[初级保健中的有限认知评估:全科医生转诊到记忆诊所是否总是合适的?]

Q4 Medicine Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde Pub Date : 2024-09-11
Laura J L Huisintveld, Barbara C van Munster, Fleur C W Visser, Liesbeth Hempenius
{"title":"[初级保健中的有限认知评估:全科医生转诊到记忆诊所是否总是合适的?]","authors":"Laura J L Huisintveld, Barbara C van Munster, Fleur C W Visser, Liesbeth Hempenius","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether referrals of general practitioners (GPs) to the memory clinic align with the regional and national dementia guidelines.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>For this single center retrospective study, data was collected from electronic patient files.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>GP referrals to the memory clinic over a 1-year period were categorized and evaluated according to the regional and national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>310 GP referrals were included with the most common referral motivations: \"Additional somatic or psychiatric factors\" (77; 24,8%) and \"Straightforward dementia diagnosis\" (70; 22,6%). A total of 51,0% of referrals were not in line with regional guidelines: either because of non-compliant referral reasons; or limited cognitive assessment without clinical findings and/or cognitive testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Half of GP referrals to the memory clinic were not in line with the national and regional guidelines. Referrals were often not preceded by clinical findings and/or cognitive testing. Aiming for effective care, cognitive assessments in primary care should be encouraged and with appropriate assistance.</p>","PeriodicalId":18903,"journal":{"name":"Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde","volume":"168 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Limited cognitive assessment in primary care: are GP referrals to the memory clinic always appropriate?]\",\"authors\":\"Laura J L Huisintveld, Barbara C van Munster, Fleur C W Visser, Liesbeth Hempenius\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether referrals of general practitioners (GPs) to the memory clinic align with the regional and national dementia guidelines.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>For this single center retrospective study, data was collected from electronic patient files.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>GP referrals to the memory clinic over a 1-year period were categorized and evaluated according to the regional and national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>310 GP referrals were included with the most common referral motivations: \\\"Additional somatic or psychiatric factors\\\" (77; 24,8%) and \\\"Straightforward dementia diagnosis\\\" (70; 22,6%). A total of 51,0% of referrals were not in line with regional guidelines: either because of non-compliant referral reasons; or limited cognitive assessment without clinical findings and/or cognitive testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Half of GP referrals to the memory clinic were not in line with the national and regional guidelines. Referrals were often not preceded by clinical findings and/or cognitive testing. Aiming for effective care, cognitive assessments in primary care should be encouraged and with appropriate assistance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde\",\"volume\":\"168 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要调查全科医生(GP)向记忆门诊转诊是否符合地区和国家痴呆症指南:在这项单中心回顾性研究中,数据来自患者电子档案:方法:根据地区和国家指南,对一年内转诊到记忆诊所的全科医生进行分类和评估:结果:共有 310 名全科医生转诊,其中最常见的转诊动机是"附加的躯体或精神因素"(77;24.8%)和 "直接的痴呆诊断"(70;22.6%)。共有51.0%的转诊不符合地区指南:要么是因为不符合转诊原因;要么是因为认知评估有限,没有临床发现和/或认知测试:半数转诊至记忆门诊的全科医生不符合国家和地区指南。转诊前往往没有临床发现和/或认知测试。为了提供有效的护理,应鼓励在初级保健中进行认知评估,并提供适当的帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Limited cognitive assessment in primary care: are GP referrals to the memory clinic always appropriate?]

Objective: To investigate whether referrals of general practitioners (GPs) to the memory clinic align with the regional and national dementia guidelines.

Design: For this single center retrospective study, data was collected from electronic patient files.

Method: GP referrals to the memory clinic over a 1-year period were categorized and evaluated according to the regional and national guidelines.

Results: 310 GP referrals were included with the most common referral motivations: "Additional somatic or psychiatric factors" (77; 24,8%) and "Straightforward dementia diagnosis" (70; 22,6%). A total of 51,0% of referrals were not in line with regional guidelines: either because of non-compliant referral reasons; or limited cognitive assessment without clinical findings and/or cognitive testing.

Conclusion: Half of GP referrals to the memory clinic were not in line with the national and regional guidelines. Referrals were often not preceded by clinical findings and/or cognitive testing. Aiming for effective care, cognitive assessments in primary care should be encouraged and with appropriate assistance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde
Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Het NTVG staat bekend als hét wetenschappelijke algemene medische tijdschrift. De lange historie en de degelijkheid maken het tijdschrift tot een bolwerk van medische wetenschap in druk. Ook door de goede leesbaarheid draagt het tijdschrift bij aan de voortdurende dialoog over de geneeskunde.
期刊最新文献
[Dealing with deep uncertainty during a pandemic; make policies adaptive]. [Neurological side-effects associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors]. [Residency attrition in orthopaedic surgery; an explanatory model based on qualitative research]. ['More research is needed' is a meaningless conclusion]. [Shaking hands or not after the COVID pandemic?]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1