Bailey J, Roland M, Roberts C
National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999 Feb;53(2):118-24. doi: 10.1136/jech.53.2.118.
To assess the benefit of planned specialist follow up appointments after elective inpatient surgery.
This was a controlled trial, using repeated alternate allocation of time periods to the two study groups. Group 1: Planned outpatient follow up 6-12 weeks after surgery. Group 2: No planned follow up: additional written information for patients and general practitioners.
A district general hospital in the north west of England.
264 patients listed for one of: transurethral resection of the prostate, varicose vein surgery, cholecystectomy (open or laparoscopic), inguinal herniorraphy (open or laparoscopic).
Health status, complications, return to normal activity, patient satisfaction, use and costs of primary and secondary care in the 12 weeks after surgery.
Data were available for 212 (80%) of eligible patients. Thirty eight per cent of patients in the "no planned follow up" group were in fact seen in outpatients after their discharge. Intention to treat analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the groups for health status, complications, or time to return to normal activity. Patients in the "no planned follow up" group had significantly fewer hospital visits and costs (mean difference in visits 0.51, 95% confidence intervals 0.39 to 0.69; mean difference in hospital costs 12.75 Pounds, 9.75 Pounds to 15.50 Pounds). There were fewer primary care staff contacts and costs in the "no planned follow up" group, although this difference was not significant (mean difference = 0.61 visits, -0.13 to 1.33 visits; primary care costs difference 8.37 Pounds, -1.31 Pounds to 18.73 Pounds). Patients in the "no planned follow up group" had significantly reduced patient travel costs (mean difference 4.84 Pounds, 3.44 Pounds to 6.22 Pounds). Eighty nine (42%) patients would prefer to be followed up by both their hospital doctor and GP; 53 (25%) patients would prefer to be followed up by the hospital doctor only. There were no significant differences between the two groups in their preferences for follow up. The majority of GPs agreed with the statement that a policy of no follow up at hospital outpatients for each of the six surgical procedures would increase their workload.
Planned outpatient appointments after uncomplicated surgery seem to be neither necessary nor cost effective. A policy of "no planned follow up" results in no increase in primary care costs, and savings in hospital and patient costs. However, many patients expected and wanted to be seen again by their surgeon and GPs were concerned that a "no follow up" policy would result in an increase in workload.
评估择期住院手术后安排专科医生随访预约的益处。
这是一项对照试验,采用将时间段交替分配给两个研究组的方法。第1组:术后6 - 12周安排门诊随访。第2组:不安排计划随访,为患者和全科医生提供额外书面信息。
英格兰西北部的一家区综合医院。
264例计划进行以下手术之一的患者:经尿道前列腺切除术、静脉曲张手术、胆囊切除术(开放或腹腔镜)、腹股沟疝修补术(开放或腹腔镜)。
健康状况、并发症、恢复正常活动情况、患者满意度、术后12周内初级和二级医疗保健的使用情况及费用。
212例(80%)符合条件的患者有数据可用。“无计划随访”组中38%的患者出院后实际在门诊就诊。意向性分析显示,两组在健康状况、并发症或恢复正常活动时间方面无显著差异。“无计划随访”组患者的医院就诊次数和费用显著更少(就诊次数的平均差异为0.51,95%置信区间为0.39至0.69;医院费用的平均差异为12.75英镑,9.75英镑至15.50英镑)。“无计划随访”组的初级保健人员接触次数和费用也更少,尽管差异不显著(平均差异 = 0.61次就诊, - 0.13次至1.33次就诊;初级保健费用差异为8.37英镑, - 1.31英镑至18.73英镑)。“无计划随访组”患者的交通费用显著降低(平均差异为图4.84英镑,3.44英镑至6.22英镑)。89例(42%)患者希望由医院医生和全科医生共同随访;53例(25%)患者希望仅由医院医生随访。两组在随访偏好方面无显著差异。大多数全科医生同意这样的说法,即对六种手术中的每一种在医院门诊不进行随访的政策会增加他们的工作量。
简单手术后安排门诊预约似乎既无必要也不具有成本效益。“无计划随访”政策不会增加初级保健费用,还能节省医院和患者费用。然而,许多患者期望并希望再次见到他们的外科医生,全科医生担心“无随访”政策会导致工作量增加。