Gastroenterologist and primary care perspectives on a post-endoscopy discharge policy: impact on clinic wait times, provider satisfaction and provider workload.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Selvig D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5763538 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Gastroenterologist and primary care perspectives on a post-endoscopy discharge policy: impact on clinic wait times, provider satisfaction and provider workload.
Selvig Daniel D Sewell Justin L JL Tuot Delphine S DS Day Lukejohn W LW
BMC health services research 20180110 1
<h4>Background</h4>To reduce unnecessary ambulatory gastroenterology (GI) visits and increase access to GI care, San Francisco Health Network gastroenterologists and primary care providers implemented guidelines in 2013 that discharged certain patients back to primary care after endoscopy with formal written recommendations. This study assesses the longer-term impact of this policy on GI clinic access, workflow, and provider satisfaction.<h4>Methods</h4>An email-based survey assessed gastroenter ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSection 507 of the VA MISSION Act of 2018 mandated a 2-year pilot study of medical scribes in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), with 12 VA Medical Centers randomly selected to receive scribes in their emergency departments or high wait time specialty clinics (cardiology and orthopedics). The pilot began on June 30, 2020, and ended on July 1, 2022.ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate the impact of medical scribes on provider productivity, wait times, and patient satisfaction in cardiology and orthopedics, as mandated by the MISSION Act.DesignCluster randomized trial, with intent-to-treat analysis using difference-in-differences regression.PatientsVeterans using 18 included VA Medical Centers (12 intervention and 6 comparison sites).InterventionRandomization into MISSION 507 medical scribe pilot.Main measuresProvider productivity, wait times, and patient satisfaction per clinic-pay period.Key resultsRandomization into the scribe pilot was associated with increases of 25.2 relative value units (RVUs) per full-time equivalent (FTE) (p < 0.001) and 8.5 visits per FTE (p = 0.002) in cardiology and increases of 17.3 RVUs per FTE (p = 0.001) and 12.5 visits per FTE (p = 0.001) in orthopedics. We found that the scribe pilot was associated with a decrease of 8.5 days in request to appointment day wait times (p < 0.001) in orthopedics, driven by a 5.7-day decrease in appointment made to appointment day wait times (p < 0.001), and observed no change in wait times in cardiology. We also observed no declines in patient satisfaction with randomization into the scribe pilot.ConclusionsGiven the potential improvements in productivity and wait times with no change in patient satisfaction, our results suggest that scribes may be a useful tool to improve access to VHA care. However, participation in the pilot by sites and providers was voluntary, which could have implications for scalability and what effects could be expected if scribes were introduced to the care process without buy-in. Cost was not considered in this analysis but is an important factor for future implementation.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04154462.
| S-EPMC10356725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProlonged wait times are known barriers to accessing nephrology care for patients needing more urgent specialist services. Improved process and standardized triage systems are known to minimize wait times of urgent or semi-urgent care in health care disciplines. In Central Zone (CZ) renal clinic, mean wait times for urgent (P1) and semi-urgent (P2) referrals were prolonged before 2014. We also observed prolonged wait times for elective (P3-P5) categories. Improving wait times was identified as an access to care quality improvement focus in CZ renal clinic of the Nova Scotia Health Authority (NSHA).ObjectivesTo describe our new referral process and new triage system, and to examine their effect on number of referrals wait-listed and mean wait times.DesignA quasi-experimental design was used.SettingHalifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ParticipantsPatients referred to Central Zone Renal Clinic between 2012 and 2018.MeasurementsA time series of referral counts and wait times for each triage category were measured before our interventions and after implementing our interventions.MethodsWe reviewed our referral processes to identify gaps leading to prolonged wait times. On January 1, 2014, we implemented new administrative procedures: pretriage (standardized referral information form and staff training), triage (standardized clinic intake criteria and new triage guidelines), posttriage (protecting clinic spots for urgent and semi-urgent referrals, wait-list maintenance, and increasing new referral clinic capacity). Data were collected prospectively. Descriptive analysis on mean wait times was done using run charts.ResultsA 33% reduction in total number of referrals wait-listed was observed over 4.5 years after intervention. Descriptive analysis of the urgent and semi-urgent categories (P1 and P2) revealed a significant shift of mean wait times on run charts after the interventions. Target wait time was achieved in 94% of P1 category and 78% of P2 category.LimitationsThis type of study design does not exclude confounding variables influencing results. We did not explore stakeholder satisfaction or whether the new referral process presented barriers to resending referrals that had insufficient triage data. The long-term sustainability of adding demand-responsive surge clinics and opportunity cost were not assessed. Our referral process and triage system have not been externally validated and may not be applicable in settings without wait-lists or settings that use electronic, telephone or telemedicine consults.ConclusionOur selective intake of referrals with adequate triage information and referrals needing nephrology consult as defined by our clinic intake criteria reduced number of referrals wait-listed. We saw improved wait times for urgent and semi-urgent referrals with these categories now falling within target wait times for the vast majority of patients. The work of this improvement initiative continues especially for the lower-risk triage categories.Trial registrationNot applicable as this was a Quality improvement initiative.
