BACKGROUND: In 2010, wait-times for new patients referred to see a haematologist at our outpatient tertiary care centre clinic exceeded 6 months. The provision of written recommendations for a subset of referred patients was undertaken to reduce patient wait-times. These recommendation letters outlined possible causes of the abnormality for which the patient was being referred and suggested a course of action for follow-up, and patients were then managed by their referring practitioner. We sought to characterize the cohort of patients for whom written recommendations were written and assess whether written recommendations were a satisfactory alternative for the referring practitioner. METHODS: All haematology patient referrals managed with written recommendations in 2010 were included in the study and were assessed one year later. Referring practitioners who received written recommendations were sent a short survey to evaluate their satisfaction with this process. RESULTS: A total of 444 of 2400 referrals were managed with a letter. At 1-year follow-up, 58 (13%, 95% CI) of the abnormalities which prompted the referral had resolved and 201 (45%, 95%CI) had remained stable. There was a single haematology-related death during the 1-year follow-up and the haematological abnormality worsened in 4 (1%) patients. Of 203 (71%) referring practitioners who responded to the satisfaction survey, 90% (95% CI) indicated that they would be satisfied with written recommendations in the future. INTERPRETATION: The provision of written recommendations appears to be a safe and satisfactory alternative to an inperson outpatient assessment in certain well-defined subsets of stable outpatients with haematologic abnormalities.
BACKGROUND: In 2010, wait-times for new patients referred to see a haematologist at our outpatient tertiary care centre clinic exceeded 6 months. The provision of written recommendations for a subset of referred patients was undertaken to reduce patient wait-times. These recommendation letters outlined possible causes of the abnormality for which the patient was being referred and suggested a course of action for follow-up, and patients were then managed by their referring practitioner. We sought to characterize the cohort of patients for whom written recommendations were written and assess whether written recommendations were a satisfactory alternative for the referring practitioner. METHODS: All haematology patient referrals managed with written recommendations in 2010 were included in the study and were assessed one year later. Referring practitioners who received written recommendations were sent a short survey to evaluate their satisfaction with this process. RESULTS: A total of 444 of 2400 referrals were managed with a letter. At 1-year follow-up, 58 (13%, 95% CI) of the abnormalities which prompted the referral had resolved and 201 (45%, 95%CI) had remained stable. There was a single haematology-related death during the 1-year follow-up and the haematological abnormality worsened in 4 (1%) patients. Of 203 (71%) referring practitioners who responded to the satisfaction survey, 90% (95% CI) indicated that they would be satisfied with written recommendations in the future. INTERPRETATION: The provision of written recommendations appears to be a safe and satisfactory alternative to an inperson outpatient assessment in certain well-defined subsets of stable outpatients with haematologic abnormalities.