British Journal of Medical & Surgical Urology
Volume 2, Issue 4 , Pages 160-165, July 2009

National re-audit of urology outpatient practice in the UK

  • A.M. Sinclair

      Affiliations

    • Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 161 206 5567; fax: +44 161 206 5814.
  • ,
  • L.F. Derbyshire

      Affiliations

    • School of Medicine, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PT, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • N.W. Clarke

      Affiliations

    • Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • C.D. Betts

      Affiliations

    • Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • D.C. Shackley

      Affiliations

    • Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • K.J. O’Flynn

      Affiliations

    • Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom

Received 20 January 2009; received in revised form 2 March 2009; accepted 7 March 2009.

Summary 

Introduction

In 2002 a National structure audit was conducted to assess UK urologists’ compliance with BAUS guidelines on outpatient provision. Given the recent change in government emphasis on waiting targets, and the possible impact of MMC and EWTD on trainees, we re-audited the contemporary urological clinic-based workload and service provision.

Methods

All 649 UK consultant urologists were asked to complete a postal questionnaire. This provided outpatient clinic information on medical staff, clinic frequency, numbers of new and follow-up patients seen, and geographical region. Data was compared to 2002.

Results

Usable questionnaire return rate was 65%. Median clinics/week were 1.87 (1–5) seeing a mean of 11.2 (1–32) new and 21.5 (1–80) follow-ups. Since 2002 consultant appointments have increased by 20%, SpR clinic attendance has decreased by 10%, with ‘consultant-only’ clinics increasing from 15% to 20.7%. Compliance with BAUS standards remains very low (18% vs. 21% (2002)) with the average consultant team ‘over-performing’ by a factor of 1.4. There were wide inter- and intra-regional variations.

Conclusion

Despite growth in consultant numbers since 2002, very few urological teams are able to meet the BAUS clinic guidelines. A trend has been demonstrated in clinic towards a consultant-led service with less support from doctors-in-training.

Keywords: Re-audit, Urology outpatient practice, Service provision, BAUS guidelines

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1875-9742(09)00036-6

doi:10.1016/j.bjmsu.2009.03.003

British Journal of Medical & Surgical Urology
Volume 2, Issue 4 , Pages 160-165, July 2009