A pediatric XXXX follow-up system: completing the cycle of care.

@entity1 @entity341
BACKGROUND: Prior to 1993, the follow-up program for our pediatric @entity341 ( @entity341 ) was the responsibility of the rotating senior pediatric resident. There were inherent problems with this system, as a consequence of inconsistent personnel. The residents' revolving schedules and the fact that they were accountable to other clinical areas decreased their availability for follow-up. Also, it was difficult for the clerical staff to identify the @entity1 responsible for answering parent calls. The medical director of the @entity341 made the decision to turn the core responsibility for the follow-up program to the nurse practitioners in addition to their direct care provider role. The nurse practitioner group is a consistent member of the treatment team who has the critical thinking skills necessary to handle the majority of issues that require follow-up. The emergency attending physicians are available for consultation whenever questions arise. OBJECTIVE: Review of current follow-up program of a pediatric @entity341 and its impact on @entity1 care, @entity1 /parent satisfaction, and communication with community providers and specialists. METHOD: A retrospective review of the evolution of the multi-faceted follow-up of @entity1 from an urban pediatric @entity341 . RESULTS: Antidotal evidence suggests that a comprehensive follow-up program increases @entity1 satisfaction, improves communication between the @entity341 , primary care providers, and specialists. It also decreases the workload of the attending emergency physicians, allowing them more time to focus on acute issues. In addition, the follow-up program for @entity341 @entity1 can decrease the medical /legal risks associated with reporting of delayed laboratory results. CONCLUSION: The next step in further reviewing this program is the development of a satisfaction questionnaire for @entity1 / families and community providers to quantify their level of satisfaction with the program. A retrospective chart review of the @entity1 who received a follow-up phone call after discharge, and the return visit rate would be another avenue to pursue to validate our antidotal information.