| S-EPMC7271271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: Community addiction treatment agencies have utilized Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment (NIATx), a proven implementation strategy, to reduce appointment wait-times. However, its effectiveness at reducing medication access wait-times has not been explored. Thus, we conducted an exploratory analysis to evaluate the impact of the NIATx implementation strategies on reduced wait-times to addiction, psychotropic or both medications for individuals with co-occurring disorders (COD). Methods: In a cluster-randomized waitlist control group design, community addiction treatment agencies (n = 49) were randomized to receive the NIATx strategy (Cohort 1, n = 25) or to a Waitlist control (Cohort 2, n = 24). All agencies had a 12-month active intervention period. The primary outcome was the medication encounter wait-time. A univariate general linear model analysis utilizing a logarithmic (log10) transformation examined medication wait-times improvements. Results: The intent-to-treat analysis for psychotropic medications and both medications (reflecting integrated treatment) showed significant main effects for intervention and time, especially comparing Baseline and Year 1 to Year 2. Conversely, only the main effect for time was significant for addiction medications. Wait-time reductions in Cohort 1 agencies was delayed and occurred in the sustainment phase. Wait-times to a psychotropic, addiction, or both medications encounter declined by 3 days, 4.9 days, and 6.8 days, respectively. For Cohort 2 agencies, reduced wait-times were seen for psychotropic (3.4 days), addiction (6 days), and both medications (4.9 days) during their active implementation period. Same- or next-day medication access also improved. Conclusions: NIATx implementation strategies reduced medication encounter wait-times but timing of agency improvements varied. Despite a significant improvement, a three-week wait-time to receive integrated pharmacological interventions is clinically suboptimal for individuals with a COD in need of immediate intervention. Community addiction treatment agencies should identify barriers and implement changes to improve medication access so that their patients "wait no longer" to receive integrated treatment and medications for their COD.
| S-EPMC9503325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Long wait times and crowding are major issues affecting outpatient service delivery, but it is unclear how these affect patients in dual practice settings. This study aims to evaluate the effects of changing consultation start time and patient arrival on wait times and crowding in an outpatient clinic with a dual practice system. A discrete event simulation (DES) model was developed based on real-world data from an Obstetrics and Gynaecology (O&G) clinic in a public hospital. Data on patient flow, resource availability, and time taken for registration and clinic processes for public and private patients were sourced from stakeholder discussion and time-motion study (TMS), while arrival times were sourced from the hospital's information system database. Probability distributions were used to fit these input data in the model. Scenario analyses involved configurations on consultation start time/staggered patient arrival. The median registration and clinic turnaround times (TT) were significantly different between public and private patients (p < 0.01). Public patients have longer wait times than private patients in this study's dual practice setting. Scenario analyses showed that early consultation start time that matches patient arrival time and staggered arrival could reduce the overall TT for public and private patients by 40% and 21%, respectively. Similarly, the number of patients waiting at the clinic per hour could be reduced by 10-21% during clinic peak hours. Matching consultation start time with staggered patient arrival can potentially reduce wait times and crowding, especially for public patients, without incurring additional resource needs and help narrow the wait time gap between public and private patients. Healthcare managers and policymakers can consider simulation approaches for the monitoring and improvement of healthcare operational efficiency to meet rising healthcare demand and costs.
