appointments. A total of 187,036 appointments from 10 clinics met inclusion and exclusion criteria, among which 177,718 (95%) were completed appointments and 9318 (5%) were patient no-shows. Patients who no-showed were younger (58 years vs 62 years; P < .01) and Black (odds ratio [OR] 3.74). No-shows were more common if the visit was virtual (OR 1.50) or follow-up (OR 1.50). Patients referred from the emergency department were more likely to no-show (OR 1.50). Of the 26 urologic diagnoses examined, testis cancer (OR 2.58) and orchitis (OR 2.49) appointments were more likely to no-show.
Conclusions: We analyzed ambulatory urology appointments within our hospital enterprise and found factors associated with a higher rate of no-show. These data may be helpful to identify patients at risk of no-show and to implement tailored strategies to enhance clinic attendance.