Cargando…

Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions

Patients choose to seek a second opinion in matters related to their health for a variety of reasons, and the total cost associated with these second opinion visits is estimated to be billions of dollars annually. Understanding the reasons behind second opinion self-referrals is key to improving pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gologorsky, Daniel, Greenstein, Scott H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3685446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23807829
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S46448
_version_ 1782273691302756352
author Gologorsky, Daniel
Greenstein, Scott H
author_facet Gologorsky, Daniel
Greenstein, Scott H
author_sort Gologorsky, Daniel
collection PubMed
description Patients choose to seek a second opinion in matters related to their health for a variety of reasons, and the total cost associated with these second opinion visits is estimated to be billions of dollars annually. Understanding the reasons behind second opinion self-referrals is key to improving patient satisfaction and reducing redundancy in delivered health care. This study represents a retrospective analysis of the records from a single provider at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI) Comprehensive Ophthalmology Service in order to determine the various reasons that patients self-refer to an ophthalmology clinic seeking second opinions. A total of 174 patients presenting for a second opinion were identified over a one-year period. Patients presented for second opinions for two primary reasons: 60% presented in order to seek a confirmation of a diagnosis from an outside ophthalmologist (54%) or optometrist (6%), and 40% presented due to a previous adverse experience with an outside provider, such as perceived treatment failure (26%), poor bedside manner (3%), distrust of the provider (5%), and poor provider communication skills (7%). This study strives to reiterate that the reduction of adverse patient experiences through effective communication of expected treatment options and outcomes, with a realistic time course of therapy, could significantly improve patient satisfaction and reduce costly second opinion visits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3685446
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36854462013-06-27 Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions Gologorsky, Daniel Greenstein, Scott H Clin Ophthalmol Original Research Patients choose to seek a second opinion in matters related to their health for a variety of reasons, and the total cost associated with these second opinion visits is estimated to be billions of dollars annually. Understanding the reasons behind second opinion self-referrals is key to improving patient satisfaction and reducing redundancy in delivered health care. This study represents a retrospective analysis of the records from a single provider at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI) Comprehensive Ophthalmology Service in order to determine the various reasons that patients self-refer to an ophthalmology clinic seeking second opinions. A total of 174 patients presenting for a second opinion were identified over a one-year period. Patients presented for second opinions for two primary reasons: 60% presented in order to seek a confirmation of a diagnosis from an outside ophthalmologist (54%) or optometrist (6%), and 40% presented due to a previous adverse experience with an outside provider, such as perceived treatment failure (26%), poor bedside manner (3%), distrust of the provider (5%), and poor provider communication skills (7%). This study strives to reiterate that the reduction of adverse patient experiences through effective communication of expected treatment options and outcomes, with a realistic time course of therapy, could significantly improve patient satisfaction and reduce costly second opinion visits. Dove Medical Press 2013 2013-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3685446/ /pubmed/23807829 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S46448 Text en © 2013 Gologorsky and Greenstein, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Gologorsky, Daniel
Greenstein, Scott H
Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title_full Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title_fullStr Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title_full_unstemmed Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title_short Retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
title_sort retrospective analysis of patients self-referred to comprehensive ophthalmology seeking second opinions
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3685446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23807829
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S46448
work_keys_str_mv AT gologorskydaniel retrospectiveanalysisofpatientsselfreferredtocomprehensiveophthalmologyseekingsecondopinions
AT greensteinscotth retrospectiveanalysisofpatientsselfreferredtocomprehensiveophthalmologyseekingsecondopinions