Accelerated discharges for patients with normal breast examination and concordant imaging in one-stop breast clinics.
Association of Breast Surgery ePoster Library. Mazari F. 05/15/17; 166340; P080
Mr. Fayyaz Mazari
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Rate & Comment (0)
ntroduction: This project was designed to assess the impact of introducing radiology-led accelerated discharges for patients with normal breast examination (P1) and concurrent imaging (U1/M1) instead of the usual two-consultations pathway in one-stop breast clinic.
Methods: The project consisted of two phases. Phase 1 was an audit of current practice and Phase 2 was a re-audit after implementation of the new radiology-led discharge pathway. Data collection was performed prospectively over two consecutive weeks in each phase and included demographics, presenting complaints, clinical findings, consultation, imaging and waiting times. Inter-group analysis was performed comparing P1 concordant group to all other groups using non-parametric tests.
Results: 258 patients were included in Phase 1. Breast lump and pain were the most common presentations. 50%(N=129) had normal clinical examination (P1). Two third of these (N=85) had concurrent normal imaging. P1 concordant group was younger (median age 39vs.49years, Mann-Whitney P=0.001) with significantly shorter median consultation times (12vs.15minutes, P=0.001) and imaging times (35vs60minutes, P=0.001). Overall duration of the clinic visit (163vs.175minutes, P=0.338) was similar.
159 patients were included in Phase 2. 52%(N=81) were concordant P1 who were deemed clinically suitable for accelerated discharge. 82%(N=66) of these had accelerated discharge with a significantly lower overall duration of clinic visit (90vs.145minutes, Mann-Whitney P = 0.001). Only 1 patient opted to have a second consultation when given the choice.
Conclusions:
P1 patients with concordant imaging are a demographically different group. Radiology- led accelerated discharge can reduce their waiting times and potentially improve patient experience and clinical workflow.
Methods: The project consisted of two phases. Phase 1 was an audit of current practice and Phase 2 was a re-audit after implementation of the new radiology-led discharge pathway. Data collection was performed prospectively over two consecutive weeks in each phase and included demographics, presenting complaints, clinical findings, consultation, imaging and waiting times. Inter-group analysis was performed comparing P1 concordant group to all other groups using non-parametric tests.
Results: 258 patients were included in Phase 1. Breast lump and pain were the most common presentations. 50%(N=129) had normal clinical examination (P1). Two third of these (N=85) had concurrent normal imaging. P1 concordant group was younger (median age 39vs.49years, Mann-Whitney P=0.001) with significantly shorter median consultation times (12vs.15minutes, P=0.001) and imaging times (35vs60minutes, P=0.001). Overall duration of the clinic visit (163vs.175minutes, P=0.338) was similar.
159 patients were included in Phase 2. 52%(N=81) were concordant P1 who were deemed clinically suitable for accelerated discharge. 82%(N=66) of these had accelerated discharge with a significantly lower overall duration of clinic visit (90vs.145minutes, Mann-Whitney P = 0.001). Only 1 patient opted to have a second consultation when given the choice.
Conclusions:
P1 patients with concordant imaging are a demographically different group. Radiology- led accelerated discharge can reduce their waiting times and potentially improve patient experience and clinical workflow.
ntroduction: This project was designed to assess the impact of introducing radiology-led accelerated discharges for patients with normal breast examination (P1) and concurrent imaging (U1/M1) instead of the usual two-consultations pathway in one-stop breast clinic.
Methods: The project consisted of two phases. Phase 1 was an audit of current practice and Phase 2 was a re-audit after implementation of the new radiology-led discharge pathway. Data collection was performed prospectively over two consecutive weeks in each phase and included demographics, presenting complaints, clinical findings, consultation, imaging and waiting times. Inter-group analysis was performed comparing P1 concordant group to all other groups using non-parametric tests.
Results: 258 patients were included in Phase 1. Breast lump and pain were the most common presentations. 50%(N=129) had normal clinical examination (P1). Two third of these (N=85) had concurrent normal imaging. P1 concordant group was younger (median age 39vs.49years, Mann-Whitney P=0.001) with significantly shorter median consultation times (12vs.15minutes, P=0.001) and imaging times (35vs60minutes, P=0.001). Overall duration of the clinic visit (163vs.175minutes, P=0.338) was similar.
159 patients were included in Phase 2. 52%(N=81) were concordant P1 who were deemed clinically suitable for accelerated discharge. 82%(N=66) of these had accelerated discharge with a significantly lower overall duration of clinic visit (90vs.145minutes, Mann-Whitney P = 0.001). Only 1 patient opted to have a second consultation when given the choice.
Conclusions:
P1 patients with concordant imaging are a demographically different group. Radiology- led accelerated discharge can reduce their waiting times and potentially improve patient experience and clinical workflow.
Methods: The project consisted of two phases. Phase 1 was an audit of current practice and Phase 2 was a re-audit after implementation of the new radiology-led discharge pathway. Data collection was performed prospectively over two consecutive weeks in each phase and included demographics, presenting complaints, clinical findings, consultation, imaging and waiting times. Inter-group analysis was performed comparing P1 concordant group to all other groups using non-parametric tests.
Results: 258 patients were included in Phase 1. Breast lump and pain were the most common presentations. 50%(N=129) had normal clinical examination (P1). Two third of these (N=85) had concurrent normal imaging. P1 concordant group was younger (median age 39vs.49years, Mann-Whitney P=0.001) with significantly shorter median consultation times (12vs.15minutes, P=0.001) and imaging times (35vs60minutes, P=0.001). Overall duration of the clinic visit (163vs.175minutes, P=0.338) was similar.
159 patients were included in Phase 2. 52%(N=81) were concordant P1 who were deemed clinically suitable for accelerated discharge. 82%(N=66) of these had accelerated discharge with a significantly lower overall duration of clinic visit (90vs.145minutes, Mann-Whitney P = 0.001). Only 1 patient opted to have a second consultation when given the choice.
Conclusions:
P1 patients with concordant imaging are a demographically different group. Radiology- led accelerated discharge can reduce their waiting times and potentially improve patient experience and clinical workflow.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}