An evaluation of home visiting of patients by physicians in geriatric medicine

The practice of preadmission home visiting of patients referred to geriatric medicine units has in recent years been criticised as being unnecessary on the grounds that if there is no waiting list there is no need for allocation of priority for admission; as being wasteful of doctors'' time; as being resented by general practitioners; and as failing to provide adequate clinical information. The geriatric medicine department at the City Hospital with no waiting list for patients referred by general practitioners has retained home visits for most referrals because of the advantages in terms of acceptability to general practitioners (98-100%); the quantity and quality of information obtained; the usefulness of this information in deciding appropriate management and in planning discharge from hospital; and the provision of a unique teaching opportunity, which is highly valued by students and teachers alike.     

Long distance travel for routine elective surgery: questionnaire survey of patients' attitudes.

OBJECTIVE--To carry out an audit and assess the acceptability of long distance travel to patients on a lengthy surgical waiting list. DESIGN--Audit and questionnaire survey. SETTING--Military hospital in Wiltshire. PATIENTS--116 Patients on a general surgical waiting list at Leighton Hospital near Crewe. INTERVENTIONS--Preselection for medical fitness at a waiting list review clinic. RESULTS--Roughly half of patients offered the facility of travelling 120 miles (190 km) for their routine elective operation at the health authority''s expense accepted. The average waiting list time declared by the patients who travelled was 28 months, and 13 patients stated that their condition prevented them from working. Only four patients regretted their decision to participate in the scheme. Lack of visitors did not cause undue concern. CONCLUSIONS--Some patients did not agree to travel for their operation but almost all of those who did so found the scheme satisfactory. Some minor problems were encountered but these could probably be overcome by ensuring use of appropriate transport, extending the postoperative stay when necessary, and more careful selection of patients for an anaesthetic. For efficient use of theatre time in such schemes it is crucial that the operating consultant surgeon should be in charge of case selection.     

Waiting times: monitoring the total postreferral wait.

OBJECTIVES--To determine whether the period spent on the true inpatient waiting list is a valid indication of the total time that patients have to wait for an operation; and to assess the feasibility of monitoring the total "postreferral waiting time" by using existing computerised information systems. SETTING--Three randomly selected Scottish hospitals. SUBJECTS--Waiting list patients admitted to hospital for operations during June to August 1993 in six major specialties, separate attention being focused on cataract operations and hip and knee replacements. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--The total time that patients have to wait for an operation after the initial general practitioner referral--the postreferral waiting time--compared with that spent at the final stage of the process on the true inpatient waiting list. RESULTS--In the specialties investigated roughly half (58 days; 53%) of the average postreferral wait of 110 days was spent on the true inpatient waiting list, one third (35 days; 32%) being spent on the outpatient waiting list and one sixth (17 days; 15%) waiting between waiting lists. Only a quarter of cataract patients (73/292) were treated within three months of general practitioner referral compared with over three quarters (228/292) within three months of being placed on the inpatient waiting list. Nevertheless, within a year over 99% of patients (290) had been treated whichever date was taken as the starting point. CONCLUSIONS--Monitoring postreferral waiting times would provide a much more accurate picture for purchasers and patients of waiting times for treatment than is obtained by focusing exclusively on the true inpatient waiting list and facilitate fairer comparisons between NHS trusts in national league tables. Stringent national and local monitoring is essential to ensure (a) that future reductions in the time waiting on true inpatient waiting lists are not gained at the expense of longer periods waiting to be placed on the lists, and (b) that no increases occur in the number of patients placed instead on deferred waiting lists or exempted from the normal maximum waiting time guarantees.     

Waiting list management in general practice: a review of orthopaedic patients.

