Survey of North American Multidisciplinary Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Team Clinic Administration.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to provide an understanding of the ways cleft palate (CP) and craniofacial teams address billing, administration, communication of clinical recommendations, appointment scheduling, and diagnosis-specific protocols.
DESIGN
An online clinic administration survey was developed using data from an open-ended telephone questionnaire. The online survey was distributed by e-mail to the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) nurse coordinator electronic mailing list, used regularly by the ACPA and its members to communicate with teams. The response was 34.1% (42/123). Two incomplete records were excluded, as were any inconsistent responses of 3 teams submitting duplicate records.
RESULTS
Six (15.8%) of 38 teams do not charge for clinic visits. For all other teams, some or all providers bill individually for services (68.4%) or a single lump sum applies (10.5%). Patients of 34 (89.5%) of 38 teams occasionally or often neglect to schedule or attend follow-up appointments. Twenty-six (66.7%) of 39 team directors were plastic surgeons. Phone is a common method of contacting families for scheduling (60.0%) and appointment reminders (82.5%). Most teams' providers (90.0%) routinely communicate findings to each other during postclinical conference. Most teams saw patients with isolated cleft lip (43.6%), cleft lip and palate (64.1%), or isolated CP (59.0%) annually.
CONCLUSIONS
The breadth of strategies team clinic administration strategies warrants further exploration of the variations and their effects on patient-centered outcomes including the quality of life, satisfaction, cost, and resource utilization.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.