Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:38:23.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Referrals, Wait Times and Diagnoses at an Urgent Neurology Clinic over 10 Years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2014

D.J. Wile ,
J. Warner ,
W. Murphy ,
A.L. Lafontaine ,
A. Hanson  and
S. Furtado
D.J. Wile
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
J. Warner
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
W. Murphy
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
A.L. Lafontaine
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
A. Hanson
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
S. Furtado
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

An urgent neurology assessment clinic was created at our institution to improve access to prompt neurological assessment, and has been in operation for over a decade. We assessed its timeliness and impact.

Methods:

The clinic database was examined retrospectively for trends in the volume and waiting time to assessments, neurologic diagnoses, and whether neurologic assessment changed patients’ diagnoses. Before and after implementation, the frequency of emergency department neurology assessments and hospital admissions for neurological investigation were compared.

Results:

In the first decade, 25145 referrals were received; 12460 patients were accepted and assessed within an average of 3.8 working days. The most common problems seen included headache and seizure (20.2% each). Overall, 44.6% of assessments resulted in a change to the referring diagnosis; this proportion varied by the type of problem seen (from 10.5% for seizures to 92.5% for psychiatric disturbances). From the pre- to post-opening periods, there were fewer emergency room neurological assessments (35.7% reduction) and fewer hospital admissions for neurological investigation (4.4/week to 2.2/week, 50% reduction).

Conclusions:

The urgent neurology clinic model at our institution has provided excellent service, including wait times of a few days, to a catchment of over two million Canadians for over a decade; clinic assessments have affected diagnoses and patient care.

Type
Original Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , March 2014 , pp. 260 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2014

References

1.Harrington, DW, Wilson, K, Rosenberg, M, Bell, S.Access granted! Barriers endure: determinants of difficulties accessing specialist care when required in Ontario, Canada. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:146–55.Google Scholar
2.National physician survey: results for family physicians by certification, sex, and age [Internet]. Ottawa ON: College of Family Physicians of Canada, Canadian Medical Association, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. c2010 [cited 2012 Jul 17]. Available from: http://www.nationalphysiciansurvey.ca.Google Scholar
3.Schoen, C, Osborn, R, Squires, D, Doty, MM, Pierson, R, Applebaum S. New 2011 survey of patients with complex care needs in eleven countries finds that care is often poorly coordinated. Health Aff. 2011;30(12):2437–48.Google Scholar
4.Patterson, V, Humphreys, J, Chua, R.Email triage of new neurological outpatient referrals from general practice. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr. 2004;75:617–20.Google Scholar
5.Robertson, NP, Shaunak, S, Compston, DAS.Urgent neurology outpatient referrals from primary health care physicians. Q J Med. 1998;91:309–13.Google Scholar
6.Ahmed, RM, Green, T, Halmagyi, GM, Lewis, SJ.A new model for neurology care in the emergency department. Med J Aust. 2010;192:30–2.Google Scholar
7.GeoSearch 2011 Census - Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-142-XWE [Internet]. Ottawa ON: Statistics Canada. c2011 [cited 2013 Feb 28]. Available from: http://geodepot.statcan.gc.ca/GeoSearch2011-GeoRecherche2011/GeoSearch2011-GeoRecherche2011.jsp.Google Scholar
8.Més-Sesé, G, Plaza-Macías, I, González-Caballero, G, et al. [An analysis of avoidable admissions to a neurology service]. Rev Neurol. 2006;43(12):714–18.Google Scholar
9.Anang, J, Tellez-Zenteno, JF.Single unprovoked seizure: wait time to full medical assessment, does it matter? Neurol Bull. 2012;4:1–11.Google Scholar
10.Hernandez-Ronquillo, L, Waterhouse, K, Hunter, G, Moien-Afshari, F, Tellez-Zenteno, JF.Outcomes in a single seizure clinic: a prospective Canadian study. Epilepsia. 2013;54(Suppl 3):38.Google Scholar
11.Moeller, JJ, Kurniawan, J, Gubitz, GJ, Ross, JA, Bhan, V.Diagnostic accuracy of neurological problems in the emergency department. Can J Neurol Sci. 2008;35:335–41.Google Scholar
12.Chapman, FA, Pope, AE, Sorensen, D, Knight, RSG, Al-Shahi Salman, R.Acute neurological problems: frequency, consultation patterns and the uses of a rapid access neurology clinic. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2009;39:296–300.Google Scholar