Literature DB >> 12398125

The cost effectiveness of a nurse-led shared-care prostate assessment clinic.

P Dasgupta1, L Drudge-Coates, K Smith, C M Booth.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Nurse-led prostate clinics (NPCs) have proved to be a highly effective method of assessing patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and most urology units now run such clinics. However, it was not known whether they are cost-effective and this analysis ansWers that question. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During one year, a trained urology nurse assessed 1,080 patients in our NPC following GP referral using a standard pro forma. Costs included those incurred for the salary of a grade D nurse at 30 min per patient, all investigations, indirect charges and overheads. This was compared to the cost of seeing all patients in clinic directly, either by a consultant, staff grade urologist or registrar. Of these 1,080 patients, 350 were sent back to their GPs after NPC assessment.
RESULTS: The NPC cost of 44.25 pounds per patient compared favourably with an average medical out-patient clinic cost of 50.46 pounds per patient, yielding an actual annual saving of 6,706.80 pounds. Since a third of the patients assessed in the NPC were sent directly back to primary care, saving the cost of a medical follow-up appointment, the true savings in secondary care were 17,661.00 pounds (50.46 x 350pounds), giving a total annual saving of 24,367.80 pounds.
CONCLUSIONS: A nurse-led shared-care prostate clinic is a cost effective, thorough and speedy method of assessing men presenting with suspected bladder outflow obstruction. The approach used has a wider generic, cost-benefit potential for the NHS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12398125      PMCID: PMC2504172          DOI: 10.1308/003588402760452448

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  7 in total

Review 1.  Selective pharmacological manipulation of the smooth muscle tissue of the genitourinary tract: a glimpse into the future.

Authors:  M C Truss; A J Becker; S Uckert; D Schultheiss; S Machtens; U Jonas; C G Stief
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 2.  Benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  R J Simpson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  [Shared care in BPH. First national experience].

Authors:  M Padilla León; C Marchal Escalona; J Caballero Alcántara; F Padilla León; I M Lucas de Vega
Journal:  Actas Urol Esp       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 0.994

4.  [Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Shared care between urologists and general practitioners].

Authors:  T Talseth; H Hedlund
Journal:  Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen       Date:  1997-01-30

5.  The benefits of a shared-care prostate clinic.

Authors:  C M Booth; A A Chaudry; K Smith; K Griffiths
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1996-06

6.  [Benign prostate hyperplasia; shared care reduces care load].

Authors:  A A Lycklama à Nijeholt
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  1998-11-21

7.  Shared care for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a feasibility study.

Authors:  S B Morris; C Pogson; R J Shearer
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1995-07
  7 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Advanced urology nursing practice.

Authors:  Helen Crowe
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 14.432

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.