Variation in GP referral rates: what can we learn from the literature?

Catherine A. O’Donnell

291 citations0/0 files storedFamily Practice

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Healthcare Systems and Technology Primary Care and Health Outcomes Clinical practice guidelines implementation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Variations in referral rates exist, at GP and practice level. Although the National Institute for Clinical Excellence is to produce referral guidelines, it is unclear if this variation requires regulation. A critical review of the literature on variation in referral rates was undertaken to see if existing evidence could inform the debate. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the variation in referral rates; to identify likely explanatory variables; and to describe the effect of GPs' decision making on the referral process. METHODS: Six bibliographic databases, the Cochrane Library, the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and the National Research Register were searched. RESULTS: Patient characteristics explain <40% of the observed variation; practice and GP characteristics <10%. The availability of specialist care does affect referral rates, but its influence on the observed variation of referral rates is not known. Intrinsic psychological variables are important. GPs who are less tolerant of uncertainty or who perceive serious disease to be a more frequent event may refer more patients. There is a lack of consensus about what constitutes an appropriate referral, and the use of guidelines has had only limited success in altering referral behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in referral rates remains largely unexplained. Targeting high or low referrers through clinical guidelines may not be the issue. Rather, activity should concentrate on increasing the number of appropriate referrals, regardless of the referral rate. Pressure on GPs to review their referral behaviour through the use of guidelines may reduce their willingness to tolerate uncertainty and manage problems in primary care, resulting in an increase in referrals to secondary care. The use of referral rates to stimulate dialogue and joint working between primary and secondary care may be more appropriate.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 291 citations exist upstream.

References

1987Health and Deprivation: Inequality and the North 1983Identification of underprivileged areas.1988Health and deprivation. Inequality and the North 1984Underprivileged areas: validation and distribution of scores.

Cited by

2010Explaining variation in referral from primary to secondary care: cohort study 2005Part II. General practitioner–specialist referral process 2003Perception and reality—a study of public and professional perceptions of plastic surgery 2012Variation in use of the 2-week referral pathway for suspected cancer: A cross-sectional analysis 2007Patient pressure for referral for headache: a qualitative study of GPs' referral behaviour.2016Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services: a scoping review of interventions at the primary–secondary care interface 2014Examining the variation in GPs’ referral practice: a cross-sectional study of GPs’ reasons for referral 2013High referral rates to secondary care by general practitioners in Norway are associated with GPs’ gender and specialist qualifications in family medicine, a study of 4350 consultations

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.