Understanding Patients' Preferences for Referrals to Specialists for an Asymptomatic Condition

Differences in the referral process from general practice to resident specialists in gynaecology depending on density of specialists and patients' socioeconomic status

BACKGROUND

There are significant differences in the densities of resident specialists in gynaecology (RSGs) in various regions of Denmark. It is unclear whether this disparity affects gynaecological patients' experience of the referral process and whether it differs in terms of their socioeconomic status (SES).

OBJECTIVE

To examine gynaecological patients' experiences of the referral process to an RSG concerning RSG density and patients' SES.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional questionnaire and registry-based study.

SETTING

In Denmark, general practitioners (GPs) serve as gatekeepers of secondary care and are responsible for referrals to resident specialists as well as inpatient and outpatient hospital care.

SUBJECTS

A total of 2917 patients who consulted an RSG participated in this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Patients' experiences of referral to an RSG, waiting times, involvement, and how they experienced the referral process.

RESULTS

Patients who lived in the highest density RSG region were referred to an RSG more promptly after the onset of symptoms, had to visit their GP less frequently to obtain a referral to the RSG, and rarely received a gynaecological examination by their GP compared with those living in regions with lower RSG densities. Moreover, their waiting times were shorter, and more often, the patients themselves proposed to be referred to an RSG. The findings show that RSG density had a greater impact on women's experiences than SES.

CONCLUSION

To allow equal access to specialist care, RSG density must be equal across all regions in the country.

Psychiatric consultation: Characteristics, satisfaction, and perceived opportunities among referrers to a 1-time service

OBJECTIVE

To further understand and optimize primary care provider (PCP) referrals to a 1-time psychiatric consultation service by developing profiles of PCP referrers, assessing PCP satisfaction with the service, and determining intervention opportunities.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a referral database and subsequent cross-sectional survey of referrers.

SETTING

Winnipeg, Man.

PARTICIPANTS

All family physicians who had made at least 1 referral in 2017 to the Centralized Psychiatric Consultation Service for Adults, a 1-time consultation service.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Referral frequency, individual and practice characteristics, satisfaction with the Centralized Psychiatric Consultation Service for Adults, and subjective drivers of referral activity were assessed. Interest in a range of intervention opportunities to increase mental health knowledge and support were also examined.

RESULTS

Of the 403 family physicians who referred patients to the consultation service in 2017, a total of 111 (27.5%) responded to the survey. Among all referrers, 287 (71.2%) were low referrers (1 to 4 referrals), 65 (16.1%) were moderate referrers (5 to 9 referrals), and 51 (12.7%) were high referrers (≥10 referrals). Solo practice (P=.04) and no access to collaborative mental health services (P<.001) were significantly associated with being a high referrer. Roughly 26.3% of low referrers, 29.2% of moderate referrers, and 15.4% of high referrers were satisfied with wait times for the service. Higher referrers did not identify a lack of comfort with providing psychiatric care as a driver of referrals; more indicated that they had a high volume of patients with mental health needs, that there was a lack of access to alternative services, and that patients sometimes requested referral. Overall, more than 40% of respondents expressed interest in a mental health care navigator, hard-copy resource information, and rapid access to consultation advice via telephone or an electronic platform. There was less interest in other proposed interventions.

CONCLUSION

We found referrers to the Centralized Psychiatric Consultation Service for Adults to be clustered based on specific practice characteristics, as well as provider-patient factors. Overall, satisfaction with the service was fair and PCPs were not highly interested in a variety of proposed interventions. Future studies should explore how useful 1-time consultation services are for solo-practising PCPs and how best to support these and other PCPs in their management of patients with mental health needs.

A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies

BACKGROUND

The referral process is an important research focus because of the potential consequences of delays, especially for patients with serious medical conditions that need immediate care, such as those with metastatic cancer. Thus, a systematic literature review of recent and influential manuscripts is critical to understanding the current methods and future directions in order to improve the referral process.

METHODS

A hybrid bibliometric-structured review was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Searches were conducted of three databases, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, in addition to the references from the eligible papers. The papers were considered to be eligible if they were relevant English articles or reviews that were published from January 2010 to June 2021. The searches were conducted using three groups of keywords, and bibliometric analysis was performed, followed by content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 163 papers that were published in impactful journals between January 2010 and June 2021 were selected. These papers were then reviewed, analyzed, and categorized as follows: descriptive analysis (n = 77), cause and effect (n = 12), interventions (n = 50), and quality management (n = 24). Six future research directions were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal attention was given to the study of the primary referral of blood cancer cases versus those with solid cancer types, which is a gap that future studies should address. More research is needed in order to optimize the referral process, specifically for suspected hematological cancer patients.

The Impact of Web-Based Ratings on Patient Choice of a Primary Care Physician Versus a Specialist: Randomized Controlled Experiment

Background

Physician review websites have empowered prospective patients to acquire information about physicians. However, little is known about how Web-based ratings on different aspects of a physician may affect patients’ selection of physicians differently.

Objective

The objectives of this study were to examine (1) how patients weigh ratings on a physician’s technical skills and interpersonal skills in their selection of physicians and (2) whether and how people’s choice of a primary care physician versus a specialist is affected differently by Web-based ratings.

Methods

A 2×2×2×2 between-subjects experiment was conducted. Over 600 participants were recruited through a crowdsourcing website and randomly assigned to view a mockup physician review Web page that contained information on a physician’s basic information and patients’ ratings. After reviewing the Web page, participants were asked to complete a survey on their perceptions of the physician and willingness to seek health care from the physician.

