Sure
First a quick explanation of why the graph is unexpected:
If you eliminate unnecesarry referrals (e.g. by using a referral management centre)
then they should form a lower proportion of the total spend -
this is because referrals only affect certain elements in expenditure (prescribing,
community, A/E etc. should not be affected) so the total spend does not fall in
parallel.
For example: a
50% drop in referrals may only lead to a 20% drop in overall costs. if referrals
drop from £10 to £5 and the total spend drops from say £100 to £80 then New OP
costs/total expenditure will drop from 10/100 or 10% to 5/80 or 6.25%. ---
that's the theory.
If you look at the graph
you'll see the reverse ---- it fairly scattered but the trend is that an
increasing % spent on new out-patients leads to a fall in total
expenditure ---- it certainly doesn't show the reduction in spend/patient we've all been told.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: Lesley kay <
[log in to unmask]>
To:
[log in to unmask]
Sent: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 22:10
Subject: Re: Analysis of referrals
Would you be able to share this, anonymised? Lesley
Sent from my iPhone
I did a simple graph for my PBC which showed that the more you refer the LESS you spend/registered patient.
Not quite the result the PCT expected - the board meeting was silent for 30 seconds after I distributed the graph.
They are now checking the effect across the PCT but if confirmed the lack of effect of referral management centres etc. is explained.
I'm waiting for further analysis to see if the extra costs came through prescribing/A+E/more complex interventions when they were referred or something else.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: Saul Galloway <
[log in to unmask]>
To:
[log in to unmask]
Sent: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 23:35
Subject: Analysis of referrals
Does anyone have either first hand audit data of the breakdown of
referrals by specialty and/or reason or know of any UK research data
about this?
