2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/75852
Title:
National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK.
Authors:
Gilmore, Paul E; Shackley, David C; Clarke, Noel W ( 0000-0001-7776-8059 ) ; Betts, C D; O'Flynn, K J
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To audit the current UK outpatient workload and compare this to the national standards as set out by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) in A Quality Urological Service for Patients in the New Millennium published in October 2000. PARTICIPANTS: 520 UK (NHS) and 21 Republic of Ireland (non-NHS) consultant urologists registered with BAUS in 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent to which consultant urologists are able to comply with guidelines set out by their specialist association, the BAUS and by the Royal College of Surgeons of England. RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 61% (318/520; regional range 42%-75%). The median "routine" clinics/week was two (1-5) with a mean of 13 (1-40) new and 26 (7-80) follow ups. Fifteen percent (49/318) of consultants worked alone in clinic; of the remainder assistance included specialist registrar 67% (212/318), staff grade/associate specialist 32% (102/318), senior house officer 53% (172/318), and pre-registration house officer 2% (7/318). Only 21% (66/318; regional range 0%-46%) of responding consultants followed the BAUS recommendations for outpatient workload/manpower. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of consultants are able to adhere to the outpatient workload guidelines as set out by BAUS council in 2000. In addition, there appears to be significant variations within and between training regions. Development of this project into a regional audit tool may allow intraregional guideline formation governing hospital outpatient workload.
Affiliation:
Department of Urology, Hope Hospital, Stott Lane, Salford, Greater Manchester M6 8HD, UK. paul.gilmore1@tiscali.co.uk
Citation:
National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK. 2005, 81 (951):55-7 Postgrad Med J
Journal:
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Issue Date:
Jan-2005
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/75852
DOI:
10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693
PubMed ID:
15640430
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
0032-5473
Appears in Collections:
All Christie Publications

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorGilmore, Paul E-
dc.contributor.authorShackley, David C-
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Noel W-
dc.contributor.authorBetts, C D-
dc.contributor.authorO'Flynn, K J-
dc.date.accessioned2009-07-29T13:50:34Z-
dc.date.available2009-07-29T13:50:34Z-
dc.date.issued2005-01-
dc.identifier.citationNational review of urology outpatient practice in the UK. 2005, 81 (951):55-7 Postgrad Med Jen
dc.identifier.issn0032-5473-
dc.identifier.pmid15640430-
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/75852-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To audit the current UK outpatient workload and compare this to the national standards as set out by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) in A Quality Urological Service for Patients in the New Millennium published in October 2000. PARTICIPANTS: 520 UK (NHS) and 21 Republic of Ireland (non-NHS) consultant urologists registered with BAUS in 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent to which consultant urologists are able to comply with guidelines set out by their specialist association, the BAUS and by the Royal College of Surgeons of England. RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 61% (318/520; regional range 42%-75%). The median "routine" clinics/week was two (1-5) with a mean of 13 (1-40) new and 26 (7-80) follow ups. Fifteen percent (49/318) of consultants worked alone in clinic; of the remainder assistance included specialist registrar 67% (212/318), staff grade/associate specialist 32% (102/318), senior house officer 53% (172/318), and pre-registration house officer 2% (7/318). Only 21% (66/318; regional range 0%-46%) of responding consultants followed the BAUS recommendations for outpatient workload/manpower. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of consultants are able to adhere to the outpatient workload guidelines as set out by BAUS council in 2000. In addition, there appears to be significant variations within and between training regions. Development of this project into a regional audit tool may allow intraregional guideline formation governing hospital outpatient workload.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.meshGreat Britain-
dc.subject.meshGuideline Adherence-
dc.subject.meshHealth Care Surveys-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshIreland-
dc.subject.meshMedical Audit-
dc.subject.meshMedical Staff, Hospital-
dc.subject.meshOutpatient Clinics, Hospital-
dc.subject.meshPractice Guidelines as Topic-
dc.subject.meshQuality of Health Care-
dc.subject.meshQuestionnaires-
dc.subject.meshUrology-
dc.subject.meshWorkload-
dc.titleNational review of urology outpatient practice in the UK.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Urology, Hope Hospital, Stott Lane, Salford, Greater Manchester M6 8HD, UK. paul.gilmore1@tiscali.co.uken
dc.identifier.journalPostgraduate Medical Journalen

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Christie are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.