| S-EPMC8871892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTimely access to medical care is an important determinant of health and well-being. The US Congress passed the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act in 2014 and the VA MISSION (Maintaining Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks) Act in 2018, both of which allow veterans to access care from community-based clinicians, but geographic variation in appointment wait times after the passage of these acts have not been studied.ObjectiveTo describe geographic variation in wait times experienced by veterans for primary care, mental health, and other specialties.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a cross-sectional study using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Corporate Data Warehouse. Participants include veterans who sought medical care from January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2021. Data analysis was performed from February to June 2022.ExposuresReferral to either VHA or community-based clinicians.Main outcomes and measuresTotal appointment wait times (in days) for 3 care categories: primary care, mental health, and all other specialties. VHA medical centers are organized into regions called Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs); wait times were aggregated to the VISN level.ResultsThe final sample included 22 632 918 million appointments for 4 846 892 unique veterans (77.3% male; mean [SD] age, 61.6 [15.5] years). Among non-VHA appointments, mean (SD) VISN-level appointment wait times were 38.9 (8.2) days for primary care, 43.9 (9.0) days for mental health, and 41.9 (5.9) days for all other specialties. Among VHA appointments, mean (SD) VISN-level appointment wait times were 29.0 (5.5) days for primary care, 33.6 (4.6) days for mental health, and 35.4 (2.7) days for all other specialties. There was substantial geographic variation in appointment wait times. Among non-VHA appointments, VISN-level appointment wait times ranged from 25.4 to 52.4 days for primary care, from 29.3 to 65.7 days for mental health, and from 34.7 to 54.8 days for all other specialties. Among VHA appointments, wait times ranged from 22.4 to 43.4 days for primary care, from 24.7 to 42.0 days for mental health, and from 30.3 to 41.9 days for all other specialties. There was a correlation between wait times across care categories and setting (VHA vs community care).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found substantial variation in wait times across care type and geography, and VHA wait times in a majority of VISNs were lower than those for community-based clinicians, even after controlling for differences in specialty mix. These findings suggest that liberalized access to community care under the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act and the VA MISSION Act may not result in lower wait times within these regions.
| S-EPMC9412224 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aim: To evaluate our early discharge program of preterm infants with nasogastric tube feeding (NTF) and close outpatient clinic follow-up with regard to safety, parent satisfaction and parental stress level. Methods: 119 preterm infants were discharged on NTF from our tertiary care neonatal unit (median gestational age 31.0 weeks, median birthweight 1,650 g). Parental satisfaction was evaluated by a standardized questionnaire. For safety assessment growth until term equivalent age and re-hospitalizations within 2 months after discharge were evaluated. Results: Infants were discharged home at a median gestational age of 35.4 weeks after a median hospital stay of 22 days. Follow up was attained in 95 of 104 parent-infant dyads. The majority of parents (94%) reported that they had made the right decision in taking their infant home on NTF. At the time of discharge 86% of parents felt very well-prepared to perform NTF. 70% Of parents rated their stress level at home as low (≤2 out of 5). There were no NTF associated readmissions and no growth faltering until term equivalent age. Conclusion: Early discharge of preterm infants with NTF together with outpatient clinic follow-up is very well-accepted by parents and appears to be safe.
| S-EPMC7491054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In many Dutch hospitals, open access referral for colonoscopy is authorized by a gastroenterologist after screening a standard referral letter (SRL) without face-to-face contact with the patient. We investigated the added value of a 7.5 min outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist (OC), regarding the patient indications, priority for colonoscopy, and the frequency of correct information about patient medications and comorbidities on SRLs.In a prospective, blinded, single-center study, gastroenterologists assessed SRLs for the accuracy and priority of the colonoscopy request (SRL). These data were compared to results from the OC, and primary outcomes were the number of patients who were not recommended for colonoscopy and priority scheduling of colonoscopy for suspicion of cancer.Patients were analyzed using both SRL and OC and, of 255 patients, 224 of them underwent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was not recommended for 6.3 % and 11.4 % of patients using the SRL and OC, respectively (P = 0.02). Using the SRL, gastroenterologists did not recommend colonoscopy for seven patients, but the same patients were recommended for colonoscopy when OC was available. This was explained because the indications on the SRL did not match the information obtained from OC. Compared to OC , more colonoscopies were prioritized when the SRL was used to make decisions. Cancer was detected in 7/112 (SRL ) versus 7/65 (OC ) of priority-scheduled patients. SRLs did not report the use of coumarins and insulin in 1.6 % of patients or the prevalence of serious comorbid conditions in 52 % of patients.A 7.5 min outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist improved the identification of indications for colonoscopy, decreased priority scheduling of patients, and increased the number of patients diagnosed with cancer in the prioritized group. SRLs frequently omitted patients' medications and comorbidities.
