AIM: To audit the quality of external referral communications sent to the Department of Sedation at Newcastle Dental Hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken of a sample of 226 consecutive external referrals received by the sedation department of Newcastle Dental Hospital during May-July 2008. A data-collection form was used to record information provided in referrals relevant to the practice of sedation and the set standard was based on the recommendations of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). RESULTS: Of the 226 referrals sampled, the majority (222; 98.2%) were from general dental practitioners. Seventy-six per cent were by letter and 24% by pro forma. Although of particular relevance to sedation referrals, a medical history was provided in only 59.0% of referrals and details of previous dental treatment in only 27.5%. The use of a pro forma significantly increased the provision of information compared to a letter in the following areas: patient's telephone number, patient's medication, doctor's name and doctor's address. Significantly less information was provided in the pro forma compared to the letters concerning the name of the referring practitioner and referring practitioner's telephone number. No difference was found between letter and pro forma referrals for medical history, treatment already attempted and reason for referral. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate a need to improve the amount of information provided in referrals to the sedation department of Newcastle Dental Hospital in order to ensure appropriate allocation to sedation services. The quality of referrals may be improved by the distribution of referral guidelines, the use of electronic referral templates or changes to the current pro forma.
AIM: To audit the quality of external referral communications sent to the Department of Sedation at Newcastle Dental Hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken of a sample of 226 consecutive external referrals received by the sedation department of Newcastle Dental Hospital during May-July 2008. A data-collection form was used to record information provided in referrals relevant to the practice of sedation and the set standard was based on the recommendations of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). RESULTS: Of the 226 referrals sampled, the majority (222; 98.2%) were from general dental practitioners. Seventy-six per cent were by letter and 24% by pro forma. Although of particular relevance to sedation referrals, a medical history was provided in only 59.0% of referrals and details of previous dental treatment in only 27.5%. The use of a pro forma significantly increased the provision of information compared to a letter in the following areas: patient's telephone number, patient's medication, doctor's name and doctor's address. Significantly less information was provided in the pro forma compared to the letters concerning the name of the referring practitioner and referring practitioner's telephone number. No difference was found between letter and pro forma referrals for medical history, treatment already attempted and reason for referral. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate a need to improve the amount of information provided in referrals to the sedation department of Newcastle Dental Hospital in order to ensure appropriate allocation to sedation services. The quality of referrals may be improved by the distribution of referral guidelines, the use of electronic referral templates or changes to the current pro forma.