RSM logo
JRSM

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J R Soc Med 2001;94:628-631
© 2001 Royal Society of Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Send a Quick Comment
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Quick Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
J R Soc Med 2001;94:628-631
© 2001 The Royal Society of Medicine

Inappropriate admissions: thoughts of patients and referring doctors

John Campbell MB DRCOG  

Bishop's Castle Medical Practice, Schoolhouse Lane, Bishop's Castle, Shropshire SY9 5BP, UK

Correspondence to: Dr J Campbell, Department of General Practice, Adelaide University, Adelaide, South Australia 5005E-mail: jpcam{at}totalise.co.uk

Research on inappropriate hospital admissions has tended to neglect the views of the referring doctors and the patients. In this study, the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol was applied to a random sample of 102 emergency medical admissions. The patients and doctors were then presented with a list of possible alternatives to admission that might have been used at the point of referral.

Case notes were available for 88 patients. As judged by these, 28% of admissions were inappropriate, the commonest reason being the potential for treatment or tests to have been performed as outpatient procedures; next commonest was the possibility of lower level care. The response rate to the questionnaires was about two-thirds, for both doctors and patients. Of the general practitioners and casualty doctors who responded, 60% specified alternatives to admission that they would have considered, and the equivalent figure for patients was 70%. For both groups the major preferences were same-day outpatient assessment and admission to a community hospital.

Referring doctors and patients, in this survey, favoured alternatives to acute medical care in proportions much higher than that of supposedly inappropriate admission.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Age AgeingHome page
C. Luthy, C. Cedraschi, F. Herrmann, M. Kossovsky, E. Perrin, P. Chopard, J.-P. Michel, and A.-F. Allaz
Appropriateness of hospital use: comparison between elderly patients' point of view and a structured questionnaire
Age Ageing, November 1, 2007; 36(6): 681 - 684.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JRSMHome page
J. Rodriguez-Vera and E. P. de la Llave
Inappropriate admissions
J R Soc Med, January 2, 2002; 95(2): 111 - 111.
[Full Text] [PDF]