Patient awareness and quality of oral surgery referrals to specialist practice

Jadun, Sarah; Syed, Nasser; T, Drabu; Yates, Julian

doi:10.1111/ors.12467

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7 Furthermore, referrals containing all the required information ensures efficient and safe treatment without unnecessary delay. 18,19 Waiting times are defined as the time between the date of the first consultation and the intervention date. 20 This was applied to the methodology of this study with the additional measure of calculating the number of days from the date of referral to the date of treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oral surgery waiting lists at an Australian university dental school

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the waiting times experienced by patients referred to an Australian University oral surgery clinic over a 2‐year period. Materials and method A single‐centre retrospective study was conducted to determine the waiting times for oral surgery services at the Griffith University postgraduate clinic. The first 233 patients were selected out of a total of 587 randomised patients and data collected regarding referral sources, procedures undertaken and the number of days from referral to consultation, then to treatment collected from the clinic's management software. Results Of the 233 referrals, 121 were female (52%) and 112 male (48%). Many patients were between 20 and 29 years representing approximately 40% (n = 93) of the sample. Analyses of referred patients showed that a significant number of public (i.e. non‐private‐paying) patients (73%, n = 170) were treated in the study period. Most patients waited only 1–2 weeks to be seen for a consultation from date of referral and treatment from date of consultation. Nearly half (49.7%, n = 116) were treated within 2 months of being referred. Once the patient was referred, the overall mean waiting time was 44 days from referral to treatment. Treatment comprised of either procedures undertaken under local anaesthesia (LA) (76.7%, n = 179) or consultations only with patients either declining treatment, deemed not in need of surgical intervention, or referred for more advanced management such as the need for general anaesthesia (23.3%, n = 54). Surgical removal of third molars (36.1%, n = 84) was the most common reason for referral. Conclusion A variety of minor oral surgery procedures can be provided under local anaesthesia with acceptable accessibility and shorter public oral surgery waiting lists.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inadequacy in the information provided in the referral may compromise effective patient management 7 . Furthermore, referrals containing all the required information ensures efficient and safe treatment without unnecessary delay 18,19 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral surgery waiting lists at an Australian university dental school

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the reason for this downward trend cannot be attributed to a single cause, there has been an increase in oral surgery referrals from primary care to secondary care. 12 Jadun et al proposed a number of reasons for this increase, including: a larger UK population; patients keeping their teeth longer and requiring treatment when they have more complex medical needs; and an increase in litigation resulting in defensive referrals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral surgery wait times in NHS secondary dental care in England: a five-year review

Ehsan

2022

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To report the oral surgery referral to treatment waiting times in hospitals in England and to identify any trends in the percentage of patients seen within 18 weeks. Materials and methods Data published by the NHS statistics team was analysed from 2016-2020. Results Pre-COVID-19, the best performing month was February 2016, with 91.5% of patients seen within 18 weeks. The worst performing month was September 2019, with 79.3% of patients seen within 18 weeks. Oral surgery was the worst performing speciality for 8% of months (4/50). Post-COVID-19, oral surgery was the worst performing speciality for 70% of months (7/10). In July 2020, the percentage of patients seen within 18 weeks of an oral surgery referral dropped to 24%. Discussion Over the last five years, there has been a steady decline in the number of patients who have been seen within 18 weeks of their oral surgery referral. There has also been an increase in oral surgery referrals to secondary care which needs to be addressed. Conclusion Improvements to undergraduate and postgraduate training, combined with enhanced commissioning of primary care services, is required.

show abstract

“…There has been a noticeable increase in the demand for Oral Surgery services nationally (1) with a greater number of referrals to specialist services based mainly in secondary care settings. This has resulted in longer waiting times from referral to treatment for patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of Oral Surgery referrals to aid development of an integrated service in Southwest England

Gradwell,

Fleming,

Bell

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: There has been an increase in the number of Oral Surgery referrals from primary to secondary care over recent years which has resulted in increased waiting times for patients. A National Institute for Health and Care Research study suggests that two-thirds of patients referred to secondary care for Oral Surgery procedures could be treated in primary care by dentists with enhanced skills (i.e., Level 2). Aims: This study aims to assess the proportion of inappropriate referrals to specialist services at Bristol Dental Hospital and to describe the patient demographic to help inform the development of an integrated Oral Surgery service in Southwest England. Materials and Methods: A random sample of 100 written referrals to the Oral Surgery department at BDH were prospectively analysed over a six-week period. Multiple variables were collected to understand the referral content, including the complexity of the treatment requested (Level 1, 2 or 3), patient and referrer locations. Results: Of the 100 referrals, 94 were included in the analysis. 17% of referrals were determined to be of Level 1 complexity, 35% were Level 2 and 48% Level 3. Therefore, 83% of referrals were deemed appropriate and 17% inappropriate for referral to specialist services. However, almost half (52%) of these referrals (i.e., Level 1 and 2 cases) could have been treated in primary care. Many referrals also had missing clinical details or unacceptable quality radiographs. Conclusion: A significant proportion of referrals to specialist services could potentially be completed in primary care by dentists with enhanced skills, but this was under two-thirds as suggested in previous studies. Our findings support the need for an integrated and effective Oral Surgery Managed Clinical Network in Southwest England, which could reduce the burden on secondary care, reduce waiting list times and improve access for patients. An electronic referral management system could also improve the quality of information provided on referrals.

show abstract

Patient awareness and quality of oral surgery referrals to specialist practice

Cited by 4 publications

References 17 publications

Oral surgery waiting lists at an Australian university dental school

Oral surgery waiting lists at an Australian university dental school

Oral surgery wait times in NHS secondary dental care in England: a five-year review

An evaluation of Oral Surgery referrals to aid development of an integrated service in Southwest England

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About