Two thirds of patients may not need routine 12-month specialist review in an epilepsy clinic: A cross-sectional study of clinic appointments

Objectives: Timely access to specialist outpatient clinics can be difficult to achieve as outpatient services are often oversubscribed leading to unacceptable wait times. New patients, or those with emergent issues may wait for appointments whilst existing patients are booked in for routine reviews “just in case” there is a problem, using considerable clinic resources. We investigated routine 12-month review appointments to assess whether these appointments changed patient management. Methods: The medical records of 100 randomly selected adult patients attending annual review appointments over 12 months at a publicly-funded specialist outpatient epilepsy clinic in Melbourne, Australia were audited. Demographic and clinical data as well as information about the content of each appointment were analysed to determine whether the appointment resulted in changes to epilepsy management (eg medication change), administrative actions (eg drivers license approval) or the provision of information or education. Logistic regression was performed to assess what clinical factors were associated with changes in patient care arising from the 12-month review appointment. Results: Almost half (47%) of appointments resulted in no change to patient care and 37% had only administrative outcomes, such as the completion of a regulatory driving report. Only 16% of appointments resulted in a change in medical management. The only factor that independently predicted a change in medical management was the occurrence of a seizure in the previous year. The only factor independently associated with not having any change in medical management or administrative action was having an unknown seizure type. Conclusions/ significance: Only a small number of patients experience a change in medical management when attending a 12-month epilepsy clinic appointment, with a need for management change associated with the presence of ongoing seizure. Outpatient services should limit the use of routine annual follow up to those patients most likely to need intervention or support, creating “just in time” capacity for timely access to review as issues arise.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2024-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26181/27050392.v1
Primary Topic
Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Two thirds of patients may not need routine 12-month specialist review in an epilepsy clinic: A cross-sectional study of clinic appointments

Figshare
Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
article

Two thirds of patients may not need routine 12-month specialist review in an epilepsy clinic: A cross-sectional study of clinic appointments

article en

Abstract

Objectives: Timely access to specialist outpatient clinics can be difficult to achieve as outpatient services are often oversubscribed leading to unacceptable wait times. New patients, or those with emergent issues may wait for appointments whilst existing patients are booked in for routine reviews “just in case” there is a problem, using considerable clinic resources. We investigated routine 12-month review appointments to assess whether these appointments changed patient management. Methods: The medical records of 100 randomly selected adult patients attending annual review appointments over 12 months at a publicly-funded specialist outpatient epilepsy clinic in Melbourne, Australia were audited. Demographic and clinical data as well as information about the content of each appointment were analysed to determine whether the appointment resulted in changes to epilepsy management (eg medication change), administrative actions (eg drivers license approval) or the provision of information or education. Logistic regression was performed to assess what clinical factors were associated with changes in patient care arising from the 12-month review appointment. Results: Almost half (47%) of appointments resulted in no change to patient care and 37% had only administrative outcomes, such as the completion of a regulatory driving report. Only 16% of appointments resulted in a change in medical management. The only factor that independently predicted a change in medical management was the occurrence of a seizure in the previous year. The only factor independently associated with not having any change in medical management or administrative action was having an unknown seizure type. Conclusions/ significance: Only a small number of patients experience a change in medical management when attending a 12-month epilepsy clinic appointment, with a need for management change associated with the presence of ongoing seizure. Outpatient services should limit the use of routine annual follow up to those patients most likely to need intervention or support, creating “just in time” capacity for timely access to review as issues arise.

Figshare
La Trobe University (AU)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.