Article

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how the allocation of referrals for a community
rehabilitation service to triage categories affects waiting time from referral to
first appointment, and whether other factors also contribute to variance in
waiting time. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: A multidisciplinary
outpatient community rehabilitation program within a large metropolitan health
service. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive adult patients (N=379) commencing
rehabilitation over a 3-month period. INTERVENTION: Allocation of referrals to a
triage category of 1 (most urgent) to 4 (least urgent) by allied health
clinicians guided by a written protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary
outcome was waiting time from referral to service commencement. RESULTS: The
small group of patients (4%) allocated to the most urgent category had
significantly shorter mean waiting times than the other 3 categories (mean, 4.8d
vs 19.6, 26.6, and 19.4d for categories 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Regression
analysis indicated that approximately 11% of the variance in waiting time was
accounted for by the triage categories. Site of treatment (home or center) and
diagnosis also made small contributions (4% combined) to variance in waiting time. CONCLUSIONS: The triage process ensured rapid service for a small number of
urgent referrals, but made little difference to the waiting time of the vast
majority of patients. Given the resources required for triaging patients, the
results of this study lead us to question the value of the triage system in this
setting.
CI - Copyright (c) 2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS