Abstract
BackgroundThe aim was to examine any differences in the way that Read codes are applied to the records for female patients with learning disabilities across three PCT areas. To ascertain the most commonly used read codes for learning disability.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study carried out in Bury, Heywood-and-Middleton and Rochdale PCTs.All women in the eligible age-group (25–64) as of the 1st June, 2005, who were in contact with the Learning Disabilities Teams in the relevant PCT areas were identified from the Teams' lists. The appropriate Read Codes were then used to identify women on GP systems. Patient data is stored on the GP database systems (Vision, EMIS, EMIS PC4 and Torex) and it was possible to search for patients with learning disabilities.ResultsThe use of Read Codes varies across the three areas. The most commonly used Read codes were E3 (Mental Retardation) – 27%, PJ0. (Down's Syndrome) – 14% and Eu81z (Learning Disabilities) – 8%. In 24% of the records a Read Code had not been documented.ConclusionRead codes application varies between GP surgeries – dependent on PCT policy and the surgery's approach and also as a result of staff time.
Highlights
The aim was to examine any differences in the way that Read codes are applied to the records for female patients with learning disabilities across three PCT areas
The use of Read Codes varies across the three areas
Read codes application varies between General Practitioners (GPs) surgeries – dependent on PCT policy and the surgery's approach and as a result of staff time
Summary
The aim was to examine any differences in the way that Read codes are applied to the records for female patients with learning disabilities across three PCT areas. To ascertain the most commonly used read codes for learning disability. There is even conflict over whether to use the term learning disabilities – the preferred term in the UK [3] and in many parts of the world the phrase mental retardation was used for some time [2]. The American Association on Mental Retardation continued to use the term mental retardation until as recently 2006 [4]. It has taken some time to arrive at 'respectful descriptions' of people with LDs, [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
