PubMed · 15283088
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R Spirig. 2001. [Editorial].. https://doi.org/10.1024/1012-5302.14.2.83
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Consult letters are the main way of relaying information between attending physicians involved in patient treatment at different levels of care and should therefore reach continuing care physicians with minimal delay. The quality assurance project described here was intended to reduce dispatch times for inpatient consult letters at our department of psychiatry and psychotherapy. To accomplish this, different measures were put to work at two levels of intervention. These included standardizing work flow, centralizing and optimizing work distribution in the secretaries' office, enabling faster access to typewritten consult letters by way of central data storage on the clinic's server, sending email notifications to all persons involved, using a central office for signing letters, and prompt monitoring and reporting of consult letter delays. These interventions helped reduce the average delay of dispatching consult letters from 29 days to 11. All in all, the project led to a high degree of workplace satisfaction for all persons involved and should be adaptable to other departments and units without difficulty. In our own department, ward-specific consult letter efficiency has become an important quality indicator.
OBJECTIVES: It has been claimed that gene technology will induce revolutionary changes in healthcare. This paper investigates how and to what extent these changes have been economically assessed. METHODS: A generic framework was developed to distinguish between methodologically similar evaluations of healthcare technology. Methodological issues and the current state of economic evidence concerning human DNA technology were extracted from publications within these groups of evaluations. RESULTS: Economic evaluations of "healthcare consisting of gene technology" were identified primarily for in vitro diagnostics for hereditary disease and others for pharmacogenetics and molecular pathology. "Healthcare enabled by gene technology" is far more encompassing and includes, e.g., biotechnology drugs for which various health economic evaluations can be found. Yet here, the impact of gene technology intertwines with the impact of other technologies and is therefore hardly susceptible to evaluation. The fields of evaluation may be classified best according to the two dimensions "purpose" and "stage of development". Current evaluations cover screening, diagnostic and treatment technologies in investigational, new and established stages. Apart from prenatal screening, healthcare consisting of gene technology was cost saving only for genotype tests replacing continuous phenotype tests and for one pharmacogenetic test. Conclusive evidence of favourable cost-effectiveness ratios is available only for few conditions. CONCLUSION: Hypotheses about the impact of gene technology on healthcare must be explicit about the definition of "genetic" medicine. A general statement regarding healthcare enabled by gene technology is not possible. Based on current evidence, an era of healthcare consisting of gene technology built on widespread predictive testing is not desirable from a health economic viewpoint.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.