In message <[log in to unmask]>, Trefor
Roscoe <[log in to unmask]> writes
>DO NOT USE OTHER CALCULATORS!!!
>
>If the lab wont give you eGFRs then exception report the whole population
>that have had a U&E in the last 12 months and claim the points.
Can't do that - unless I classify *everyone* who had a serum creatinine
as having CKD in the first place!
As it is - using the EMIS potential CKD search - I have about the
expected 3-4% prevalence. As the majority of CKD3 patients are elderly,
I am not sure how clinically useful this is. One of my partners has just
exception reported a patient who is 101, with dementia and a serum
creatinine well within the normal values for the local lab...
>The PCT
>should have sorted this out
Agree: but there does not appear to have been any requirement for the
labs to provide the information - and they won't release it until the
funding stream for nephrology has been sorted.
As a member of a PBC Consortium, I am not in favour of providing an open
ended increased funding stream to secondary care - especially when I
have not seen the evidence that elderly - and very elderly -patients
actually benefit.
>and if you cannot say if a pateint has kidney
>disease or not then that is their fault. Doing this may of course increase
>the supposed prevelance, but the whole thing is a nonsense anyway.
>
>And let your GPC rep know you are unhappy.
I have let my LMC know - should I tell the GPC representative as well?
MaryH
--
Mary Hawking
|