Optimisation of outpatient resource utilisation in XXXX management.

@entity1 @entity1222 @entity231
PURPOSE: We assessed whether @entity1 referred with a diagnosis of @entity231 require outpatient assessment before listing for surgery or whether the general practitioner could have direct access to the waiting list. We also studied whether pre-assessment clinics made a significant difference to management even when waiting times were long. METHODS: Data about @entity1 referred with a diagnosis of @entity231 to the Oxford Eye Hospital and associated hospitals were collected. Seventy-five @entity1 were prospectively studied and 100 @entity1 records were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-six per cent of @entity1 had a misdiagnosis or additional problems affecting management. Optometrists provided more information than general practitioners, but their diagnostic accuracy was equal (73% optometrists, 75% general practitioners). At the pre-assessment clinic pupil dilatation changed management in only 4% of @entity1 . CONCLUSION: Listing @entity1 on the basis of @entity1222 would be inappropriate in 1 in 4 @entity1 . Pre-assessment clinics rarely picked up a clinically relevant change. Thus if outpatient consultation included a decision on the exact surgical plan including implant power, then pre-assessment clinics may not be necessary.
