Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Moyez Jiwa

Publications and source records attributed to Moyez Jiwa.

18 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2004

Less haste more speed: factors that prolong the interval from presentation to diagnosis in some cancers.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, the GP is the gatekeeper to specialist services in addition to many other roles. Recently, the GP is also expected to select cases that warrant 'urgent' as opposed to 'routine' specialist investigation. Failure to refer on the appropriate timetable may have implications for timely diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to explore the circumstances in which the diagnosis of cancer is delayed with reference to the primary care records and by a structured investigation of clinical records in one practice. METHODS: The study was set in an urban group practice serving a mixed population of deprived and affluent communities. List size was 10 440 patients, with five whole time equivalent partners and three practice nurses. The appointment system was fully computerized and there were no personal lists. Records for all cases with specified common cancers diagnosed since 1990 and still registered in the practice were reviewed. The interval from presentation to referral, referral to diagnosis and presentation to diagnosis was compared for a series of factors including 'urgent' referral. The clinical team currently working in the practice conducted a structured review of the case records for the most delayed cases. RESULTS: Fifty-four cases were listed in the practice. A series of factors were identified as having a bearing on delayed diagnosis, including a reticence on the part of patients to seek to expedite specialist appointments, failures of communication, and patients presenting multiple problems in short general practice consultations. The action plan agreed by the clinical team includes improving the quality of communication with secondary care, follow-up of patients who have been referred for radiological or ultrasound investigation and reviewing patients who fail to attend specialist clinics. CONCLUSIONS: The data imply that delays sometimes result from avoidable errors before and after referral and especially by the patient entering secondary care on the wrong pathway. Improving the patients' experience in health care requires the provider to take a global view of the service. Primary care is not merely a filter but influences and is influenced by policies in other parts of the health care system.

Family Practice↗
PubMed2004

Surveying general practitioners: a new avenue.

BACKGROUND: The validity of opinions expressed in questionnaire surveys diminishes with lower response rates. Recent research suggests that general practitioners (GPs) are more likely to respond to questionnaire surveys if they are motivated to do so because the subject of the survey is perceived as relevant to the practitioner at the time of the survey, and there is an opportunity to respond without encroaching on existing obligations or interests. AIM: To compare the results of a questionnaire survey administered by two routes: a postal survey with reminders and after an educational meeting with no reminders. METHODS: A validated questionnaire with 19 questions using a Likert scale seeking views about the ideal contents of a referral letter to colorectal surgeons was administered to GPs attending a monthly educational meeting in one locality in the UK and by post to a different group in a second locality. The response rate and demographic characteristics of the GPs were compared for respondents, non-respondents, attenders and non-attenders to the educational meeting. The mean responses to the questions on the Likert scale were used to produce a schedule to score the contents of referral letters. The schedules produced by the two methods (postal/educational meeting) were used to score 551 referral letters at one district general hospital. Mean scores calculated using the two schedules derived by the postal and educational routes were compared. Cases diagnosed with 'significant organic pathology' as defined in a previous study were identified. The predictive value of the scores in identifying these cases was compared. RESULTS: 88% (138/157) of GPs in the locality attended the educational meeting and were invited to participate in the survey. Non-attenders were more likely to be assistants, locums or part-time practitioners. Overall 71% (98) of the GPs responded to the survey. There were no significant demographic differences between the respondents and non-respondents to the survey. Response rates to the survey conducted by the two routes were similar. Referral letter 'quality' scores derived via the two alternative routes were equally valuable in predicting which patients had significant organic pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Responses to questionnaire surveys are equally valid when administered via an educational meeting or by post. The value of the educational meeting approach was the relative ease of administering the questionnaire and the rapid turn around of replies. However this method may exclude the views of part-time practitioners who were more likely to fail to attend. These practitioners may need to be targeted by alternative routes in questionnaire surveys.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2004

Satisfying the patient in primary care: a postal survey following a recent consultation.

