Key Points
-
This paper looks at GDPs' perceptions of what made a good oral medicine referral communication and how this compared with the views of an oral medicine service provider.
-
Differing perceptions of what makes an ideal referral and how referrals were handled were apparent.
-
The results suggest that a lack of time, confidence in making a diagnosis and for some, lack of administrative support were barriers to achieving an ideal referral communication.
-
No single mechanism for improving the quality of referrals to this service were apparent. Suggestions included standardised referral proformas and access to improved IT systems.
Abstract
The quality and content of referral letters are important for prioritisation of patients who may have oral cancer. Referrals letters to the Oral Medicine Clinic at Birmingham Dental Hospital were analysed and practitioners interviewed. Whilst acceptable for general purposes, most letters did not contain sufficient information to allow effective prioritisation. Interviews disclosed a misunderstanding amongst practitioners about the way in which referrals were handled. A number of barriers to increasing the information included in letters were identified. Referral guidelines and a standardised proforma might help improve the ability of the service to operate a fast-track system.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
McAndrew R, Potts AJC, McAndrew M, Adam S . Opinions of dental consultants on the standard of referral letters in dentistry. Br Dent J 1997; 182: 22– 25.
Morris AJ, Burke T . Primary and Secondary Dental Care; the nature of the interface. Br Dent J 2001; 191: 660– 664.
Morris AJ, Burke T . Primary and Secondary Dental Care; how ideal is the interface? Br Dent J 2001; 191: 666– 670.
Sanderson RS, Ironside JAD . Squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Br Med J 2002; 325: 822– 827.
Department of Health. The New NHS: Modern, Dependable. Cm3807. HMSO December, 1997.
Department of Health. Breast cancer waiting times – achieving the two week target. Health Service Circular HSC 1998/242, 22/12/1998.
Department of Health. Cancer waiting times; achieving the two week target. Health Service Circular HSC 1999/205, 6/9/1999.
Department of Health. Over 90% of urgent cancer referrals seen within two weeks. Press release 2001/0410, 7/9/2001.
Department of Health. The NHS Cancer Plan, September 2000. (available via www.doh.gov.uk/cancer).
Department of Health. Cancer referral guidelines. HSC 2000/013. 14/4/2000
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by funding from Birmingham Health Authority.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
White, D., Morris, A., Burgess, L. et al. Facilitators and barriers to improving the quality of referrals for potential oral cancer. Br Dent J 197, 537–540 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811800
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811800
This article is cited by
-
Improving the quality of oral surgery referrals
British Dental Journal (2012)
-
Application of teledentistry in oral medicine in a Community Dental Service, N. Ireland
British Dental Journal (2010)
-
The two-week wait cancer initiative on oral cancer; the predictive value of urgent referrals to an oral medicine unit
British Dental Journal (2006)
