Effect of ambulatory utilization review on referrals from generalists to specialists

Cordelia T. Grimm, Arthur G. Gomez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We studied whether ambulatory utilization review (UR) alters how many patients internal medicine residents refer to subspecialists, and whether the effect persists without reinforcement. We compared referral rates of residents from a firm that held UR meetings (intervention firm residents, n = 20) with those of residents from a firm that did not (control firm residents, n = 21). We then compared referral rates of 17 intervention firm residents while they were participating in UR with their rates after not participating for at least 4 weeks. Intervention firm residents submitted 30% fewer referrals than control firm residents (9% vs 13%, p = .05). However, the effect was short-lived; after 4 weeks without UR, intervention firm resident referral rates were similar to control firm referral rates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)778-780
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of General Internal Medicine
Volume13
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Utilization Review
Referral and Consultation
Internal Medicine

Keywords

  • Ambulatory utilization review
  • Internal medicine residents
  • Referral to subspecialists

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Effect of ambulatory utilization review on referrals from generalists to specialists. / Grimm, Cordelia T.; Gomez, Arthur G.

In: Journal of General Internal Medicine, Vol. 13, No. 11, 1998, p. 778-780.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Grimm, Cordelia T. ; Gomez, Arthur G. / Effect of ambulatory utilization review on referrals from generalists to specialists. In: Journal of General Internal Medicine. 1998 ; Vol. 13, No. 11. pp. 778-780.
@article{e3c1d5af2288417c86ef86fd93af2029,
title = "Effect of ambulatory utilization review on referrals from generalists to specialists",
abstract = "We studied whether ambulatory utilization review (UR) alters how many patients internal medicine residents refer to subspecialists, and whether the effect persists without reinforcement. We compared referral rates of residents from a firm that held UR meetings (intervention firm residents, n = 20) with those of residents from a firm that did not (control firm residents, n = 21). We then compared referral rates of 17 intervention firm residents while they were participating in UR with their rates after not participating for at least 4 weeks. Intervention firm residents submitted 30{\%} fewer referrals than control firm residents (9{\%} vs 13{\%}, p = .05). However, the effect was short-lived; after 4 weeks without UR, intervention firm resident referral rates were similar to control firm referral rates.",
keywords = "Ambulatory utilization review, Internal medicine residents, Referral to subspecialists",
author = "Grimm, {Cordelia T.} and Gomez, {Arthur G.}",
year = "1998",
doi = "10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00232.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "778--780",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of ambulatory utilization review on referrals from generalists to specialists

AU - Grimm, Cordelia T.

AU - Gomez, Arthur G.

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - We studied whether ambulatory utilization review (UR) alters how many patients internal medicine residents refer to subspecialists, and whether the effect persists without reinforcement. We compared referral rates of residents from a firm that held UR meetings (intervention firm residents, n = 20) with those of residents from a firm that did not (control firm residents, n = 21). We then compared referral rates of 17 intervention firm residents while they were participating in UR with their rates after not participating for at least 4 weeks. Intervention firm residents submitted 30% fewer referrals than control firm residents (9% vs 13%, p = .05). However, the effect was short-lived; after 4 weeks without UR, intervention firm resident referral rates were similar to control firm referral rates.

AB - We studied whether ambulatory utilization review (UR) alters how many patients internal medicine residents refer to subspecialists, and whether the effect persists without reinforcement. We compared referral rates of residents from a firm that held UR meetings (intervention firm residents, n = 20) with those of residents from a firm that did not (control firm residents, n = 21). We then compared referral rates of 17 intervention firm residents while they were participating in UR with their rates after not participating for at least 4 weeks. Intervention firm residents submitted 30% fewer referrals than control firm residents (9% vs 13%, p = .05). However, the effect was short-lived; after 4 weeks without UR, intervention firm resident referral rates were similar to control firm referral rates.

KW - Ambulatory utilization review

KW - Internal medicine residents

KW - Referral to subspecialists

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031724903&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031724903&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00232.x

DO - 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00232.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 9824526

AN - SCOPUS:0031724903

VL - 13

SP - 778

EP - 780

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

IS - 11

ER -