PURPOSE: To increase prompt access to routine office visits the concept of the group appointment was developed in the primary care setting. Drop-in group medical appointments have been piloted at our department. We hypothesized that 1) efficiency could be improved by seeing 6 to 14 patients at 1 appointment, 2) access to appointment times would increase and 3) patient satisfaction would be enhanced with 60 minutes of didactic contact and discussion with the urologist. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were invited to participate in a drop-in group medical appointment. Appointments were made based on sex and not on diagnosis. A 60-minute group teaching session was followed by a private 2 to 5-minute physical examination or further testing, as indicated. Confidential satisfaction surveys were administered to drop-in group medical appointment participants and patients seen at traditional individual (solo) appointments. Results were compared. RESULTS: From September 22, 2003 to August 30, 2004, 279 patients attended a drop-in group medical appointment. Mean patient age was 63 years and 142 patients were 65 years or older. Most diagnoses were prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, benign prostatic hyperplasia, incontinence, neurogenic bladder and chronic discomfort syndromes. Of the patients 287 were surveyed, including 177 at drop-in group medical appointments and 110 at solo appointments. Patient satisfaction with the drop-in group medical appointment format was as high as that of solo patients with 87% of drop-in group medical appointment patients rating their experience as excellent or very good vs 88% by solo patients. CONCLUSIONS: Drop-in group medical appointments can be implemented successfully in a urological practice with high patient satisfaction despite the sensitive nature of topics discussed. Ideal patients are those with chronic or complex conditions and those requiring repetitive discussions, such as elderly individuals.
PURPOSE: To increase prompt access to routine office visits the concept of the group appointment was developed in the primary care setting. Drop-in group medical appointments have been piloted at our department. We hypothesized that 1) efficiency could be improved by seeing 6 to 14 patients at 1 appointment, 2) access to appointment times would increase and 3) patient satisfaction would be enhanced with 60 minutes of didactic contact and discussion with the urologist. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients were invited to participate in a drop-in group medical appointment. Appointments were made based on sex and not on diagnosis. A 60-minute group teaching session was followed by a private 2 to 5-minute physical examination or further testing, as indicated. Confidential satisfaction surveys were administered to drop-in group medical appointment participants and patients seen at traditional individual (solo) appointments. Results were compared. RESULTS: From September 22, 2003 to August 30, 2004, 279 patients attended a drop-in group medical appointment. Mean patient age was 63 years and 142 patients were 65 years or older. Most diagnoses were prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, benign prostatic hyperplasia, incontinence, neurogenic bladder and chronic discomfort syndromes. Of the patients 287 were surveyed, including 177 at drop-in group medical appointments and 110 at solo appointments. Patient satisfaction with the drop-in group medical appointment format was as high as that of solo patients with 87% of drop-in group medical appointment patients rating their experience as excellent or very good vs 88% by solo patients. CONCLUSIONS: Drop-in group medical appointments can be implemented successfully in a urological practice with high patient satisfaction despite the sensitive nature of topics discussed. Ideal patients are those with chronic or complex conditions and those requiring repetitive discussions, such as elderly individuals.
Authors: Leonie Heyworth; Ronen Rozenblum; James F Burgess; Errol Baker; Mark Meterko; Debra Prescott; Zeev Neuwirth; Steven R Simon Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Lauren S Prescott; Andrea S Dickens; Sandra L Guerra; Jila M Tanha; Desiree G Phillips; Katherine T Patel; Katie M Umberson; Miguel A Lozano; Kathryn B Lowe; Alaina J Brown; Jolyn S Taylor; Pamela T Soliman; Elizabeth A Garcia; Charles F Levenback; Diane C Bodurka Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2015-11-05 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Marian Andrei Stanciu; Caroline Morris; Matt Makin; Eila Watson; Jenna Bulger; Richard Evans; Julia Hiscock; Zoë Hoare; Rhiannon Tudor Edwards; Richard David Neal; Clare Wilkinson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Marlous J Madderom; Jessica Heijdra; Elisabeth M W J Utens; Suzanne Polinder; Anita W Rijneveld; Marjon H Cnossen Journal: BMC Hematol Date: 2016-08-04