OBJECTIVE: To review all patients on a current general practice orthopaedic waiting list for outpatient appointments with regard to accuracy of the list, clinical priority, and need for further radiological investigation before hospital attendance. DESIGN: Record review by one general practitioner and a radiologist, and discussion with patients of management alternatives. SETTING: Six partner city centre urban fund-holding general practice, list size 8651 (29% low deprivation payment status). SUBJECTS: 116 adults on an orthopaedic waiting list. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: List accuracy (patient details and status on waiting list); clinical priority (severity of condition); further investigations (results of tests after radiological review). RESULTS: 32 patients (28%) were removed from the waiting list because of inaccuracies. 14 patients were considered to be high priority and referred to other hospitals by utilising waiting list initiative funds. Of these patients, five agreed to referral to another hospital (treatment completed on average within three months of rereferral), six did not wish to be rereferred, and two did not attend to discuss the offer and remained on the original waiting list. One prioritised patient had further radiological investigations, was reassured, and was taken off the waiting list. 10 patients had further investigations. These resulted in six patients being referred to other hospitals, three being taken off the waiting list, and one seeking private care. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic review of patients on an orthopaedic waiting list of one general practice, though time consuming, led to the identification of inaccuracies in the list and changes in management. Costs need further evaluation, but if the findings occur widely substantial benefits could be achieved for patients.     

Access to adult liver transplantation in Canada: a survey and ethical analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the substantive and procedural criteria used for placing patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation and for allocating available livers to patients on the waiting list; to identify principal decision-makers and the main factors limiting liver transplantation in Canada; and to examine how closely cadaveric liver allocation resembles theoretic models of source allocation. DESIGN: Mailed survey. PARTICIPANTS: Medical directors of all seven Canadian adult liver transplantation centres, or their designates. Six of the questionnaires were completed. OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative importance of substantive and procedural criteria used to place patients in the waiting list for liver transplantation and to allocate available livers. Identification of principal decision-makers and main limiting factors to adult liver transplantation. RESULTS: Alcoholism, drug addiction, HIV positivity, primary liver cancer, noncompliance and hepatitis B were the most important criteria that had a negative influence on decisions to place patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation. Severity of disease and urgency were the most important criteria used for selecting patients on the waiting list for transplantation. Criteria that were inconsistent across the centres included social support (for deciding who is placed on the waiting list) and length of time on the waiting list (for deciding who is selected from the list). Although a variety of people were reported as being involved in these decisions, virtually all were reported to be health to be health care professionals. Thirty-seven patients died while waiting for liver transplantation in 1991; the scarcity of cadaveric livers was the main limiting factor. CONCLUSIONS: Criteria for resource allocation decisions regarding liver transplantation are generally consistent among the centres across Canada, although some important inconsistencies remain. Because patients die while on the waiting list and because the primary limiting factor is organ supply, increased organ acquisition efforts are needed.     

Waiting for coronary revascularization in Toronto: 2 years' experience with a regional referral office.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of major adverse events among patients awaiting coronary revascularization; to assess the match between referring physicians'' estimates of urgency, a computer-generated multifactorial urgency rating score and actual waiting times; to determine the changes in waiting times as capacity for bypass surgery increased; and to evaluate the influence of choice of procedure or operator on waiting times. DESIGN: Consecutive case series. SETTING: Greater Toronto region. SUBJECTS: All 571 patients referred to an organized referral office by cardiologists at hospitals without on-site revascularization facilities between Jan. 3, 1989, and June 30, 1991. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction; proportions of patients waiting longer than the maximum period recommended for their urgency rating; mean waiting times for various subgroups; and correlations among referring physicians'' urgency ratings, computer-generated multifactorial urgency scores and waiting times. RESULTS: Of the 496 patients accepted for a procedure 5 had fatal cardiac events and 3 nonfatal myocardial infarction. Events occurred three times more often in patients with left mainstem disease than in those in other anatomic categories (relative risk [RR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48 to 6.27, p = 0.03). Both the computer-generated scores and the referring physicians'' scores were correlated with the actual waiting time (r = 0.46 and 0.57 respectively). Waiting times and the proportion of patients with excessive waiting times fell during the study period (p < 0.0001). However, urgent cases were much less likely to be done "on time" than those with a recommended waiting time of more than 2 weeks (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.25, p < 0.0001). The mean wait for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was 22.73 days if the referral office was allowed to find a surgeon or interventional cardiologist and 35.31 days if one was requested (p = 0.002 after adjustment for urgency scores). CONCLUSIONS: Death of a patient on the waiting list is uncommon in an organized referral system. Patients with left main-stem disease are at higher risk of death than those in other anatomic categories. There were significant correlations between referring physicians'' ratings of urgency, multifactorial urgency scores and actual waiting times. Expansion of capacity for CABG led to shorter waiting times, but patients with unstable symptoms continued to wait longer than recommended. Requests for a specific surgeon caused significantly longer delays.     

