Rationale, aims and objectives

Specialty care referrals have doubled in the last decade. Optimization of the pre-referral workup by a primary care doctor can lead to a more efficient first specialty visit with the patient. Guidance regarding pre-referral laboratory testing is a first step towards improving the specialty referral process. Our aim was to establish consensus regarding appropriate pre-referral workup for common gastrointestinal and liver conditions.

Methods

The Delphi method was used to establish local consensus for recommending certain laboratory tests prior to specialty referral for 13 clinical conditions. Seven conditions from The University of Michigan outpatient referral guidelines were used as a baseline. An expert panel of three PCPs and nine gastroenterologists from three academic hospitals participated in three iterative rounds of electronic surveys. Each panellist ranked each test using a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Local panellists could recommend additional tests for the initial diagnoses, and also recommended additional diagnoses needing guidelines: iron deficiency anaemia, abdominal pain, irritable bowel syndrome, fatty liver disease, liver mass and cirrhosis. Consensus was defined as ≥70% of experts scoring ≥4 (agree or strongly agree).

Results

Applying Delphi methodology to extrapolate externally developed referral guidelines for local implementation resulted in considerable modifications. For some conditions, many tests from the external group were eliminated by the local group (abdominal bloating; iron deficiency anaemia; irritable bowel syndrome). In contrast, for chronic diarrhoea, abnormal liver enzymes and viral hepatitis, all/most original tests were retained with additional tests added. For liver mass, fatty liver disease and cirrhosis, there was high concordance among the panel with few tests added or eliminated.

Conclusions

Consideration of externally developed referral guidelines using a consensus-building process leads to significant local tailoring and adaption. Our next steps include implementation and dissemination of these guidelines and evaluating their impact on care efficiency in clinical practice.

Background

Subspecialty ambulatory care visits have doubled in the past 10 years and nearly half of all visits are for follow-up care. Could some of this care be provided by primary care providers (PCPs)?

Objective

To determine how often PCPs and specialists agree that a mutual patient's condition could be managed exclusively by the PCP, and to understand PCPs' perspectives on factors that influence decisions about 'repatriation,' or the transfer of patient management to primary care.

Design

A mixed method approach including paired surveys of PCPs and specialists about the necessity for ongoing specialty care of mutual patients, and interviews with PCPs about care coordination practices and reasons for differing opinions with specialists.

Participants

One hundred and eighty-nine PCPs and 59 physicians representing five medicine subspecialties completed paired surveys for 343 patients. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 PCPs.

Measurements

For each patient, PCPs and specialists were asked, "Could this diagnosis be managed exclusively by the PCP?"

Results

Specialists and PCPs agreed that transfer to primary care was appropriate for 16% of patients, whereas 36% had specialists and PCPs who agreed that ongoing specialty care was appropriate. Specialists were half as likely as PCPs to identify patients as appropriate for transfer to primary care. PCPs identified several factors that influence the likelihood that patients will be transferred to primary care, including perceived patient preferences, limited access to physician appointments, excessive workload, inter-clinician communication norms, and differences in clinical judgment. We group these factors into two domains: 'push-back' and 'pull-back' to primary care.

Conclusions

At a large academic medical center, approximately one in six patients receiving ongoing specialty care could potentially be managed exclusively by a PCP. PCPs identified several non-clinical factors to explain continuation of specialty care when patient transfer to PCP is clinically appropriate.