Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10491231

Methods for analyzing referral patterns.

M E Cowen·M W Zodet
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a sound method to identify patient and physician characteristics that influence specialty referrals. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis of medical claims data from 1996 supplemented with surveys of primary care physicians. SETTING: A 600-member independent practice association in southeastern Michigan that provided care for 90,000 members of an HMO. PATIENTS: Five cohorts, each of 2,000 to 6,000 patients with diagnoses that could be referred to cardiologists, ophthalmologists, pulmonologists, orthopedists, or general surgeons. MAIN RESULTS: The referral rates for the different cohorts ranged from 1% to 7%. The discriminatory ability of the multivariate logistic models (c-statistic) ranged from 0.66 to 0.79. The likelihood of referral was associated with the patient's diagnoses and medications and with the referring physician's age, years out of medical school, satisfaction with the specialty being referred to, and the importance of making or confirming a diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Because these methods were not difficult to implement and the results were credible, we believe that other organizations should be able to use them.

Explore related subjects

Cohort StudiesData CollectionFamily PracticeFemaleHealth Maintenance OrganizationsHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMichiganMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPractice Patterns, Physicians'Referral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M E Cowen, M W Zodet. 1999. Methods for analyzing referral patterns.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.06368.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Nationwide cancer family ascertainment using Finnish Cancer Registry data on family names and places of birth for 35,761 prostate cancer patients.

Identification of predisposition loci to complex diseases, such as prostate cancer, requires high-quality family material, the ascertainment of which is often laborious, time-consuming and inaccurate with conventional methods. Here, we describe a new method for rapid, nationwide cancer family ascertainment using Finnish Cancer Registry data on 35,761 prostate cancer cases over a 40-year period. As members of a prostate cancer family are likely to share the same family name and place of birth, we stratified all prostate cancer cases by these 2 parameters (10,721 different names and 596 municipalities). Data were compared with the distribution of family names and places of birth for all 3.3 million Finnish men to derive standardized prevalence ratios (SPRs). A significantly elevated SPR of prostate cancer was detected for 468 (1.6%) of the 28,459 evaluable combinations of family name and place of birth. Of the 20 highest SPR values, 19 corresponded to true nuclear families, most of these having 3 or more affected cases. Two-thirds of our 50 previously established Finnish prostate cancer families were classified among this 1.6% fraction of the highest SPR values. Finally, many of the highest SPR values originated from municipalities in southern and south-western Finland. To explore whether such clusters could highlight local founder effects, we applied genealogical research to link together several families with elevated SPRs and identified an extended family with 20 prostate cancer cases with common ancestors in the early seventeenth century. In summary, a rapid novel method was developed and validated for identification of prostate cancer families from nationwide cancer registry data and for the identification of putative regional founder effects.

Cohort Studies↗
PubMed2000

Four-year follow-up results of lumbar spine arthrodesis using the Bagby and Kuslich lumbar fusion cage.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective multicenter clinical trial of a lumbar interbody fusion cage with a minimum of 4 years' follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the early positive clinical results in fusions with lumbar cages, such as the Bagby and Kuslich (BAK) cage, are maintained beyond 2 years. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Threaded cages have been used increasingly for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative intervertebral disc disease. Concerns about the long-term clinical outcomes of this procedure have been posed, particularly regarding bony fusion viability, revision rates, potential adjacent level disease, and late complications. METHODS: The study cohort was a 196-patient subset from a prospective investigational device exemption. In addition to early postoperative examinations, these patients were examined biannually with a minimum of 4 years' follow-up. Patient outcome was assessed by a 6-point scale that evaluated pain relief, and functional improvement was determined by changes in activities of daily living. Fusion rates and return to work were determined. Complications and secondary operations were reported and categorized as non-device related or device related. RESULTS: The patient cohort with 4-year follow-up represented 25.6% of the original study population eligible at that time. Overall, the largest percentage of pain relief and functional improvements occurred by 3 months, and these improvements were maintained at each follow-up. Overall fusion rate was 91.7% and 95. 1% at 2 and 4 years, respectively. In this cohort, 39.5% of patients were working or were able to work within 3 months of surgery. After 4 years, 62.7% of patients were gainfully employed or able to work. The late-occurring complication rate in this cohort was 13.8% (27/196). Complications necessitating a second operation occurred in 8.7% (17/196), whereas reoperations that were deemed device related were performed in 3.1% (6/196). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the early positive benefits of interbody fusion cage procedures are maintained through 4 years with acceptably low morbidity.

Cohort Studies↗