Waiting list for kidney transplant. Some patients wait too long.

The selection of a kidney graft recipient should be made not only taking into account biological and clinical parameters, for assuring the maximum possible clinical success; the ethical objective to allow every patient equal opportunity of receiving a transplant should also be pursued. In every waiting list of transplant candidates a proportion of patients remains in the list for a particularly long time. The present analysis aimed to find out the factors associated with a prolonged waiting time, in order to allow the implementation of patient selection criteria able to balance unfavourable factors. The analysis of the waiting list of our kidney transplant centre allowed to observe that blood group 0, anti-HLA immunisation, presence of rare HLA antigens and, at a lesser extent, HLA homozygosity are associated with a longer waiting time for a kidney transplant.     

Waiting list statistics. I: Relation between admissions from waiting list and length of waiting list.

The relation between changes in inpatient workload, measured as increases or decreases in the number of inpatients admitted from the waiting list, and the overall length of the waiting list was studied. Overall trends in admissions from the waiting list, the influence of seasonal patterns, and the impact of industrial action on admissions were also studied. The hypothesis was that when admissions from the waiting list increased the length of the waiting list would decrease and vice versa. No such simple relation was found. In fact, if anything, as the number of admissions from the waiting list increased so did the length of the waiting list. This result could be due to inconsistencies in compiling waiting list data or to the use of waiting lists to improve organisational efficiency. It is also possible, and perhaps likely, that the ability to meet need in admitting patients to hospital influences patients and their doctors to translate previously unmet need into demand for hospital services.     

A More Efficient Use of Hospital Beds?

Faced with a shortage of trained nursing staff and a high wastage rate among learners the management of a district general hospital decided to close some of its acute beds. A beds committee attempted to minimize the effects of these closures by introducing a bed bureau, “pooling,” and a simple system for forecasting waiting list admissions.The figures for recruitment and wastage of nurses improved, and a very high turnover per available bed was achieved. This increased efficiency in numerical terms was not mirrored by an improvement in the morale of the doctors and nurses working on the wards, who were subjected to new pressures and considered that at times the standard of patient care deteriorated.     

Equity of access to renal transplant waiting list and renal transplantation in Scotland: cohort study

Objective To examine the access to the renal transplant waiting list and renal transplantation in Scotland.Design Cohort study.Setting Renal and transplant units in Scotland.Participants 4523 adults starting renal replacement therapy in Scotland between 1 January 1989 and 31 December 1999.Main outcome measures Impact of age, sex, social deprivation, primary renal disease, renal or transplant unit, and geography on access to the waiting list and renal transplantation.Results 1736 of 4523 (38.4%) patients were placed on the waiting list for renal transplantation and 1095 (24.2%) underwent transplantation up to 31 December 2000, the end of the study period. Patients were less likely to be placed on the list if they were female, older, had diabetes, were in a high deprivation category, and were treated in a renal unit in a hospital with no transplant unit. Patients living furthest away from the transplant centre were listed more quickly. The only factors governing access to transplantation once on the list were age, primary renal disease, and year of listing. A significant centre effect was found in access to the waiting list and renal transplantation.Conclusions A major disparity exists in access to the renal transplant waiting list and renal transplantation in Scotland. Comorbidity may be an important factor.     

Audit of surgical practice in a community hospital.

The results of a prospective analysis of one year''s surgery on inpatients in a busy community hospital showed that a high quality of surgery may be achieved with safety and low rates of complications. The results of a retrospective analysis of certain aspects of surgery was just as encouraging. Surgery that is performed in a community hospital is convenient for the patient, provides continuity of care by the general practitioner, and waiting list times are short. Surgical facilities can form an integral part of the comprehensive service provided by a community hospital and can lighten the caseload for minor surgery at the district general hospital. Close liaison between the two hospitals is essential.     

Waiting list for nursing home admission gives limited insight of the problems. Study in handling of the waiting list and the consequences for the patients

The waiting list for nursing home admission is expected to remain unacceptably long. A study of the use and of possibly problematic consequences of the waiting list was described in a thesis. Despite long mean waiting periods and many problems (depressive symptoms, experiences of burden) already at the start of the waiting period, the majority of the informal caregivers were satisfied with the waiting times. This may be explained by a reticence to nursing home admission and by enlistment to the waiting list "out of precaution". Both a long and a short waiting period could be experienced as too long. Waiting list figures give insufficient insight in the "real" demand for nursing home care and in problematic waiting periods.     

