BACKGROUND: Poor compliance with attendance at outpatient clinic appointments in patients referred from emergency departments (EDs) is a major problem in public hospitals. AIMS: To determine whether the intervention of a telephone call within three days of ED attendance would improve: 1. the proportion of patients making recommended outpatient appointments; and 2. the proportion of patients attending scheduled appointments. To characterise reasons for non-attendance at appointments made by patients referred from the ED. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was undertaken of 400 patients recommended to make outpatient appointments during attendance at The Royal Melbourne Hospital ED in July-August 1999. INTERVENTION: a telephone call one to three days after attendance to remind the patient about the appointment (and its importance for medical follow-up) if one had been made and to offer to make an appointment if one had not been made. OUTCOME MEASURES: 1. making the recommended appointment; 2. attendance at the scheduled appointment; and 3. reasons for non-attendance at scheduled appointments. RESULTS: The telephone intervention improved attendance at scheduled appointments from 54.4% to 70.7% (p=0.002). The proportion of patients making appointments was not significantly affected. The commonest reasons given for non-attendance were: attended general practitioner (13%), attended private specialist (6.6%), inpatient in hospital at time of appointment (6.6%), too busy or inconvenient (5.3%), claimed to have attended (5.3%) and did not differ by intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A significant improvement in the proportion of patients attending outpatients appointments can be made by a simple reminder telephone call one to three days after attendance at the ED.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Poor compliance with attendance at outpatient clinic appointments in patients referred from emergency departments (EDs) is a major problem in public hospitals. AIMS: To determine whether the intervention of a telephone call within three days of ED attendance would improve: 1. the proportion of patients making recommended outpatient appointments; and 2. the proportion of patients attending scheduled appointments. To characterise reasons for non-attendance at appointments made by patients referred from the ED. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was undertaken of 400 patients recommended to make outpatient appointments during attendance at The Royal Melbourne Hospital ED in July-August 1999. INTERVENTION: a telephone call one to three days after attendance to remind the patient about the appointment (and its importance for medical follow-up) if one had been made and to offer to make an appointment if one had not been made. OUTCOME MEASURES: 1. making the recommended appointment; 2. attendance at the scheduled appointment; and 3. reasons for non-attendance at scheduled appointments. RESULTS: The telephone intervention improved attendance at scheduled appointments from 54.4% to 70.7% (p=0.002). The proportion of patients making appointments was not significantly affected. The commonest reasons given for non-attendance were: attended general practitioner (13%), attended private specialist (6.6%), inpatient in hospital at time of appointment (6.6%), too busy or inconvenient (5.3%), claimed to have attended (5.3%) and did not differ by intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A significant improvement in the proportion of patients attending outpatients appointments can be made by a simple reminder telephone call one to three days after attendance at the ED.
Authors: Suryakanth R Gurudu; Lucía C Fry; David E Fleischer; Bradford H Jones; Marlene R Trunkenbolz; Jonathan A Leighton Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2006-09-29 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Jill S Huppert; Jennifer L Reed; Jennifer Knopf Munafo; Rachel Ekstrand; Gordon Gillespie; Carolyn Holland; Maria T Britto Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jennifer L Reed; Jill S Huppert; Regina G Taylor; Gordon L Gillespie; Terri L Byczkowski; Jessica A Kahn; Evaline A Alessandrini Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Sachin J Shah; Patrick Cronin; Clemens S Hong; Andrew S Hwang; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Benjamin I Bearnot; Calvin A Richardson; Blair W Fosburgh; Alexandra B Kimball Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jessica A Shuen; Michael P Wilson; Allyson Kreshak; Samuel Mullinax; Jesse Brennan; Edward M Castillo; Corinne Hinkle; Gary M Vilke Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Janet D Record; Ashwini Niranjan-Azadi; Colleen Christmas; Laura A Hanyok; Cynthia S Rand; David B Hellmann; Roy C Ziegelstein Journal: Med Educ Online Date: 2015-04-29