The impact of developing a comprehensive hernia center on the referral patterns and complexity of hernia care

Hernia ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 625-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Raigani ◽  
G. S. De Silva ◽  
C. N. Criss ◽  
Y. W. Novitsky ◽  
M. J. Rosen
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 891-892
Author(s):  
Corinna J. Rea ◽  
Ronald C. Samuels ◽  
Snehal Shah ◽  
Melissa Rosen ◽  
Sara L. Toomey

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amandeep Taggar ◽  
Majed Alghamdi ◽  
Derek Tilly ◽  
Xanthoula Kostaras ◽  
Marc Kerba ◽  
...  

Introduction: Adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) can improve biochemical progression-free survival in patients with high-risk features (HRF) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Guidelines from Alberta andthe Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada (GUROC) recommend that patients with HRF be referred to radiation oncologists (RO) based on the findings from three randomized, controlled trials(RCT). Our study examines the impact of these recommendations both pre- (2005) and post- (2012) publication of RCT and GUROC guideline establishment.Methods: Patients undergoing RP during 2005 and 2012 were identified from the provincial cancer registry. Charts were retrospectively reviewed and variables of interest were linked to the registry data. RO referral patterns for each year were determined and variables influencing referral (extracapsular extension, positive margin, seminal vesicle invasion, and post-RP prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) were compared.Results: Median time to referral was 26.4 months in 2005 compared to 3.7 months 2012 (p<0.001). Among patients referred post-RP, a higher proportion was referred within six months in 2012 (21%)as compared to 2005 (13%) (p=0.003). Among eligible patients in 2012, 30% were referred for discussion of aRT compared to 24% in 2005 (p=0.003). There was a marked drop in patients referredfor salvage radiation therapy beyond six months and a rise in the number of patients who are never referred.Conclusions: Despite an increase in referral rates to RO post-RP from 2005–2012, more than 50% of those patients with HRF did not receive a referral. Initiatives aimed at improving multidisciplinary care and guideline adherence should be undertaken.


Author(s):  
Leonard A. Sowah ◽  
Sarah A. Schmalzle ◽  
Mariam Khambaty ◽  
Ulrike K. Buchwald

People living with HIV are at high risk for anal cancer (AC); however, the impact of screening for and treatment of precancerous anal lesions on AC incidence remains uncertain. In 2013, we conducted a survey of HIV providers evaluating the perceived need for an institutional AC screening program. Based on an overwhelmingly positive response, we established a dedicated AC screening clinic (including provision of high-resolution anoscopies) embedded within the institutional HIV clinic. Here, we describe that referral of high-risk patients in the first 3 years was lower than expected. Referral patterns suggest that screening practices vary widely among HIV providers within the institution. Anal cancer clinic patients who completed a perception survey rated the value of AC screening as high, with perceived positive health impact, and identified their providers as the main source of information on AC and AC screening. Our findings imply remaining provider-related barriers to AC screening.


2007 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. e143-e150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan C. Clyman ◽  
Fiza Nazir ◽  
Sharon Tarolli ◽  
Elizabeth Black ◽  
Roni Q. Lombardi ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
O.M. MCNALLY ◽  
V. WAREHAM ◽  
D.J. FLEMMING ◽  
M.E. CRUICKSHANK ◽  
D.E. PARKIN

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e032179
Author(s):  
Chris Smith ◽  
Jenny Hewison ◽  
Robert M West ◽  
Elspeth Guthrie ◽  
Peter Trigwell ◽  
...  

IntroductionWe describe the protocol for a project that will use linkage of routinely collected NHS data to answer a question about the nature and effectiveness of liaison psychiatry services in acute hospitals in England.Methods and analysisThe project will use three data sources: (1) Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), a database controlled by NHS Digital that contains patient data relating to emergency department (ED), inpatient and outpatient episodes at hospitals in England; (2) ResearchOne, a research database controlled by The Phoenix Partnership (TPP) that contains patient data relating to primary care provided by organisations using the SystmOne clinical information system and (3) clinical databases controlled by mental health trusts that contain patient data relating to care provided by liaison psychiatry services. We will link patient data from these sources to construct care pathways for patients who have been admitted to a particular hospital and determine those patients who have been seen by a liaison psychiatry service during their admission.Patient care pathways will form the basis of a matched cohort design to test the effectiveness of liaison intervention. We will combine healthcare utilisation within care pathways using cost figures from national databases. We will compare the cost of each care pathway and the impact of a broad set of health-related outcomes to obtain preliminary estimates of cost-effectiveness for liaison psychiatry services. We will carry out an exploratory incremental cost-effectiveness analysis from a whole system perspective.Ethics and disseminationIndividual patient consent will not be feasible for this study. Favourable ethical opinion has been obtained from the NHS Research Ethics Committee (North of Scotland) (REF: 16/NS/0025) for Work Stream 2 (phase 1) of the Liaison psychiatry—measurement and evaluation of service types, referral patterns and outcomes study. The Confidentiality Advisory Group at the Health Research Authority determined that Section 251 approval under Regulation 5 of the Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002 was not required for the study ‘on the basis that there is no disclosure of patient identifiable data without consent’ (REF: 16/CAG/0037).Results of the study will be published in academic journals in health services research and mental health. Details of the study methodology will also be published in an academic journal. Discussion papers will be authored for health service commissioners.


2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 226-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Reilly ◽  
David Markenson

ABSTRACTBackground:A prevalent assumption in hospital emergency preparedness planning is that patient arrival from a disaster scene will occur through a coordinated system of patient distribution based on the number of victims, capabilities of the receiving hospitals, and the nature and severity of illness or injury. In spite of the strength of the emergency medical services system, case reports in the literature and major incident after-action reports have shown that most patients who present at a health care facility after a disaster or other major emergency do not necessarily arrive via ambulance. If these reports of arrival of patients outside an organized emergency medical services system are accurate, then hospitals should be planning differently for the impact of an unorganized influx of patients on the health care system. Hospitals need to consider alternative patterns of patient referral, including the mass convergence of self-referred patients, when performing major incident planning.Methods:We conducted a retrospective review of published studies from the past 25 years to identify reports of patient care during disasters or major emergency incidents that described the patients' method of arrival at the hospital. Using a structured mechanism, we aggregated and analyzed the data.Results:Detailed data on 8303 patients from more than 25 years of literature were collected. Many reports suggest that only a fraction of the patients who are treated in emergency departments following disasters arrive via ambulance, particularly in the early postincident stages of an event. Our 25 years of aggregate data suggest that only 36% of disaster victims are transported to hospitals via ambulance, whereas 63% use alternate means to seek emergency medical care.Conclusions:Hospitals should evaluate their emergency plans to consider the implications of alternate referral patterns of patients during a disaster. Additional consideration should be given to mass triage, site security, and the potential need for decontamination after a major incident.(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:226-231)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document