Explaining variation in referral from primary to secondary care: cohort study

Dulcie McBride, Sarah Hardoon, Kate Walters, Stuart Gilmour, Rosalind Raine, Dulcie McBride, Sarah Hardoon, Kate Walters, Stuart Gilmour, Rosalind Raine

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the extent to which referral for defined symptoms from primary care varies by age, sex, and social deprivation and whether any sociodemographic variations in referral differ according to the presence of national referral guidance and the potential of the symptoms to be life threatening.

Design: Cohort study using individual patient data from the health improvement network database in primary care.

Setting: United Kingdom.

Participants: 5492 patients with postmenopausal bleeding, 23 121 with hip pain, and 101 212 with dyspepsia from 326 general practices, 2001-7.

Main outcome measures: Multivariable associations between odds of immediate referral for postmenopausal bleeding and age and social deprivation; hazard rates of referral for hip pain or dyspepsia and age, sex, and social deprivation. Analyses for dyspepsia were stratified for people aged less than and more than 55 years because referral guidance differs by age.

Results: 61.4% (3374/5492) of patients with postmenopausal bleeding, 17.4% (4019/23 121) with hip pain, and 13.8% (13 944/101 212) with dyspepsia were referred. The likelihood of referral for postmenopausal bleeding declined with increasing age: the adjusted odds ratio for patients aged 85 or more compared with those aged 55-64 was 0.39 (95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.49). Patients aged 85 or more with hip pain were also less likely to be referred than those aged 55-64 (0.68, 0.57 to 0.81). Women were less likely than men to be referred for hip pain (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 0.96). More deprived patients with hip pain or dyspepsia (if aged <55) were less likely to be referred. Adjusted hazard ratios for those in the most deprived Townsend fifth compared with the least deprived were 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.82) and 0.76 (0.68 to 0.85), respectively. No socioeconomic gradient was evident in referral for postmenopausal bleeding.

Conclusions: Inequalities in referral associated with socioeconomic circumstances were more likely to occur in the absence of both explicit guidance and potentially life threatening conditions, whereas inequalities with age were evident for all conditions.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare (1) Financial support for the submitted work from the King’s Fund to access the data; (2) RR is partly funded by a National Institute for Health Research Public Health Career Scientist Award and by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals/University College London Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre; (3) No spouses, partners, or children have relationships with commercial entities that might have an interest in the submitted work; and (4) have no non-financial interests that may be relevant to the submitted work.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4787688/bin/mcbd699678.f1_default.jpg
Flow of practices and patients through study