Diabetes Mellitus and Prediabetes on Kidney Transplant Waiting List- Prevalence,Metabolic Phenotyping and Risk Stratification Approach

Background

Despite a significant prognostic impact, little is known about disturbances in glucose metabolism among kidney transplant candidates. We assess the prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) and prediabetes on kidney transplant waiting list, its underlying pathophysiology and propose an approach for individual risk stratification.

Methods

All patients on active kidney transplant waiting list of a large European university hospital transplant center were metabolically phenotyped.

Results

Of 138 patients, 76 (55%) had disturbances in glucose metabolism. 22% of patients had known DM, 3% were newly diagnosed. 30% were detected to have prediabetes. Insulin sensitivity and-secretion indices allowed for identification of underlying pathophysiology and risk factors. Age independently affected insulin secretion, resulting in a relative risk for prediabetes of 2.95 (95%CI 1.38–4.83) with a cut-off at 48 years. Body mass index independently affected insulin sensitivity as a continuous variable.

Conclusions

The prevalence of DM or prediabetes on kidney transplant waiting list is as high as 55%, with more than one third of patients previously undiagnosed. Oral glucose tolerance test is mandatory to detect all patients at risk. Metabolic phenotyping allows for differentiation of underlying pathophysiology and provides a basis for early individual risk stratification and specific intervention to improve patient and allograft outcome.     

Waiting list statistics. III. Comparison of two measures of waiting times.

The length of time that patients spend on waiting lists is a topic of current concern. Calculating the proportion of patients who have been on a waiting list for a long time by taking a census of patients on the list at a single point in time will tend to yield a higher estimate than that obtained by calculating waiting times of patients admitted to hospital during a period of time. To illustrate this point the waiting times of patients in the Oxford region as measured by SBH 203 returns ("census" data) were compared with those as measured by the Hospital Activity Analysis ("event" data). As expected, the SBH 203 census returns showed a higher proportion of patients who had waited over a year compared with the "event" measure of all admissions. This difference, which is analagous to the difference between prevalence and incidence in epidemiology, should be considered when using data from these sources to calculate waiting times.     

Shortening waiting lists in orthopaedic surgery outpatient clinics.

There is a long waiting list for orthopaedic outpatient appointments in South Glamorgan Area Health Authority as elsewhere. A detailed study of that waiting list was undertaken to identify factors that might lead to its better management and reduction. One-third of patients on the list failed to attend when appointments were offered. A postal-questionnaire to all those listed as waiting confirmed that many no longer sought specialist orthopaedic consultation. Another third of the patients reported that they had been treated previously for the same orthopaedic problem. It is concluded that improved management of long outpatient waiting lists could be achieved by correspondence with referring general practitioners to weed out those patients who no longer wish to attend, to reduce the burden of reviews and re-referrals of patients with "chronic" conditions, and to request priorities fairly so that earlier appointments may be offered to truly "new" patients with treatable or with potentially serious conditions.     

Consultant physician to outpatients.

Analysis of the records of the last 450 outpatients referred to me showed that the basic disorder of at least one in three lay in the psyche, and there was a large emotional element in many of the others. None were put on a waiting list for admission. Not only should physicians be generalists most of the time (whether or not they have a special interest) but most medical problems are best dealt with by the GP. Only occasionally can the physician attach a precise diagnosis to a patient who has been an obscure problem to his GP, and the physician''s most important function is to reassure the patient and explain his symptoms. Routine investigations seldom benefit the patient. If there could be a more equitable distribution of GPs of high quality with good back-up facilities fewer general and many fewer specialist physicians would be needed.     

General practice orthopaedic outpatient referrals in North Staffordshire.

A study was made of 813 orthopaedic referrals by 134 general practitioners in North Staffordshire. The referral rates showed no relation to practice list size or the doctors'' previous orthopaedic experience. The published waiting times did not accurately reflect clinic vacancies, and no effective priority rating of letters by consultants was shown. Less than 1% of patients had an appointment within four weeks. One quarter of the patients failed to attend and, of those who did, 27% received physiotherapy or a "simple" appliance, or both, while 16% received treatment already available from their general practitioner. Patients from high referring doctors showed the same pattern of distribution in body area affected and treatment outcome as those from low referring doctors, but had a significantly longer time to wait for their appointment. A survey of non-attenders showed that 56% of the patients failed to attend because the condition had resolved.     

