Abstract

ObjetiveTo indirectly address the adequacy of referrals from general practitioners (GP) to specialized care taking into account a previously agreed protocol on ten urological topics. Materials & methodsThe study analyzed all referrals to the Urology department originated in 10 primary care centres (135 GPs involved) throughout a 19-month period. Adequacy of 2841 referrals was checked. The urologist judged the referral as compliant (adequate) or not compliant (inadequate) with the terms of the protocol. Compliance per primary care centres was compared. Also referral adequacy corrected per centre and clinical topic was compared. The relationship between “absolute number of referrals” and “adequate referrals” was tested using a linear regression model. Results57.2% of the referrals were inadequate. Overall, no significant differences were detected between primary care centres. Nevertheless significant differences between centres were evident in terms of referrals due to renal colic and female urinary incontinence. 70% (94/135) of the GPs complied with the protocol in, at least, 50% of the cases. A strong association between “absolute number of referrals” and “adequate referrals” was evident (r2=0.86). ConclusionsOverall compliance with the protocol was modest. While no significant differences between centres were detected in terms of adequacy of referrals certain conditions have to be locally revisited; most of the topics (particularly microhematuria) have to be revisited in every center.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call