National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK
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 Republ...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Postgraduate medical journal 2005-01, Vol.81 (951), p.55-57 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 57 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 951 |
| container_start_page | 55 |
| container_title | Postgraduate medical journal |
| container_volume | 81 |
| creator | Gilmore, P E Shackley, D C Clarke, N W Betts, C D O’Flynn, K J |
| description | 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. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1743188</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67354883</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b526t-ebdd8bbfc068f09c7d68205c5a5cc0acacc71bb96f6c158670e90981525e30573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1P3DAQxa0KVBbaO6cqEmovKNtx_JlLpWpVFsSKXqBXy_E6i7fZOLUTWv57HGUFpZeefHi_eX4zD6FTDHOMCf_cbXbbeQFA51AAL8kbNMOUlzkIxg_QDIAUOaOCHKHjGLcAmAiK36IjzDgFSmCG5I3unW91kwX74OzvzNfZEHzjN4-ZH_ouqbbtsy5o0ztjM9dm_b3N7q7focNaN9G-378n6O7i2-3iMl99X14tvq7yihW8z221Xsuqqg1wWUNpxJrLAphhmhkD2mhjBK6qktfcYCa5AFtCKTErmCXABDlBXybfbqh2dm1SmqAb1QW30-FRee3Ua6V192rjHxQWlGApk8GnvUHwvwYbe7Vz0dim0a31Q1RcEEYTl8Czf8CtH0I6TUxeKVFJAHiiYKJM8DEGWz9HwaDGUtRYihpLUVMpaeTD3yu8DOxbSMDHPaCj0U0ddGtcfOE4ZQUU49_5xLnY2z_Pug4_xy0EUzc_FmpZstuVXC4US_z5xFcp0X9jPgHDmbGY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1781593006</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Gilmore, P E ; Shackley, D C ; Clarke, N W ; Betts, C D ; O’Flynn, K J</creator><creatorcontrib>Gilmore, P E ; Shackley, D C ; Clarke, N W ; Betts, C D ; O’Flynn, K J</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-5473</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-0756</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15640430</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine</publisher><subject>Auditing ; Audits ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinics ; Compliance ; Consultants ; Councils ; General aspects ; Guideline Adherence - statistics & numerical data ; guidelines ; Health Care Surveys ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Ireland ; Medical Audit ; Medical sciences ; Medical Staff, Hospital - organization & administration ; Original ; outpatient ; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - organization & administration ; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - standards ; Patient satisfaction ; Patients ; Physicians ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Quality of Health Care ; Questionnaires ; Studies ; surgical ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; United Kingdom ; Urology ; Urology - organization & administration ; Urology - standards ; Workload ; Workloads</subject><ispartof>Postgraduate medical journal, 2005-01, Vol.81 (951), p.55-57</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2005 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright: 2005 Copyright 2005 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b526t-ebdd8bbfc068f09c7d68205c5a5cc0acacc71bb96f6c158670e90981525e30573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b526t-ebdd8bbfc068f09c7d68205c5a5cc0acacc71bb96f6c158670e90981525e30573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1743188/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1743188/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,4024,27923,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16452026$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15640430$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gilmore, P E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shackley, D C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, N W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betts, C D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Flynn, K J</creatorcontrib><title>National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK</title><title>Postgraduate medical journal</title><addtitle>Postgrad Med J</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Auditing</subject><subject>Audits</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinics</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Consultants</subject><subject>Councils</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Guideline Adherence - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>guidelines</subject><subject>Health Care Surveys</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ireland</subject><subject>Medical Audit</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medical Staff, Hospital - organization & administration</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>outpatient</subject><subject>Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - organization & administration</subject><subject>Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Quality of Health Care</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>surgical</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><subject>Urology</subject><subject>Urology - organization & administration</subject><subject>Urology - standards</subject><subject>Workload</subject><subject>Workloads</subject><issn>0032-5473</issn><issn>1469-0756</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1P3DAQxa0KVBbaO6cqEmovKNtx_JlLpWpVFsSKXqBXy_E6i7fZOLUTWv57HGUFpZeefHi_eX4zD6FTDHOMCf_cbXbbeQFA51AAL8kbNMOUlzkIxg_QDIAUOaOCHKHjGLcAmAiK36IjzDgFSmCG5I3unW91kwX74OzvzNfZEHzjN4-ZH_ouqbbtsy5o0ztjM9dm_b3N7q7focNaN9G-378n6O7i2-3iMl99X14tvq7yihW8z221Xsuqqg1wWUNpxJrLAphhmhkD2mhjBK6qktfcYCa5AFtCKTErmCXABDlBXybfbqh2dm1SmqAb1QW30-FRee3Ua6V192rjHxQWlGApk8GnvUHwvwYbe7Vz0dim0a31Q1RcEEYTl8Czf8CtH0I6TUxeKVFJAHiiYKJM8DEGWz9HwaDGUtRYihpLUVMpaeTD3yu8DOxbSMDHPaCj0U0ddGtcfOE4ZQUU49_5xLnY2z_Pug4_xy0EUzc_FmpZstuVXC4US_z5xFcp0X9jPgHDmbGY</recordid><startdate>200501</startdate><enddate>200501</enddate><creator>Gilmore, P E</creator><creator>Shackley, D C</creator><creator>Clarke, N W</creator><creator>Betts, C D</creator><creator>O’Flynn, K J</creator><general>The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine</general><general>BMJ</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>BMJ Group</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200501</creationdate><title>National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK</title><author>Gilmore, P E ; Shackley, D C ; Clarke, N W ; Betts, C D ; O’Flynn, K J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b526t-ebdd8bbfc068f09c7d68205c5a5cc0acacc71bb96f6c158670e90981525e30573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Auditing</topic><topic>Audits</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinics</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Consultants</topic><topic>Councils</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Guideline Adherence - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>guidelines</topic><topic>Health Care Surveys</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ireland</topic><topic>Medical Audit</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medical Staff, Hospital - organization & administration</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>outpatient</topic><topic>Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - organization & administration</topic><topic>Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Quality of Health Care</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>surgical</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><topic>Urology</topic><topic>Urology - organization & administration</topic><topic>Urology - standards</topic><topic>Workload</topic><topic>Workloads</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gilmore, P E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shackley, D C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, N W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betts, C D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Flynn, K J</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Postgraduate medical journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gilmore, P E</au><au>Shackley, D C</au><au>Clarke, N W</au><au>Betts, C D</au><au>O’Flynn, K J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK</atitle><jtitle>Postgraduate medical journal</jtitle><addtitle>Postgrad Med J</addtitle><date>2005-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>81</volume><issue>951</issue><spage>55</spage><epage>57</epage><pages>55-57</pages><issn>0032-5473</issn><eissn>1469-0756</eissn><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.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine</pub><pmid>15640430</pmid><doi>10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693</doi><tpages>3</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0032-5473 |
| ispartof | Postgraduate medical journal, 2005-01, Vol.81 (951), p.55-57 |
| issn | 0032-5473 1469-0756 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1743188 |
| source | MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Auditing Audits Biological and medical sciences Clinics Compliance Consultants Councils General aspects Guideline Adherence - statistics & numerical data guidelines Health Care Surveys Hospitals Humans Ireland Medical Audit Medical sciences Medical Staff, Hospital - organization & administration Original outpatient Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - organization & administration Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - standards Patient satisfaction Patients Physicians Practice Guidelines as Topic Quality of Health Care Questionnaires Studies surgical Surveys and Questionnaires United Kingdom Urology Urology - organization & administration Urology - standards Workload Workloads |
| title | National review of urology outpatient practice in the UK |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T04%3A15%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=National%20review%20of%20urology%20outpatient%20practice%20in%20the%20UK&rft.jtitle=Postgraduate%20medical%20journal&rft.au=Gilmore,%20P%20E&rft.date=2005-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=951&rft.spage=55&rft.epage=57&rft.pages=55-57&rft.issn=0032-5473&rft.eissn=1469-0756&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/pgmj.2004.020693&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E67354883%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1781593006&rft_id=info:pmid/15640430&rfr_iscdi=true |