| Literature DB >> 29046724 |
Tom P Walsh1, Linda R Ferris1, Nancy C Cullen1, Christopher H Brown2, Cathy J Loughry3, Nikki M McCaffrey4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-consequences of a podiatry-led triage clinic provided in an orthopaedic department relative to usual care for non-urgent foot and ankle complaints in an Australian tertiary care hospital.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical pathways; Medical economics; Orthopaedics; Podiatry
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29046724 PMCID: PMC5639763 DOI: 10.1186/s13047-017-0227-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Foot Ankle Res ISSN: 1757-1146 Impact factor: 2.303
Summary of patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints managed in the usual care and triage clinics over the 12-month periods
| Usual carea | Triageb |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of new patient appointments, n | 72 | 212 | |
| Total number of review patient appointments, n | 61 | 66 | |
| Total number of clinic sessions, n | 110 | 70 | |
| Age, years, median (IQR) | 56.1 (20.4) | 57.4 (18.7) | 0.901‡ |
| Gender, no. women (%) | 59 (82.0) | 161 (75.9) | 0.418‡‡ |
| Total new patients per sessionc, mean (SD) | 0.7 (0.8) | 3.6 (1.0) | < 0.001‡ |
| Number of appointments per patient, mean (SD) | 1.9 (1.1) | 1.3 (0.6) | < 0.001‡ |
| Number of patients discharged without surgeryd, n (%) | 63 / 72 (87.5) | 139 / 173 (80.3) | 0.135‡‡ |
| Surgical conversion ratee | 12.5% | 76.1% | < 0.001‡‡ |
aoutpatient clinic, patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints managed by Orthopaedic Surgeons and registrars (July 2014–June 2015);
boutpatient clinic, patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints managed by a Podiatrist (July 2015–June 2016);
cincludes all new patients seen, including those currently under review in the triage clinic;
dincludes patients discharged from triage clinic and those referred to Orthopaedics and discharged;
esurgical conversion rate is based on conversion from orthopaedic outpatient appointment to consent for surgery
‡ p calculated for differences between groups analysed with Mann-Whitney U test
‡‡ p calculated for differences between groups analysed with chi-squared test
Summary of the costs of managing patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints in the usual care and triage clinics over the 12-month periods
| Usual carea ( | Triageb ( | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit cost | Number | Total cost | Unit cost | Number | Total cost | |
| Total new and review appointments | $246.20 | 133 | $32,744 | $39.34 (wages) | 278 | $10,936 |
| Imaging cost per patient | Included | $42.75 | ||||
| Total appointment cost | $32,744 | $19,999 | ||||
| Mean cost per new patient | $454.78 | $94.34 | ||||
aoutpatient clinic, patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints managed by Orthopaedic Surgeons (July 2014–June 2015);
boutpatient clinic, patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints managed by a Podiatrist (July 2015–June 2016)
Summary of the utilisation of imaging in managing patients with non-urgent foot and ankle complaints in the usual care and triage clinics over the 12-month periods
| Investigations | Usual care | Triage |
|---|---|---|
| X-Ray | 57 | 98 |
| Ultrasound | 20 | 40 |
| CT | 1 | 3 |
| MRI | 3 | 3 |
| Nuclear bone scan | 3 | 1 |
Abbreviations: X-Ray Plain film radiograph, CT Computed tomography, MRI Magnetic resonance imaging