These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An assessment of the quality of referral letters sent to a specialist periodontist during a nine month period.
    Author: Eaton AK, Furniss SJ, Snoad RJ, Newman HN.
    Journal: J Int Acad Periodontol; 2001 Jan; 3(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 12666972.
    Abstract:
    There have been concerns about the quality of referral letters received by specialist periodontists. This retrospective study aimed to assess the quality of all referral letters received over a nine month period, by a specialist periodontist working in a publicly financed community clinic, and to compare the results with those obtained from a study which assessed referral letters received by the periodontal department of a London teaching hospital during the same period. After the assessors had trained for intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility, the letters were assessed using the Categorisation System for Periodontal Referral Quality (CSPRQ) (Snoad et al., 1999). The year and country of qualification (UK or non-UK), and possession or otherwise of postgraduate qualifications for each of the referring dentists was ascertained from the UK Dentists Register. The results from this study and those from the hospital study were statistically tested using the Chi-squared test. Before the studies commenced the assessors achieved 100% inter-examiner reproducibility when applying the CSPRQ. A total of 114 letters was received, six of which were excluded. Of the remaining 108, 38 were categorised as of an acceptable standard. There were differences in the performance of dentists from different age groups in that 56% of letters from those qualified from 10-20 years, 29% of those from dentists qualified < 10 years and 27% of those qualified > 20 years were of an acceptable standard. The results were broadly similar to those of the hospital study except that there was a statistically significant difference (P< 0.05) between the quality of referrals from dentists qualified between 10 and 20 years and those with non-UK primary qualifications. It was concluded that the overall quality of referral letters assessed in this study was poor and that the CSPRQ provided a highly reproducible technique for assessing the quality of periodontal referral letters.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]