A218 EVALUATION OF IBD SPECIALTY CARE IN NOVA SCOTIA: THE REFERRING PHYSICIAN PERSPECTIVE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The incidence and prevalence rates of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) in Canada have been observed to be amongst the highest globally, with the highest observed estimates in Nova Scotia (NS). Excessive wait times for outpatient consultations is a well-documented problem. As increased wait times lead to negative outcomes for IBD patients, it is crucial that a thorough understanding of access to care is obtained by engaging multiple stakeholders including patients, referring physicians, specialist physicians, and administrative personnel. The study aim was to identify barriers in access to IBD care for referring physicians and their patients. This was a mail-out survey between July and October 2017 of a representative sample of general practitioners (GPs) referring to GI IBD specialty care in NS. Stratified sampling was done to ensure geographic representativeness of the sample. The survey incorporated social exchange theory and included a non-conditional incentive to maximize response rates. The questionnaire consisted of five sections: 1) demographic information (e.g. sex, age, patient load); 2) geographic information (e.g. urban versus rural); 3) referral processes (e.g. number of referrals sent to GI, communication between GP and GI offices); 4) patient wait times (e.g. how many patients on wait list); 5) referral process satisfaction. Descriptive analyses were carried out using Stata software. The project was approved by the NS Health Authority Research Ethics board. This survey is still in progress. A total of 634 surveys were mailed out, and thus far 145 were returned (23%). Mean age was 48 years (29 to 77 years), mean number of years in practice was 18 (1 to 50 years). Sixty-eight percent (n=99) worked in a private practice setting, and 46 (44%) in an urban setting. Thirty-one percent of respondents did not have access to IBD specialty care in their community, but the majority (84%) had access in their health zone. Over half (57%) of respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied at the current referral process. Forty-one percent felt the current referral process was either inefficient or very efficient. Respondents identified the following as being access barriers: 1) perceived inequity in access to GI for rural compared to urban areas, 2) need to increase number of GIs, and 3) need to create a centralized referral and triage process for the whole province. The results show wait times for IBD patients are a significant problem and there is major dissatisfaction among GPs about the referral process. Identification of barriers to IBD specialty care can lead to informed system redesign with goals of improving access to GI specialist IBD care, improving access efficiency, overcoming access inequities for patients and referring physicians and ultimately improving health outcomes. CIHRNova Scotia Health Authority Research Fund
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».