References

    1. Campbell SM, Roland MO. Why do people consult the doctor? Fam Pract 1996;13:75-83.
    1. Raine R. Does gender bias exist in the use of specialist health care? J Health Serv Res Policy 2000;5:237-49.
    1. Department of Health. National service framework for older people. DH, 2001.
    1. Goddard M, Smith P. Equity of access to health care services: theory and evidence from the UK. Soc Sci Med 2001;53:1149-62.
    1. Morris S, Sutton M, Gravelle H. Inequity and inequality in the use of health care in England: an empirical investigation. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 2003.
    1. Dixon A, Le Grand J, Henderson J, Murray R, Poteliakhoff E. Is the British National Health Service equitable? The evidence on socioeconomic differences in utilization. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12:104-9.
    1. O’Donnell CA. Variation in GP referral rates: what can we learn from the literature? Fam Pract 2000;17:462-71.
    1. Department of Health. The NHS cancer plan. DH, 2000.
    1. Miller P, Craig N, Scott A, Walker A, Hanlon P. Measuring progress towards a primary care-led NHS. Br J Gen Pract 1999;49:541-5.
    1. Raine R, Wong W, Ambler G, Hardoon S, Petersen I, Morris R, et al. Sociodemographic variations in the contribution of drug prevention to stroke survival at middle and older ages: cohort study. BMJ 2009;338:b1279.
    1. Townsend P, Phillimore P, Beattie A. Inequalities in health in the northern region. Northern Regional Health Authority and University of Bristol, 1986.
    1. Maguire A, Blak BT, Thompson M. The importance of defining periods of complete mortality reporting for research using automated data from primary care. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2009;18:76-83.
    1. Surender R, Bradlow J, Coulter A, Doll H, Stewart Brown S. Prospective study of trends in referral patterns in fundholding and non-fundholding practices in the Oxford region, 1990-4. BMJ 1995;311:1205-8.
    1. Health Episode Statistics. 2008. .
    1. Department of Health. 2008. .
    1. Department of Health. Referral guidelines for suspected cancer. DH, 2000.
    1. D’Ambrosia RD. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis. Orthopedics 2005;28(2 suppl):s201-5.
    1. Dieppe P. Fortnightly review: management of hip osteoarthritis. BMJ 1995;311:853-7.
    1. British Society of Gastroenterology. Dyspepsia: management guidelines. BSG, 2002.
    1. Campbell S, Monga A, ed. Gynaecology by ten teachers. 17 ed. Arnold, 2000.
    1. Schneeweiss S, Seeger JD, Maclure M, Wang PS, Avorn J, Glynn RJ. Performance of comorbidity scores to control for confounding in epidemiologic studies using claims data. Am J Epidemiol 2001;154:854-64.
    1. Walters K, Rait G, Petersen I, Williams R, Nazareth I. Panic disorder and risk of new onset coronary heart disease, acute myocardial infarction, and cardiac mortality: cohort study using the general practice research database. Eur Heart J 2008;29:2981-8.
    1. Department of Health. New GMS contract QOF implementation dataset and business rules—smoking indicator set. DH, 2008.
    1. Department of Health. 2008. .
    1. Tate A, Nicholson A, Cassell J. Are GPs under-investigating older patients presenting with symptoms of ovarian cancer? Observational study using General Practice Research Database. Br J Cancer 2010;102:947-51.
    1. Katz JN. Patient preferences and health disparities. JAMA 2001;286:1506-9.
    1. Hawker GA, Wright JG, Coyte PC, Williams JI, Harvey B, Glazier R, et al. Differences between men and women in the rate of use of hip and knee arthroplasty. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1016-22.
    1. Williams A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argument. Health Econ 1997;6:117-32.
    1. Bowling A. Ageism in cardiology. BMJ 1999;319:1353-5.
    1. Santaguida PL, Hawker GA, Hudak PL, Glazier R, Mahomed NN, Kreder HJ, et al. Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Can J Surg 2008;51:428-36.
    1. Karlsen E, Daltroy L, Liang M, Eaton H, Katz J. Gender differences in patient preferences may underlie differential utilization of elective surgery. Am J Med 1997;102:534.
    1. Walters K, Iliffe S, Orrell M. An exploration of help-seeking behaviour in older people with unmet needs. Fam Pract 2001;18:277-82.
    1. Hawker GA, Wright JG, Glazier RH, Coyte PC, Harvey B, Williams JI, et al. The effect of education and income on need and willingness to undergo total joint arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:3331-9.
    1. Gredmark T, Kvint S, Havel G, Mattsson L. Histopathological findings in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102:133-6.
    1. Steward A, Wood H. Stomach. In: ONS. Cancer atlas of UK and Ireland. ONS, 2005.
    1. Majeed A, Bindman AB, Forrest C, Weiner JP. Specialist referral rates among primary care physicians in the united kingdom: association with patient characteristics and comparison with referral rates among primary care physicians in the USA. Academy for Health Services Research and Health Policy Meeting. Abstr Acad Health Serv Res Health Policy Meet 2001;18:89.
    1. Mercer S, Watt G. The inverse care law: clinical primary care encounters in deprived and affluent areas of Scotland. Ann Fam Med 2007;5:503-10.
    1. Adams J, Ryan V, White M. How accurate are Townsend deprivation scores as predictors of self-reported health? A comparison with individual level data. J Public Health (Oxf) 2005;27:101-6.
    1. Krieger N, Williams DR, Moss NE. Measuring social class in U.S. public health research: concepts, methodologies, and guidelines. Annu Rev Public Health 1997;18:341-78.
    1. Grundy E, Holt G. The socioeconomic status of older adults: how should we measure it in studies of health inequalities? J Epidemiol Community Health 2001;55:895-904.
    1. Parker C, Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Vinogradova Y. Rectal and postmenopausal bleeding: consultation and referral of patients with and without severe mental health problems. Br J Gen Pract 2007;57:371-6.
    1. North of England Dyspepsia Guideline Development Group. Dyspepsia: managing dyspepsia in adults in primary care. North of England Dyspepsia Guideline Development Group, 2004.
    1. Moller AM, Pedersen T, Vellebro N, Munksgaard A. Effect of smoking on early complications after elective orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85-B:178-81.
    1. Coulthard M, Chow YH, Dattani N, White C, Baker A, Johnson B. Health. In: ONS. Focus on social inequalities. ONS, 2004.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj