Rujin Ju1,2, Anna M Guanzon3, Jacob DeWitt4, Onying Liu4, Michael H Heit5. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA. Rujinju60853@gmail.com. 2. Urogynecology, IU Health Physicians, 11725 N. Illinois St. Suite K104, Carmel, IN, 46032, USA. Rujinju60853@gmail.com. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Vincent's Hospital, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The urogynecology subspecialty relies on appropriate referrals from their referral base. We sought to provide guidance for optimizing appropriate referrals to urogynecology by comparing pre-referral characteristics between appropriate and inappropriate referrals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined predictors of appropriate urogynecology referrals. Appropriateness categorization was based upon pelvic floor disorder (PFD) symptoms and signs provided by the referring provider. Patients with both a PFD symptom and sign were considered "appropriate." Patients with neither a PFD symptom nor sign were considered "inappropriate." PFD symptoms were: vaginal bulge, voiding or defecatory dysfunction. PFD signs were: vaginal vault prolapse, urethral hypermobility, mesh/sling exposure, elevated post-void residual, positive standing stress test, abnormal urinalysis or urine culture-proven infection. Continuous and categorical data were analyzed with ANOVA and chi-square test, respectively. A logistic regression model to predict appropriateness was developed from variables identified from the bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Bivariate predictors of an appropriate referral for 1716 study subjects were older age, prior overactive bladder medication use, MD/DO referrer source and OBGYN, urogynecology or urology referrer specialty. Our logistic regression model correctly classified referrals as appropriate in 93.6% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Age, anti-cholinergic medication use, referrer source and specialty are pre-initial visit predictors of urogynecology referral appropriateness. The predictor-generated model was successful in predicting referral appropriateness. Potential bias from information transfer issues, lack of pre-referral evaluation and referring provider unfamiliarity with urogynecology are possible reasons for inappropriate referrals and potential areas for improvement.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The urogynecology subspecialty relies on appropriate referrals from their referral base. We sought to provide guidance for optimizing appropriate referrals to urogynecology by comparing pre-referral characteristics between appropriate and inappropriate referrals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined predictors of appropriate urogynecology referrals. Appropriateness categorization was based upon pelvic floor disorder (PFD) symptoms and signs provided by the referring provider. Patients with both a PFD symptom and sign were considered "appropriate." Patients with neither a PFD symptom nor sign were considered "inappropriate." PFD symptoms were: vaginal bulge, voiding or defecatory dysfunction. PFD signs were: vaginal vault prolapse, urethral hypermobility, mesh/sling exposure, elevated post-void residual, positive standing stress test, abnormal urinalysis or urine culture-proven infection. Continuous and categorical data were analyzed with ANOVA and chi-square test, respectively. A logistic regression model to predict appropriateness was developed from variables identified from the bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Bivariate predictors of an appropriate referral for 1716 study subjects were older age, prior overactive bladder medication use, MD/DO referrer source and OBGYN, urogynecology or urology referrer specialty. Our logistic regression model correctly classified referrals as appropriate in 93.6% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Age, anti-cholinergic medication use, referrer source and specialty are pre-initial visit predictors of urogynecology referral appropriateness. The predictor-generated model was successful in predicting referral appropriateness. Potential bias from information transfer issues, lack of pre-referral evaluation and referring provider unfamiliarity with urogynecology are possible reasons for inappropriate referrals and potential areas for improvement.
Entities:
Keywords:
Appropriate; Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery; Referrals; Sub-specialist; Urogynecology
Authors: Donna Mazloomdoost; Lauren B Westermann; Catrina C Crisp; Susan H Oakley; Steven D Kleeman; Rachel N Pauls Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-10-28 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jihad S Obeid; Catherine A McGraw; Brenda L Minor; José G Conde; Robert Pawluk; Michael Lin; Janey Wang; Sean R Banks; Sheree A Hemphill; Rob Taylor; Paul A Harris Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Ingrid Nygaard; Matthew D Barber; Kathryn L Burgio; Kimberly Kenton; Susan Meikle; Joseph Schaffer; Cathie Spino; William E Whitehead; Jennifer Wu; Debra J Brody Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Amir Qaseem; Paul Dallas; Mary Ann Forciea; Melissa Starkey; Thomas D Denberg; Paul Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-09-16 Impact factor: 25.391