BACKGROUND: Factors over and above the skills of the health care professional appear to impact on how well patients can cope with an illness following a consultation in general practice. These other factors appear to relate to the organisation and fabric of the doctor's practice. This study reports a systematic analysis of responses to a questionnaire survey of patients following a telephone consultation in a general practice setting. This study aims to explore how views on specific aspects of a general practice service contrast among patients. METHODS: A structured anonymised postal questionnaire was sent to 916 patients within 24 h of a telephone consultation with a doctor or nurse in five general practices in North Trent, UK. No reminders were sent. Included on the questionnaire were free-text questions that invited opinions on areas for improvement for the patients' registered practice. These were analysed qualitatively using content analysis by two independent researchers. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 52% although responses from young men were under-represented in the survey. One in three responders expressed a need for improvements in the appointments, more access and less delay before practice. Five themes and a number of sub-themes were identified. Patients wanted more appointments. Other themes included a desire for better communication, more patient friendly policies and facilities. Analysis suggests that it would be very difficult to satisfy the contrasting and divergent needs of all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Communication with patients in general practice is influenced by the fabric, policies and reception staff in the practice as much as by the skills and resources of the care provider. Seeking patients' opinions about the practice within the context of a recent telephone consultation unearthed conflicting desires that cannot be satisfied given existing resources in the National Health Service (NHS). Patients favour a speedy, convenient and above all, tailored service. This may be impossible to deliver universally. Attention to the non-doctor aspects of the service may enhance the ability of practitioners to enable patients to cope with illness. The data suggest that patients are not universally satisfied with the service provided and that it would be naive to attempt to please them all.

Female↗
PubMed2004

Referral letters to colorectal surgeons: the impact of peer-mediated feedback.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) select few patients for specialist investigation. Having selected a patient, the GP writes a referral letter which serves primarily to convey concerns about the patient and offer background information. Referral letters to specialists sometimes provide an inadequate amount of information. The content of referral letters to colorectal surgeons can now be scored based on the views of GPs about the ideal content of referral letters. AIM: To determine if written feedback about the contents of GP referral letters mediated by local peers was acceptable to GPs and how this feedback influenced the content and variety of their referrals. DESIGN: A non-randomised control trial. SETTING: GPs in North Nottinghamshire. METHOD: In a controlled trial, 26 GPs were offered written feedback about the documented contents of their colorectal referral letters over 1 year. The feedback was designed and mediated by two nominated local GPs. The contents of referral letters were measured in the year before and 6 months after feedback. GPs were asked about the style of the feedback. The contents of referral letters and the proportion of patients with organic pathology were compared for the feedback GPs and other local GPs who could be identified as having used the same hospital for their referrals in the period before and after feedback. RESULTS: All GPs declared the method of feedback to be acceptable but raised concerns about their own performance, and some were upset by the experience. None withdrew from the project. There was a difference of 7.1 points (95% confidence interval = 1.9 to 12.2) in the content scores between the feedback group and the controls after adjusting for baseline differences between the groups. Of the GPs who referred to the same hospital before and after feedback, the feedback GPs referred more patients with organic pathology than other local colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: GPs welcome feedback about the details appearing on their referral letters, although peer comparisons may not always lead to changes in practice. However, in some cases feedback improves the content of GP referral letters and may also impact on the type of patients referred for investigation by specialists.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2004

Referral of suspected colorectal cancer: have guidelines made a difference?

In the United Kingdom, patients with colorectal symptoms referred on the fast-track pathway into secondary care are offered investigation of their symptoms within 2 weeks. Audits demonstrate that a minority of patients with colorectal cancer are referred under this arrangement. We assessed referral letters to hospitals in one district in the period before and after the introduction of the 2-week wait initiative. The guidelines appear to have made little difference to the proportion of cases selected for referral on the urgent pathway. However, cancers in the earliest stages present with fewer clinical features than advanced disease and a combination of signs and symptoms are more likely to arouse suspicion in the referring agent.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Advanced access.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Quality of information on referrals to colorectal surgeons: towards consensus.

