RAPID ACCESS UPPER GI CANCER SERVICE (RAUGICS): WORKLOAD, NON-ATTENDANCE, AND PREDICTIVE VALUE OF REFERRAL CRITERIA
- AUDIT OF THE 2 WEEK RULE (TWR) FOR SUSPECTED UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL (UGI) CANCER AND THE PATHWAYS TO DIAGNOSIS. Barbour, J.; Leontiadis, G.; Saeed, A.; Kadis, S. // Gut;Apr2003 Supplement 1, Vol. 52, pA88
Aims: To audit TWR for UGI cancers in a north east district general hospital (DGH) and to determine the proportion of UGI cancers diagnosed outside the TWR referral system. Methods: Prospective audit of all TWR over a 20 week period (Oct 2001 to March 2002) in our DGH (catchment population...
- THE 2 WEEK STANDARD FOR SUSPECTED UPPER GI CANCERS: ITS IMPACT ON CANCER STAGING. Radbourne, D.; Walker, G.; Joshi, D.; Sheil, M.; Robertson, F.; Steger, A.; O'Donohue, J. // Gut;Apr2003 Supplement 1, Vol. 52, pA116
Introduction: The 2 week wait standard for suspected upper Gl cancer ('the standard'), introduced 1 July 2000, requires patients to be seen by a specialist within 2 weeks of referral. We aimed to investigate its impact on the pattern of referrals and clinical outcome. Methods: We identified...
- GI Ca guide cuts referrral 40%. Wilkinson, Emma // Pulse;3/23/2006, Vol. 66 Issue 12, p7
The article reports on the findings of a study revealing that a new risk score in Great Britain could reduce general practitioner referrals for upper gastrointestinal cancer by 40 percent. The scoring system applies additional criteria on top of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence...
- Dyspepsia referral: Is NICE right or wrong? Goddard, Andrew // Pulse;5/14/2005, Vol. 65 Issue 19, p56
Examines guidelines issued by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) in Great Britain on dyspepsia management. Discrepancies between NICE and national cancer referral guidelines; Guidelines for the primary care management of dyspepsia in adults; Guidelines for urgent referral for...
- Beware: You can be liable for a referral gone awry. Stout, Chris E. // Psychotherapy Letter;Jun96, Vol. 8 Issue 6, p7
Focuses on the possible liability of doctors when making a medical referral. Safeguarding against the risks; Maintenance of the standard of care.
- Don't let referrals go sour. Murray, Dennis // Medical Economics;8/7/95, Vol. 72 Issue 15, p113
Offers advice for doctors on how to resolve referral conflicts. Right of primary-care physicians to keep abreast with patient's treatment; Diplomacy; Presentation of a united front; `Team approach'; Non-reliance to patient's word; Patient's conflicting histories; Communication; Patient's final...
- Positively productive PPO prospecting. Bernstein, Alan L. // ENT: Ear, Nose & Throat Journal;Jan1996, Vol. 75 Issue 1, p52
Editorial. Looks at ways to promote an increase in new patients. Reference to the `Practice Builder.'
- How to protect existing referral relationships against marauders. Bernstein, Alan L. // ENT: Ear, Nose & Throat Journal;Feb96, Vol. 75 Issue 2, p109
Offers advice on how to protect existing referral relationships against competitors. Importance of ongoing maintenance.
- Recruiting non-referring professionals through their non-referred clientele. Bernstein, Alan L. // ENT: Ear, Nose & Throat Journal;Mar1996, Vol. 75 Issue 3, p174
Discusses the recruitment of non-referring professionals through non-referred clientele. Recruitment method used.