Results

The results showed that participants were more willing to choose a physician with higher ratings on technical skills than on interpersonal skills compared with a physician with higher ratings on interpersonal skills than on technical skills, t_369.96=22.36, P<.001, Cohen d=1.22. In the selection of different types of physicians, patients were more likely to choose a specialist with higher ratings on technical skills than on interpersonal skills, compared with a primary care physician with the same ratings, F_1,521=5.34, P=.021.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that people place more weight on technical skills than interpersonal skills in their selection of a physician based on their ratings on the Web. Specifically, people are more likely to make a compromise on interpersonal skills in their choice of a specialist compared with a primary care physician. This study emphasizes the importance of examining Web-based physician ratings in a more nuanced way in relation to the selection of different types of physicians.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN91316463; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91316463

Socioeconomic Status, Family Functioning and Delayed Care Among Children With Special Needs

Parents of children with special healthcare needs (CSHCN) face tremendous stress in caring for their children. Families of CSHCN face increased barriers to health services as evidence also reflects the influence of socioeconomic factors on access. This study investigates the impact of socioeconomic factors and family functioning on delayed care. Descriptive, bivariate, and adjusted multivariate logistic regression were performed using sampling weights. findings suggest that family dynamics are more impactful on delayed care than socioeconomic predictors. Promoting family-centered care that incorporates social support for families to reduce barriers is essential for improved quality of life and health outcomes.

The Role of Organizational Affiliations in Physician Patient-Sharing Relationships

Provider consolidation may enable improved care coordination, but raises concerns about lack of competition. Physician patient-sharing relationships play a key role in constructing patient care teams, but it is unknown how organization affiliations affect these. We use the Massachusetts All Payer Claims Database to examine whether patient-sharing relationships are associated with sharing a practice site, medical group, and/or physician contracting network. Physicians were 17 percentage points more likely to have a patient-sharing relationship if they shared a practice site and 4 percentage points more likely if they shared a medical group, as compared with sharing no affiliation. However, there was no detectable increased probability of a patient-sharing relationship within the same physician contracting network. Our finding that physician patient-sharing relationships are concentrated within organizational boundaries at practice site and medical group levels helps illuminate referral incentives and provide insight into the role of organizational affiliations in patient care team construction.

Validating Domains of Patient Contextual Factors Essential to Preventing Contextual Errors: A Qualitative Study Conducted at Chicago Area Veterans Health Administration Sites

PURPOSE

"Patient context" indicates patient circumstances and characteristics or states that are essential to address when planning patient care. Specific patient "contextual factors," if overlooked, result in an inappropriate plan of care, a medical error termed a "contextual error." The myriad contextual factors that constitute patient context have been grouped into broad domains to create a taxonomy of challenges to consider when planning care. This study sought to validate a previously identified list of contextual domains.

METHOD

This qualitative study used directed content analysis. In 2014, 19 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) providers (84% female) and 49 patients (86% male) from two VA medical centers and four outpatient clinics in the Chicago area participated in semistructured interviews and focus groups. Topics included patient-specific, community, and resource-related factors that affect patients' abilities to manage their care. Transcripts were analyzed with a previously identified list of contextual domains as a framework.

RESULTS

Analysis of responses revealed that patients and providers identified the same 10 domains previously published, plus 3 additional ones. Based on comments made by patients and providers, the authors created a revised list of 12 domains from themes that emerged. Six pertain to patient circumstances such as access to care and financial situation, and 6 to patient characteristics/states including skills, abilities, and knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Contextual factors in patients' lives may be essential to address for effective care planning. The rubric developed can serve as a "contextual differential" for clinicians to consider when addressing challenges patients face when planning their care.

Competing priorities in treatment decision-making: a US national survey of individuals with depression and clinicians who treat depression

OBJECTIVE

To identify information priorities for consumers and clinicians making depression treatment decisions and assess shared decision-making (SDM) in routine depression care.

DESIGN

20 questions related to common features of depression treatments were provided. Participants were initially asked to select which features were important, and in a second stage they were asked to rank their top 5 'important features' in order of importance. Clinicians were asked to provide rankings according to both consumer and clinician perspectives. Consumers completed CollaboRATE, a measure of SDM. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified consumer characteristics associated with CollaboRATE scores.

SETTING

Online cross-sectional surveys fielded in September to December 2014.

PARTICIPANTS

We administered surveys to convenience samples of US adults with depression and clinicians who treat depression. Consumer sampling was targeted to reflect age, gender and educational attainment of adults with depression in the USA.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Information priority rankings; CollaboRATE, a 3-item consumer-reported measure of SDM.

RESULTS

972 consumers and 244 clinicians completed the surveys. The highest ranked question for both consumers and clinicians was 'Will the treatment work?' Clinicians were aware of consumers' priorities, yet did not always prioritise that information themselves, particularly insurance coverage and cost of treatment. Only 18% of consumers reported high levels of SDM. Working with a psychiatrist (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.26) and female gender (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.25 to 3.34) were associated with top CollaboRATE scores.

CONCLUSIONS

While clinicians know what information is important to consumers making depression treatment decisions, they do not always address these concerns. This mismatch, coupled with low SDM, adversely affects the quality of depression care. Development of a decision support intervention based on our findings can improve levels of SDM and provide clinicians and consumers with a tool to address the existing misalignment in information priorities.