| S-EPMC4812814 | biostudies-other
Project description:The time patients spend in a doctor's waiting room prior to a scheduled appointment is an important component of the quality of the overall health care experience. We analyzed data on twenty-one million outpatient visits obtained from electronic health record systems, which allowed us to measure time spent in the waiting room beyond the scheduled appointment time. Median wait time was a little more than four minutes. Almost one-fifth of visits had waits longer than twenty minutes, and 10 percent were more than thirty minutes. Waits were shorter for early-morning appointments, for younger patients, and at larger practices. Median wait time was 4.1 minutes for privately insured patients and 4.6 minutes for Medicaid patients. After adjustment for patient and appointment characteristics, Medicaid patients were 20 percent more likely than the privately insured patients to wait longer than twenty minutes, with most of this disparity explained by differences in practices and providers they saw. Wait times for Medicaid patients relative to privately insured patients were longer in states with relatively lower Medicaid reimbursement rates. The study complements other work that suggests that Medicaid patients face some additional barriers in the receipt of care.
| S-EPMC5812017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Wait-list control clinical trials are popular among psychologists and rehabilitation specialists partly because all participants receive the intervention. In 2 arm wait-list control trials, individuals randomized to the treatment group receive immediate treatment whereas individuals randomized to the control group wait a fixed amount of time before intervention is initiated. For interventions that have varying durations, careful consideration must be given to the period that participants in the control group have a delay until treatment begins, as incongruent wait times compared to the intervention durations of the treatment group may introduce confounding into the evaluation of the treatment differences. To alleviate this issue, we propose to adaptively assign wait times to individuals randomized to the control group based on the intervention duration of those in the treatment group. Simulations demonstrate the that our method not only results in similar timing distributions between participants in the treatment and control groups, but also allows participants in the control group to initiate treatment earlier than the traditional design. The latter characteristic may reduce dropout and result in more efficient study enrollment.
| S-EPMC7872975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) affects many Canadians. Although morbidity and mortality are rare, the burden to patients and the health-care system is significant. This study aims to evaluate current plastic surgery wait times and care pathways for patients with NMSC in Southwestern Ontario.MethodsA retrospective chart review of 225 patients treated in Ontario from 2015 to 2018 was conducted. Inclusion criteria included patients with an NMSC managed with surgical excision. Referral information was compared. Primary outcomes were wait times: from referral to consultation, referral to excision, and consultation to excision. Data were analyzed using Student t test with equal variance.ResultsOne-hundred forty-three patients were included from the academic cohort and 82 from the community cohort. Referrals to academic and community surgeons included lesion location (90% and 97.6%, respectively), but less frequently included size (18% and 29.2%, respectively). Most referrals to academic surgeons included biopsy results (78.6%), as opposed to community referrals (25.6%). Patients in the academic cohort waited 15.3 ± 12.7 weeks from referral to consultation, and 15.7 ± 13 weeks from referral to excision. Patients from the community cohort waited significantly shorter periods of 4.9 ± 3.1 (P < .001) and 11.7 ± 9.9 weeks (P = .016), respectively. However, patients of the academic cohort waited 2.4 ± 7.1 weeks from consultation to excision, while patients in the community cohort waited 6.7 ± 9.6 weeks (P < .001). Rates of negative peripheral margins on pathology were similar between groups, at 89.5% of the academic cohort and 88.9% of the community cohort. Deep margins were positive 5.7% of the time at the academic sites and 6.2% of the time in the community.ConclusionsPatients referred to academic centres waited significantly longer periods of time in several parameters compared to those referred to a community surgeon. However, academic surgeons often had expedited consultation-to-excision time frame. This study provides important data for future quality improvement initiatives in NMSC care.
| S-EPMC7016394 | biostudies-literature