OBJECTIVES: To produce a valid, reliable instrument to gauge the extent to which GPs document relevant signs, symptoms and risk factors in referral letters to colorectal surgeons. DESIGN: GPs and colorectal surgeons were invited to participate in a two-part questionnaire survey about the ideal contents of a referral letter. In the second round participants were asked to reconsider the questionnaire in the light of the group's collective replies in the first round. The instrument was tested for predictive validity and inter-rater reliability. SETTING: GPs in North Nottinghamshire Health Authority and colorectal surgeons in North Trent. PARTICIPANTS: 125 GPs registered in two districts with North Nottinghamshire Health Authority and nine colorectal surgeons in North Trent were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean scores in the second round of the questionnaire were used to produce an instrument in which marks could be ascribed to each item mentioned on a GP referral letter. RESULTS: There was a 68.6% response rate to the questionnaire survey. The instrument had substantial inter-rater reliability (r= 0.77). Higher scores predicted cases that would be offered urgent appointments by the specialist (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.10). Cases with pathology were not referred with more thorough documentation of pre-referral assessment (score 33 vs. 31, mean difference 2.3, p = 0.06 (t-test), 95% Cl = -0.07 to 4.02). CONCLUSIONS: In some cases, patients with pathology are entering secondary care with communications from GPs in which the relevant history and examination are not fully documented. Explicit documentation of GP assessment prior to referral may have a significant impact on how cases might be managed in secondary care.

Colorectal Surgery↗
PubMed2002

GP letter writing in colorectal cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The usual mode of communication with the specialist in the UK is a referral letter. Letters now primarily document the GPs' concerns for the patient and are no longer required to persuade the specialist to offer an appointment. The content of referral letters from GPs has failed to satisfy specialists responding to a series of surveys. Evidence suggests that GPs who improve their letters to specialists also refer more cases with significant pathology. AIMS: The aims of this research are to explore the factors that may influence GPs in writing the referral letter when consulting patients presenting with lower bowel symptoms. METHODS: A convenience sample of twelve GPs was interviewed in Nottinghamshire and inner city Sheffield practices. A framework approach was utilised in the analysis of data. Data from the interviews followed the prescribed steps, including: familiarisation, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting and mapping, and interpretation. RESULTS: The thematic framework reflected four major themes. These were: (1) the nature and content of referral letters, (2) knowledge about colorectal cancer, (3) issues relating to the quality of referral letters in colorectal cases and (4) factors that effect the use of guidelines for referral. CONCLUSIONS: GPs only have very short consultations in which to address many and complex issues. Pre-referral assessment in colorectal cases includes intimate examination of the patient. Therefore the writing of the letter of referral is often postponed until long after the patient has left the GP's office. Some GPs do not believe the consultant reads the letter of referral. However, GPs are keen to provide best care and welcome feedback about the quality of their letters. They acknowledge the responsibility to communicate with colleagues effectively and have differing ideas about what constitutes an adequate referral letter.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Preventing avoidable hospital admission of older people.

The National Service Framework for Older People (Department of Health, 2001) stresses the importance of preventing unnecessary hospital admissions for older people. Such admissions arise when there is inadequate health and social support available in the community to meet the needs of this age group. This article reports on a study designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a programme of enhanced primary care support intended to reduce the risk of hospital admission for people aged 75 years and above. Nineteen patients out of a possible 322 in one GP practice were judged by GPs and district nurses to be "at risk" of avoidable hospital admission. All at-risk patients were visited by a GP or district nurse to review their needs for enhanced support, six patients subsequently accepting a referral for additional support. No statistically significant difference in the number of hospital admissions in the intervention group was observed compared with a group of patients with similar demographic characteristics but deemed not to be at such high risk, suggesting that the intervention might have been effective in reducing the number of avoidable hospital admissions.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

The effect of GP telephone triage on numbers seeking same-day appointments.

Telephone consultations with general practitioners (GPs) have not been shown to be an effective way to reduce the demandfor face-to face appointments during the surgery hours. This study aims to determine if GP telephone triage can effectively reduce the demandforface-to -face consultations for patients seeking same-day appointments in general practice. We report an interrupted time series, twoyears before and one year after introduction of GP-led telephone triage. Demand for face-to face appointments with a GPwas reduced by 39% (95% CI = 29 to 51%, P < 0.001). more than 92% of the telephone calls lasted less thanfive minutes. The telephone bill increased by 26%. For a substantial proportion of patients seeking same-day appointments telephone consultations were an acceptable alternative service.

Appointments and Schedules↗