Waiting list statistics. II: An estimate of inflation of waiting list length.

The discrepancy between the length of the waiting list and eventual admissions from the waiting list was investigated by comparing data from two different sources of routine statistics in the Oxford region. It was estimated that about 28% of the waiting list comprised patients who were not eventually admitted to hospital within the region.     

How effective are cognitive behavior therapies for major depression and anxiety disorders? A meta‐analytic update of the evidence

We report the current best estimate of the effects of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in the treatment of major depression (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorder (PAD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD), taking into account publication bias, the quality of trials, and the influence of waiting list control groups on the outcomes. In our meta‐analyses, we included randomized trials comparing CBT with a control condition (waiting list, care‐as‐usual or pill placebo) in the acute treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD or SAD, diagnosed on the basis of a structured interview. We found that the overall effects in the 144 included trials (184 comparisons) for all four disorders were large, ranging from g=0.75 for MDD to g=0.80 for GAD, g=0.81 for PAD, and g=0.88 for SAD. Publication bias mostly affected the outcomes of CBT in GAD (adjusted g=0.59) and MDD (adjusted g=0.65), but not those in PAD and SAD. Only 17.4% of the included trials were considered to be high‐quality, and this mostly affected the outcomes for PAD (g=0.61) and SAD (g=0.76). More than 80% of trials in anxiety disorders used waiting list control groups, and the few studies using other control groups pointed at much smaller effect sizes for CBT. We conclude that CBT is probably effective in the treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD and SAD; that the effects are large when the control condition is waiting list, but small to moderate when it is care‐as‐usual or pill placebo; and that, because of the small number of high‐quality trials, these effects are still uncertain and should be considered with caution.     

Copeptin as an Indicator of Hemodynamic Derangement and Prognosis in Liver Cirrhosis

Background

Advanced liver cirrhosis is associated with systemic hemodynamic derangement leading to the development of severe complications associated with increased mortality. Copeptin is a stable cleavage product of the precursor of arginine vasopressin, a key-regulator in hemodynamic homeostasis. Copeptin is currently considered a reliable prognostic marker in a wide variety of diseases other than cirrhosis. The present study aimed to assess copeptin, both experimentally and clinically, as a potential biomarker of hemodynamic derangement and to evaluate its prognostic significance in cirrhosis.

Materials and Methods

Two studies were executed: 1) in 18 thioacetamide-induced cirrhotic rats and 5 control rats, plasma copeptin and hemodynamic measurements were performed, 2) in 61 cirrhotic patients, serum copeptin concentration was measured in samples collected at time of registration at the waiting list for liver transplantation. In 46 patients, also a second copeptin measurement was performed during follow-up while registered at the waiting list for liver transplantation. To determine the association of serum copeptin and clinical data with outcome, Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and Kaplan Meier analysis were performed.

Results

Plasma copeptin concentration was significantly higher in cirrhotic rats than in controls (1.6 ± 0.5 vs. 0.9 ± 0.1 pmol/L, p< 0.01) and was negatively correlated to the mean arterial blood pressure (r = -0.574, p = 0.013). In cirrhotic patients, serum copeptin concentration was high [11.0 (5.2–24.0) pmol/L] and increased significantly during the time of registration at the waiting list for liver transplantation. MELD and MELD-sodium score were significantly correlated to serum copeptin [MELD: (r = 0.33, p = 0.01), MELD-sodium: (r = 0.29, p = 0.02)], also at time of the second copeptin measurement [MELD and MELD-sodium: r = 0.39, p< 0.01]. In cirrhotic humans, serum copeptin concentration was significantly associated with outcome, independently of the MELD and MELD-sodium score. Patients with a low serum copeptin concentration at time of registration at the liver transplant waiting list had significantly better transplant-free survival rates at 3, 6 and 12 months of follow-up as compared to those with a high serum copeptin concentration (Log-rank: p< 0.01, p< 0.01 and p = 0.02 respectively).

Conclusions

Circulating copeptin levels are elevated in rats and humans with cirrhosis. Copeptin is independently associated with outcome in cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation.